Why You Should Wait Before You Have Sex

7 Shares


Sex is not a new topic on this blog.

Nor is my stance on why it’s a good idea to wait until you’re in a relationship before you have sex.

What’s different today is that I just had two clients who illustrated the value of my theory.

Both slept with men on the second or third date.

One turned into an instant boyfriend.

The other turned into a three month booty call.

Neither of them turned into happy relationship. It’s not a coincidence.

Please watch my new video Why You Should Wait Before You Have Sex and share your thoughts below.

And if you’re sick of being used, click here to learn what it means to have healthy boundaries and bulletproof confidence with men.

Join our conversation (198 Comments).
Click Here To Leave Your Comment Below.

Comments:

  1. 1
    No Name To Give

    Hold on while I get my popcorn. The comments section will be lit.

    1. 1.1
      Noone45

      If there’s one thing you can always count on, it’s people having strong opinions on how others should behave lol.

      (Not knocking the validity of Evan’s opinion here. I don’t date at all anymore so I have no opinion either way)

  2. 2
    Caroline R

     

    Thanks Evan for this great video that encapsulates some GREAT life wisdom!

    I’m going to keep it handy to play for those who don’t understand my values and pre-determined, self-interested, behaviours that I exhibit during dating.

    “I’m not having sex with you unless we are in a relationship, and we have feelings for each other”.

    “I want to, but I want it to be about love”

    “I want it to be special” (i.e. “I want to be the only woman in your life. I won’t share you”. That’s a bare minimum requirement).

    “We’re getting to know one another, we’re building trust, and that’s a good thing. Trust takes time”.

    “nobody gets to just ‘have’ me”

    “I need emotional safety to feel pleasure, and I am all about the pleasure…”

    “I’m not available for cheap and meaningless… there’s nothing in it for me. I can’t separate sex and love, and I don’t want to”

    “My body is all I have to express my most profound feelings of love for a man, and I don’t fall in love with just anybody”

    “When I was younger I was intimate with the man I was seeing before I knew him well enough, and I felt crappy afterwards; for a long time afterwards.   I decided that I would never again inflict crappy feelings on myself”

    “If a man can’t win my heart and mind, then he can’t have my body”.

     

    I’m going to play this video to younger women that I interact with, to generate some good discussion, and to validate their feelings that it’s in their best interests to wait and get to know the guy first. All they’ve known is hook-up culture as the norm. There’s a deficit of good mentors with practical life wisdom. I’ve taken care of many young women who are now undergoing fertility treatment because they got STIs from men/’boys’ they slept with, didn’t know how to navigate adult relationships to stay safe, didn’t know yet if they could trust a word coming out of the guy’s mouth, were infected and became unable to conceive or carry a baby to term as a result.

     

    1. 2.1
      Evan Marc Katz

      Thanks for your kind words, Caroline, but, to be clear, I wouldn’t say ANY of the things you said above to a man. A huge part of dating – for both men and women – is in understanding how you come across. Contrast most of your above statements about love, feelings, and emotional safety with this:

      “I am SOOO attracted to you right now and would LOVE to have sex with you. But I don’t sleep with guys who are still active on dating sites. So if we both conclude that a relationship is worth exploring, you’re in for the night of your life. In the meantime, I can think of some other fun stuff we can do…”

      It shows him that you’re sexual, interested, have healthy boundaries and self-respect, and that he has a chance of getting laid in the not-so-distant future – all without the bold proclamations of love that you seem to be demanding.

      Now, to be fair, if you only sleep with men when you’re “in love,” you’re entitled to that. And 90% of men are entitled to run in the opposite direction. Sexclusivity isn’t about love. It’s not designed to “trap” men. It’s designed to let know men you ARE attracted to him and you ARE interested in sex, and that you don’t sleep with anyone unless you’re in a committed relationship. Period. Hope that lends some clarity to the proceedings.

      1. 2.1.1
        jenny

        ‘I am SOOO attracted to you right now and would LOVE to have sex with you. But I don’t sleep with guys who are still active on dating sites. So if we both conclude that a relationship is worth exploring, you’re in for the night of your life. In the meantime, I can think of some other fun stuff we can do…”’

        Ohhh…make sure still you still come across as sexy, groovy ,confident BUT not toooo needy/emotional/ or clingy AND be sure to let him know ‘  that he has a chance of getting laid in the not-so-distant future’…all without the bold proclamations of love that you seem to be demanding…..

        Evan….really?????

        1. Evan Marc Katz

          Yes, really.

        2. sylvana

          Jenny,

          yup. Now if that doesn’t make you want to head to the bar, go enjoy the company of some good-looking men, then pick one (or a few) to take home for a night of casual fun, I don’t know what will.

          Hats off to all women willing to go through all of that just to find a relationship. Especially considering it only gets more complicated after that.

      2. 2.1.2
        Caroline R

        Evan,
        thank you for taking time to reply, to explain and mentor me. I appreciate it.

        (note to self: don’t contribute comments to blogs after midnight, you’ll only have to qualify and clarify what you’ve written)

        The statements I made are really my internal monologue, so to speak. I’ve discussed them with other women, as part of personal growth, identity, female role models, etc, but mostly they are things I’ve been made aware of in myself to determine my boundaries. I grew up in a family that trampled on boundaries, and punished me for asserting them and saying “no”. There was incest, and I was conditioned to be a co-dependant pleaser, and also a trophy child, whose achievements reflected well on her parents.

        I haven’t said any of the statements listed in my comment above, to a man, except the one about building trust. I’d seen him twice, we were talking on the phone, he was trying to coerce me into letting him come into my house, and to be ready at once for him to come over. He’d told me a few minutes earlier that he was currently seeing two other women. I told him that I’d need some advance notice, but would like to see him later that afternoon, and we could go for a walk (we’re both athletic). I made the “we’re getting to know each other, and building trust” comment to which he replied “oh, we’re taking it slow”. I said softly and playfully “yes, we are”.
        He came over later, and ‘punished’ me for not letting him into my house, by withholding affection, and eye contact. When we were walking down my street he grabbed me suddenly and kissed me til my legs went weak (it didn’t take long, especially when he picked me up in his strong arms *sigh*), then he was back to withholding affection and eye contact again. His next manipulation was to make plans to take me out for breakfast next weekend. I was delighted, and wrapped myself around him. He remained a statue. The plans didn’t eventuate. I texted him goodbye that next weekend.

        My first few romantic relationships became emotionally abusive, and were short lived. Then there were some good guys who were suitably outgoing and had feelings for me, but I couldn’t reciprocate. Next I dated a doctor that I’d met at work. I was 24, he was 26. He was smart, athletic, ambitious, outgoing and handsome. My type. We went out for about 7-8 weeks. It was classic dating, picking me up and taking me out for dinner etc. We were making out in his car one summer night after a date, and suddenly he put his finger inside me. It hurt. He THEN asked “do you want me inside you?”. I was stunned and softly said “not yet”. I didn’t know how I was supposed to feel. I liked being with him, but I wasn’t in love with him. I didn’t have enough life experience. We kissed for a while, then he was pushing my head down to give him oral sex, and not taking no for an answer.
        We talked about it afterward and he told me he wanted us to be having sex, and I said I didn’t want to, for a couple of reasons. We both concluded we should part company. I haven’t thought about that for a long time. I never told anyone about it, but now I can see that it constitutes date rape. It was emotionally painful for a long time, because I felt an attachment to him, even though I didn’t love him.
        I realised that I have a window of time at the beginning of a relationship to make some decisions about whether to continue seeing a man, so that wouldn’t happen again.
        The next man whose dick I held in my hand wanted to be with me, but I knew that I didn’t love him, and desperately wanted to get over another man I DID love (who’s married someone else). Ugh!
        I broke it off with the last man (also a doctor I’d met at work) and he became obsessed with winning me back He’d leave notes on my car (creepy) and kept coming into where I was working to force me to speak to him, even though he didn’t work there anymore. It was still emotionally painful, because even though I didn’t want him, I could have called him just to use as a warm body, and that went against my principles, and ugh! I decided I wouldn’t put myself in that position again.
        I decided that I wouldn’t get naked while I decided whether I liked a man. That didn’t stop a couple of other men from becoming obsessed with me. They made out I was a tease and femme fatale to our new social group, and I became a social leper. I didn’t want to go out with either of them.
        The rest of my relationships have been with Narcissists who start out charming, and become abusive.

        So, the reason for me explaining, and I apologise if this is too much information, but I needed to develop boundaries and know how I worked best, to make myself happy, and not create extra emotional pain for myself.
        I care very much for young women who like myself are gaining life experience, and may not have anyone to talk to who will support them, and not judge them, or be shocked by anything they say.
        We all need good life mentors, I wish I’d had some of my own, and that’s why I’m here, and learning how to have better relationships generally, and find success in life.

        BTW, I have never discussed feelings, love or otherwise with a man. I am generally soft, gentle, the one who’s listening and smiling adoringly at him, and keeping myself with an air of mystery (I don’t give much away about myself). (This much sharing is rare). My relationships these days generally don’t last more than two weeks.

        Thanks again.

        1. Jeremy

          I am sorry these things happened to you, Caroline, that you went through such traumatic events.   Your story raises a question in my mind, and of course feel free to ignore it if it is too personal.   But do you find that the qualities in men to which you are attracted are correlated with abusive behavior?   The nice, outgoing men that you dated – the ones you weren’t interested in – what do you think they lacked that resulted in your lack of interest in them?   The abusive, narcissistic guys you were attracted to, who later acted inappropriately – is there a common denominator you can see?

           

          So often we believe that we are helpless to our attraction.   That we are attracted to the people we are attracted to, and not when not.   But that’s a bit of a cop-out.   We’re attracted to some degree to the qualities our history has wired us to be attracted to.   The girl who grows up with a father who’s a passive-aggressive pushover comes to desire a man who takes care of business, the antithesis of what she has come to despise.   A woman who grows up feeling insecure comes to desire a man whose bombastic personality makes her feel secure – whose confidence makes her feel like he can handle anything, compensate for all her lacks.   Problem is, confidence is total bullshit.   The absolute worst heuristic for quality you can imagine.   Does not mean what you think it means.   Bravery is being afraid but going on anyway.   Confidence is going on as if you’re not afraid.   Why is he not afraid?   Does he have reason, or is he just too stupid to know he should be?   The same man who sees no reason others wouldn’t like him might also see no reason not to put his finger inside you unsolicited.

           

          It is not your fault that the things that happened to you happened.   But that also doesn’t mean that there’s nothing you can do to prevent recurrence.   Consider whether your picker needs fixing, whether the wiring of which qualities you find attractive need some re-working.

      3. 2.1.3
        Adrian

        Hi Evan,

        I love your advised dialog for women to show men that they are interested but wish to wait. Do you have any advise for men that are with women who want to wait a few months instead of a few weeks?

        Where does the divide between respecting her wants and neglecting your wants start? Any dialog for the guys so that we don’t sound like we are only after sex?

        1. Evan Marc Katz

          No sex until you’re boyfriend/girlfriend. If that’s 4 weeks instead of 8 weeks, so be it (that’s what my wife and I did, anyway). Use that month or two to continue to enjoy each other, hang out platonically, explore sexually (without intercourse) and figure out if you want to be in a relationship. If not, there’s no point in having sex with someone you’re just gonna ditch.

        2. Nissa

          @Adrian,

          I may be one of the only women here who does this, so I want to offer some thoughts about what I would really like to hear from a man I was dating, who has asked me to be his girlfriend, and who is now talking to me about our sexual schedule.

          I’m aware that we are just getting to know each other. But based on what I’ve seen of you so far, you seem like you match what I really want for myself (give example: because you are fun, easy, have the same beliefs about values, etc). I’m looking forward to getting to know you. But I’m willing to do it in a time frame that’s comfortable for you. What I need from you is  feedback on what you are open for, what you want and need – keeping in mind that sometimes it changes or there are unexpected snags.  

          What is powerful about this for me is that he is expressing his needs and wants in a way that is not demanding. He’s expressing his expectations and thoughts in a non respectful way. This lets me figure out where he is…which is essential to me figuring out if I can provide that or not. If not, I can tell him, so his time and money is not wasted (see how the man is really considered here? so it’s not about her wants and needs.

          How can he respect his needs? If he feels he needs porn and/or masturbation, I wouldn’t consider that cheating. If he was spending time with other women, I would consider that cheating. If he felt he couldn’t keep waiting, I would expect him to break up with me over that. It would hurt, but it would be honest. To me, this means his wants are respected because he is the one who gets to decide if the relationship, as it is right then, works for him or not. Not her. If he then feels disrespected…that’s on his shoulders.

        3. Adrian

          Hi Evan,

          Thanks for answering.

          I should have been more clear. I was talking to a group of women that were followers of books like “The Rules” and Steve Harvey’s where they are told to make a man wait a specific number of days whereas I know you teach to make men wait until he is your boyfriend.

          The impression I was getting from them is that even if a man does commit to being her boyfriend she still makes him wait. So I was speaking of how do I as her boyfriend respect her wants when it comes to sex and her body while not neglecting my own.

          As popular as you are I know that people who teach such things are also very popular so I just wanted your thoughts on the subject.

        4. Evan Marc Katz

          I think that once you’re a couple, it’s a reasonable expectation that there is sex involved. If you’re with a woman who is saving herself until marriage – or, really, anything other than commitment – you should probably have figured out her boundaries BEFORE you became her boyfriend.

          Which is why I suggest “sexclusivity”; it would seem to be a policy that is both fair to women AND men. If a guy wants to get laid on Date 3, she isn’t losing much. If the woman wants to wait until some arbitrary 3 month mark because Steve Harvey said so, he isn’t losing much. In my opinion.

          Everything in moderation.

        5. Adrian

          Hi Nissa,

          Thanks for the advice. You have often spoken of having guys wait months before having sex. Where these guys that you were dating or your boyfriends?

          If you were just dating them why continue to go out for months with someone who would not commit to being your boyfriend? If these guys were your boyfriend why make them wait for months before having sex?

        6. Chris

          I have the feeling Nissa meant she indeed was in an exclusive relationship but still felt the necessity to wait a few months (but not til marriage). The term for this is “demisexuality” I think. Why would a guy agree to this? I’m curious myself. Shy or inexperienced? A bit old fashioned? Lower than average libido?

        7. Nissa

          Adrian,

          They were boyfriends. It was never even a thought to me that we should be having sex. I was brought up in a Christian household, and the expectation was that you got married before having sex. After all, none of the other kids that had boyfriends or girlfriends ever mentioned that they had sex. It just meant you kissed a little and could hold hands when you went to the movies or rode next to them on the Ferris wheel. So that was my expectation – that sex was a part of marriage, not dating. Dating was about getting to know the person, finding out if you wanted the same things. I always felt as if I didn’t know them very well, so how could I possibly conceive of doing something as intimate as sex with a guy I barely knew? My parents dated once a week for 2 years before they got married (and very likely didn’t actually have sex until they were married – honestly it never occurred to me to ask) – sex was tied that strongly to “marriage first”. And I could see that my parents really hadn’t known each other very well before they did get married. This resulted in my feeling that it was important to me personally to really know a person before I married them, so I would have a better marriage than my parents had had.

          When I first had sex, I got engaged right around that same time. I knew within 3 months of dating my first, that I was in love, and therefore I planned to be with him forever. It actually never occurred to me that anything other than that was happening. We were a couple, we were dating, ergo at some point we would get married.

          When that relationship ended, when I finally recovered, I began looking for my next relationship, for someone to love and marry. Again, those two things go together for me. Not because I had to, but because why would you do anything else when you found the person you loved and wanted to be with forever? And if you didn’t know yet if they were your forever person, why would you be offering such incredibly intimate acts with someone for whom you have not yet formed a connection?

          For me, saying someone is my boyfriend is a declaration of intention, that you are getting to know that person exclusively and not sharing intimacy of any kind with someone else – you are off the market. To me, if someone wants to have sex with people they barely know, that is unattractive. When you say, why make them wait months –  I never saw it as making them wait. I still don’t. I have always seen it as, I’m getting to know this man, and making up my mind as to whether or not I see myself marrying him. There’s no waiting in my mind. We are already doing everything that in my mind constitutes dating. I am assuming that he has already made up his mind that I’m the one he wants – why else would he ask me to be his girlfriend? Most of time it has been a complete non issue. Most men don’t make it to a second date

          After that, if they come on too strong or get too physical, I naturally pull   back. It’s not even deliberate. To me, if the man hasn’t done anything to show me who he is, has not pursued me, has not declared his intentions, offered a ring or a declaration of love – well, that’s your answer right there, isn’t it? It tells you that his interest is in sex, not you as a person. No judgement, but that’s not my thing.

        8. Nissa

          Chris –

          Shy or inexperienced? No, and not particularly. Me? No, but not many walks around the block. *smile* Old fashioned? They weren’t, but I am. Low libido? Only one, and that was years into the relationship.

          IMO, they were merely being gentleman, respectful of my old fashioned ways and my age based inexperience. I’m sure it mattered to them (as it did to me) that I choose very carefully.

          Now, I’m not shy, and I am a flirt by both nature and by Southern heritage. But, I also have almost zero interest in non marriage sex. It just does not achieve my goals, so I don’t do it. As such, I’m a terrible match for someone who views premarital sex as essential.

          I know it sounds strange, but I think men are caring enough to not want a woman to fall in love with them if they don’t love her. I think men care enough to not hurt someone, when they see that sex for this particular woman is inextricable from exclusivity, love and marriage. Sex is just too available from too many other sources to make that an appealing choice. So the men that felt that sex was necessary, stop pursuing me very quickly, when they realize that my actions match my words.

    2. 2.2
      Michelle H.

      Caroline – Like you, I now find myself mentoring a younger generation on this topic: sex does affect your soul!!

      It took me 20 years or so to figure that out .

      Evan – I thank God for you.   Before your teachings, I was feeling so out of control, betrayed, hurt, confused & crazy(!) about men & sex.   You have verbalized something that I couldn’t quite figure out: Hollywood says it’s ok… pop culture says it’s ok… so why am I not feeling ok??!!

      Thank you Evan for helping me understand myself & men better, and giving me the tools to better navigate my way through sex & dating.   I’m embarrassed to say that I really didn’t know how.

      1. 2.2.1
        sylvana

        Caroline, Michelle,

        I’d recommend not spreading this very unhealthy view of sex to future generations of women.

        Sex does not affect every woman’s soul. Actually, it mostly affects those women who have been brought up in religious ways, or in cultures who want to keep a certain amount of “control” over their women. They make women feel like sex is something dirty, sinful, or shameful unless it’s with a special partner, rather than just the simple, physical desire it is.

        Mental programming at it’s best.

        The biggest reason women don’t feel comfortable having sex without an emotional component is because women are not secure in their sexuality. So they seek that security from a partner. Not a healthy approach.

        I see nothing wrong telling young women it’s all right for them to want a deeper connection with someone before they have sex. But, at the same time, it should also be taught that it is all right if they don’t. To consider sex as simply pleasure, only special if a special partner is involved. Likewise, also let them know that you do not find a boyfriend through sex. Not because men are different, but rather because sex has nothing to do with love, unless it’s with a loving partner – for both women and men.

        This “shaming” women or making them feel that it’s unnatural for them to have base desires separate from emotions has got to stop.

        With other words, don’t push one way or the other. Simply educate about the differences and consequences of either version.

         

        1. Evan Marc Katz

          The shaming I see is usually from women who are judging women for NOT having sex. No one here is judging those who do.

        2. sylvana

          Evan,

          It goes both ways.

          Still, do you think it is healthy to program young women with the mindset that women’s souls are affected by sex? That women should only want sex with commitment? That it is not natural for them to enjoy sex outside of commitment?

          Is it ALL RIGHT for them to feel that way? Absolutely, yes. But what effect do you think that kind of programming has on those women who naturally do NOT feel that way?

          That’s why I said: Educate about BOTH, and that both are all right. Instead of pushing just one way or the other – whichever way that may be.

           

        3. Evan Marc Katz

          I’m not “programming” anything.
          I’m not saying women should only want sex with commitment.
          I’m not saying its “unnatural for them to enjoy sex outside of commitment.”
          I’m not saying it’s wrong for them to feel that way, nor am I saying it’s wrong for YOU to feel the way you do.

          What I seem to understand – which you are somehow grappling with – is that if advice doesn’t apply to you, IGNORE it.

          I’m not pushing YOU to stop having sex with strangers for fun. I’m letting other women who ARE having sex with strangers and getting their hearts broken that there’s another way to handle it which works quite well. That’s all. All the people who are pushing back are basically telling me that my advice isn’t right for EVERYBODY. Yeah, I know.

          If you’re a vegetarian and I’m giving you advice on how to cook your steak, you wouldn’t worry too much about it. Not sure why you’re so invested in making these women wrong for feeling hurt when the guy they like and are fucking doesn’t want to commit. Remember, YOU may be sleeping with him just for fun. SHE’s sleeping with him because she likes him and is hoping he commits – and a good portion of the time, he doesn’t. What is your recommendation to THAT woman, Sylvana? Keep sleeping with every guy you like (because we’re all sex-positive) and keep your fingers crossed that one of them will choose you? That’s objectively weak advice for a woman who has been used for sex by men for years and years.

          (And please don’t tell me that the answer is to change society. While there is societal conditioning, it’s not “society’s” fault that women associate sex with feeling more than men do. Coaching is about affecting personal change – not about me changing the way billions of women feel about sex without commitment.)

        4. No Name To Give

          Not sure I see what the anger is over telling a woman to wait. It’s not like you’re being commanded to wait if you don’t want to. If a woman decides she wants to wait, that doesn’t affect your dating life. I thought we were in a you-do-you tolerant culture.

        5. Nissa

           

          Sylvana,

          Evan’s right about this. He has said many, many times that if you want to have sex right away and it works for you, yay you. No shaming whatsoever. In fact, he comes right out and says that’s how he lived for a long time. But that’s not his core audience.

          You might not feel that sex affects your soul. No one, including Evan, is condemning you for that. We are saying, there are a lot of women who don’t feel that way. Women who enjoy sex, who are passionate, physical beings who are simultaneously spiritual beings who experience life as a journey of the soul, which cannot be separate from the body. Just as we might desire to run naked through the streets, we realize that there are consequences for that behavior (ie it’s cold out, and you might get run over) and make choices accordingly. That is absolutely not based on religion, “rules” or patriarchy. Bosh! Nothing to do with sex being dirty or shameful at all.

          And haven’t you seen how emotional and needy some women are once they have had, so called casual sex? That’s security seeking. It takes an incredibly secure person, male or female, to tell a prospective partner, who they would really like to impress, that they are hoping will like them, no to sex. Sex without emotion is like masturbation with another person in the room, purely physical. If that’s your thing, so be it. But judging others for not making that same choice is unnecessary.

          Saying sex has nothing to do with love might be true for you. But that’s not a independently existing fact. There are a lot of people for whom sex has a great deal to do with love, even when sharing a purely physical moment with a partner.

          No one is pushing anything here. Women know it’s fine to have sex without deeper connection. Most of them have done it. Most of them know having sex early on does not result in a boyfriend. The truth is ….already out there.

           

        6. Cathalei

          There is no pushing involved here. It’s not even about being dirty, sinful or shameful, but about expectations. If a woman has no expectation with regards to commitment, then this really is a moot point. But if they have such an expectation, it’s better to point out how they would be likely to get it. After all, just because she has such expectations doesn’t mean men she sleeps with would feel the same way. If she tries that again and again and it just wouldn’t happen, why not eliminate guys who don’t want the same thing as her and deal with guys who are on the same page?

          I for myself don’t have such expectations. But I don’t think women who don’t feel the same way are “programmed” or “brainwashed”, they just go with their wants. Why should they feel wrong for their personal desires? Media and pop culture would say that enough times. The way we feel about such things gives us indications about what’s right for us, and I don’t see fit to deprive anyone of their way.

        7. sylvana

          Evan,

          who said YOU were saying this? You replied to what I said to Michelle and Caroline. So I asked you if you thought that their approach of pushing only one way (programming) was a healthy approach. Since I know you don’t push one direction or the other.

           

      2. 2.2.2
        Mrs Happy

        I understand what you are trying to say, but you know there is no such thing as a soul, right?

        Facts ma’am, just the facts.

        1. No Name To Give

          Some believe there is. It’s a live and let live culture. So if someone believes that, let them believe it. It’s not hurting anyone.

        2. Mrs Happy

          Religions have done truckloads of harm over the ages.   They hurt a lot of people.   Killed lots.   Tortured lots.   Ostracised lots.   Kept in poverty and want, lots.   Kept masses uneducated.   Restricted females’ rights.   Abused and indoctrinated many children.

          So a logical person is well within their rights to call it when someone start writing about souls or other fantasy objects.   A ‘live and let live’ attitude can allow harm and evil to flourish.

        3. Cathalei

          That sounds controlling, because any belief system could be used as justification for these atrocities. There is a difference between believing in Santa Claus and Santa Claus orders sexual abuse of children. Poverty is a universal problem that occurs independently of religion. That’s not a discussion that I enjoy having at all, nor is here the place for it but censoring other people’s words just because we associate them with things we don’t agree with it would be a form of said abuse if done systematically. “Battling evil” is a useful pretext for that. Just because one uses the world “soul” doesn’t necessarily mean she’s religious, let alone trying to preach.

        4. No Name To Give

          Mrs. Happy, I am well aware that the live and let live attitude is very selectively applied in this current day. That’s why I said it. It was very tongue in cheek. I respect your right to no faith. I’m not obligated to renounce mine.

    3. 2.3
      Clare

      Caroline,

      I know your intentions are good, but most of the above messages which you set out made me cringe. Particularly the following:

      “nobody gets to just ‘have’ me”

      “When I was younger I was intimate with the man I was seeing before I knew him well enough, and I felt crappy afterwards; for a long time afterwards.   I decided that I would never again inflict crappy feelings on myself”

      What does it mean? No one gets to just “have” me? Does that mean a woman’s body or sexuality is some treasure or prize, while a man’s is not? It conveys a superior attitude which is all about hoop-jumping and not about love.

      And the second one, about feeling crappy for a long time after sex. What potential future mate wants to hear that? a) about your sexual experiences with another man, and b) the fact that it scarred you for life? This part also “I decided that I would never again” indicates a preoccupation with getting hurt and protecting yourself, and again, the attendant hoop-jumping, rather than getting to know and bonding with your new potential mate.

      I know your intentions are good. But honestly, you make women sound like a group of precious, mortally wounded waifs who require endless cossetting and reassurance. That doesn’t describe me or any of the strong, empowered women I know or admire.

      I’ve said it on this blog numerous times before, but I really wish we could teach women that their value lies inside them, in their own strength and character, and that they are empowered by virtue of that alone and can themselves  act  in their own interests. Instead of constantly insisting that men, and the rest of the world, understand and pander to us and make it easy for us. Women are  already  powerful; we do not need another generation to hand us that power nor do we need men to love, respect and affirm us to be powerful. We can make our own, powerful decisions every day. We can be the sole deciders of what is good for us. I wish someone would teach young women  that  message rather than this wimpy “If you love me, maybe I’ll have sex with you” message.

      Sorry Caroline, I did not mean my post to come off as judgmental or attacking of you, but it just really rubbed me up the wrong way.

      1. 2.3.1
        sylvana

        Clare,

        Thank you so very much for this!! This is exactly what I’m talking about.

        But apparently, since I’m advocating teaching young women that BOTH having casual sex and not having casual sex are all right, I’m somehow shaming those who choose to wait.

         

  3. 3
    mgm531

    As alluded to by the video and any of the numerous previous blog posts about this topic, this is not new territory.      As such I will say what I’ve always said about having a time line for having sex.   Waiting vs Not Waiting doesn’t garauntee any desireable or non-desireable outcome.   Want to have sex on the 1st, 2nd or 3rd date?   Great!   Could that be a mistake that leads to a booty call?   Sure can, but it also could lead to a longer term commitent.   On the flip side waiting certainly has more potential for a longer term commitment, but it still doesn’t offer any garauntee that it won’t turn into a booty call anyways.   It just means the guy had to wait longer and jump through more hoops.   In such cases the decision to wait vs not wait was pointless — both scenarios resulted in the same outcome.

    The whole ‘wait for sex until commitment’ advice for women really is just a false sense of security the promises offers some sort of perceived insurance or garauntee against heartbreak or bad behaviour.   Well it doesn’t.   More over I find it patronizing to coddle women by offering them some sort of protection against heartbreak, as if women are too naive or fragile to take care of themselves.   Smart, Strong, Successful Women are not shrieking violets.   They are wise, aware and savvy enough to know to enter into any relationship with eyes wide open.   So why treat them as if they need to be ‘protected’ with such ‘wait before sex’ advice?

    Lastly I find it confounding to put parameters around one of the most important aspects of any relationship — long term or otherwise — sex.   A man or woman can make the decision to wait for commitment before having sex, but isn’t that sort of like putting the cart before the horse?   I mean what if you wait for commitment before sex and then sex turns out to be really bad, or that you both are not sexually compatible with each other?   What then?   Since now both are ‘commited’ to a relationship does that mean that you both have to muddle through a long life of bad or medicore sex?   I should hope not!   So in such cases what did the notion of waiting for commitment before sex actually result in?   A lot of wasted time if you ask me.

    So if ask me my advice on the whole wait vs not wait before sex is do what you want and what feels right for YOU, not follow some arbitrary advice that offers no garantees one way or other.   Act like the mature adult that you are and go into any relationship with eyes wide open and with full acceptance that things could go good or bad.   It’s just the risk you take if you want to play the game….

    1. 3.1
      Evan Marc Katz

      MGM – please read the link above to address your objections, but in short:

      1. This advice is for women who don’t like the feeling of sleeping with men who aren’t committed to them. If YOU are comfortable with that, fuck away! But for women who are sick of seeing the man they’re sleeping with on Tinder and waiting for him to step up as a boyfriend, there is no better advice than what I offer here.

      2. I’m a dating coach for smart, strong, successful women. I have been listening to this complaint for 15 years about women who feel used and anxious when they sleep with men who are not their boyfriends. It is patronizing of YOU to suggest that this problem is a figment of my imagination or that there’s anything wrong with women who don’t like this feeling.

      3. Once again you have it backwards: it is not the cart before the horse to put commitment first. It’s the cart before the horse to put SEX first. “Commitment” by the way, isn’t marriage. It’s “you’re my boyfriend and we’re going to give this thing a shot.” It happens after 3-6 weeks. If you are sexually incompatible, or, more likely, incompatible in dozens of other different ways, that’s what DATING is for. You DATE for 2-3 years before getting married. Thus, sex is one of many variables that determine compatibility. Your statement, “Since now both are ‘commited’ to a relationship does that mean that you both have to muddle through a long life of bad or mediocre sex?” is objectively asinine. You can literally dump a guy a week after you’ve slept with him if you see fit. But my way, you’re not sleeping with a guy who is actively seeking other women. Your way, you are.

      I think it’s obvious which of us has a better grasp of logic and is offering better advice to women who are sick of feeling used by men.

      1. 3.1.1
        mgm531

        Whatever…

        It’s obvious we have a difference of opinion on this subject.

        I will say no more.

        1. Evan Marc Katz

          Sorry, but not all opinions are equal. Again, if YOU want to sleep with men without commitment, go ahead.

          But if you’re going to tell women who are NOT enjoying the sex-without-commitment process that my advice is bad, you shouldn’t be too surprised if I shoot holes in your logic.

        2. No Name To Give

          MGM, why are so so emotionally invested in a woman not waiting? I’m genuinely curious. If women who don’t know you from Adam choose to wait, what do you care? It doesn’t effect your dating life. I don’t happen to agree with you on not waiting, but that’s your deal. It doesn’t effect me.   What gives?

    2. 3.2
      sylvana

      No Name,

      So if you ask me my advice on the whole wait vs not wait before sex is do what you want and what feels right for YOU, (mgm531)

      What about this statement, or my statement that BOTH having casual sex or not having casual sex are perfectly all right do you consider offensive or us being “angry” or trying to change women who wait, or even being emotionally invested in whether they have sex or not?

      What I don’t like is not the coach’s advice (because Evan does not judge either way), but women stating that they will tell younger generations of women that sex for them has to be an emotional experience that is guaranteed to have an affect on their souls. That casual sex should make them feel bad or ashamed. Basically in so many words telling younger women that they are freaks if they don’t feel that way. While completely skipping the actual point of waiting: To not try and use sex to obtain a relationship (because that will never happen). And to not let a man push you into something you’re not comfortable with.

      Likewise, both mgm531 and I are pointing out that advice to wait often makes it sound as if waiting is a way to “failproof” a relationship. Which is far from the truth. That is what I, at least, AM emotionally invested in (not the sex part).

      I have a lot of women friends who do not enjoy casual sex. Here they are, following all this advice, then ending up three times as heartbroken when their “making him wait” approach led to nothing but my friends being even more emotionally attached to a man who ended up breaking up with them.

      Having sex early did not lead to a happy relationship. No surprise there. That is the advice. Well, since there’s never any mention of the fact that the majority of the ones who waited did not lead to happy relationships either, one could assume that waiting WILL lead to a happy relationship. Expectations are much higher, therefore the heartbreak is as well.

      Women who are not comfortable with casual absolutely should wait – I totally agree. At the same time, they also need to be reminded that that absolutely does no guarantee that the relationship will actually work, and that they’re still just as likely to have their hearts broken.

      They’re not avoiding heartbreak. They’re only avoiding feeling used or anxious about sex. But it often comes across as if waiting before sex is the magical ingredient missing in obtaining a lasting relationship (aka will guarantee the relationship to last).

      No, it’s only the missing ingredient in not feeling used or anxious if you don’t like casual sex.

      1. 3.2.1
        No Name To Give

        Sylvana,

        I said nothing about your statements being offensive nor did I call you angry, so let’s get that part correct. Secondly, even though prior generations of women are telling younger ones to wait, be it for commitment or marriage, but obviously women are making different choices or Evan wouldn’t have so many of these posts.

        I would suspect what you really want is not so much a lack of judgment, which nobody has done to you, even if I disagree with you, but you want to be validated.   Nobody has told you to change or not do what you want. Nobody is trying to keep you from it. You can have sex 100 times a night with a 100 men for all I care, it’s not my business. But if a women chooses to wait, whether it’s out it fear, or whatever so be it. Her body, her choice, right?

  4. 4
    Melodie

    I’ve been quick to jump into sex, only to have met the outcomes Evan describes… not compatible, not boyfriend material, and the worst one is immediate proclamations of love which I don’t return. After years of disatisfying dating scenarios, I’m doing it Evan’s way. Thanks Evan for keeping it real!

  5. 5
    Tron Swanson

    I greatly appreciate that Evan is putting this advice out there: it makes it easier for me to weed out non-ideal women, just they also use it to weed out me. This sort of advice has saved me a lot of time and trouble. I want women whose attraction to me is so strong that they’ll break all the rules–including their own. If their rules are more powerful than their attraction to me, well, there must not be much chemistry there. When I was younger and less confident, I put up with this sort of waiting…not only was it miserable, but it was never worth it, either. If a woman was more passionate about her “life schedule” than me, boring times were ahead. I should’ve done a hard “next” and moved on. Ahh well, live and learn.

    I am about to use an extremely fraught term, so please don’t panic. I’m going to use “value” in the sense that the world does. Obviously, all humans have an equal level of value, but when it comes to dating and mating, I think we all know what “high-value” and “low-value” mean. For instance, I’m sure most would describe me as a low-value man. I say all of that to say this: this strategy will be great for Evan’s clientele, who are high-value women, but not so much for low-value women, who are the majority. I’ve seen it firsthand. A more attractive woman gives me the “relationship before sex” speech, I say no and walk away, and she has no problem replacing me. Alternately, an average woman gives me the same speech, I say no and walk away…and she tends to come back and try to change my mind. Evan obviously won’t be concerned about this, because it’s outside the scope of his job, but I do feel that this advice will hurt average women.

    Ultimately, this is just a power play, the same as dating. “You’re paying or I’m not going.” “We’re in a relationship or you’re not getting sex.” It’s done right at the beginning, to establish dominance. Most men will back down and go along, so women don’t need to worry…yet. There’s a growing number who won’t, though. I’m genuinely curious about the percentages involved–what percentage of men have to “check out” before women start to experience problems? I look forward to finding out…

    1. 5.1
      anon

      Tron-

      do you think you are low value because of your looks, education, income, moral values or high sexual number? Or, some thing else? Just curious. And, since you believe the power play is disadvantageous to the average women (who are your target) do you believe that your ‘check out’ strategy would cause them to have chronic singleness or sexless problems?

      1. 5.1.1
        Tron Swanson

        Holy crap, I’ve got a lot of comments to respond to. I’d better stop checking for NFL free agency news–uh, I mean, working, and get on this.

        anon,

        I’m considered low-value because I lack many things: ambition, social skills, height. I obviously have eccentric beliefs. Education isn’t as big a deal in my neck of the woods, but I am held back by the fact that I don’t fit the main molds that various types of women prefer. Successful white-collar guy who’s a feminist ally? Nope, not me. Tough, manly rural/blue-collar guy who has traditional values and is all about family? Again, not me. I kind of fall between the cracks.

        And, the average women I know (and I know far, far too many of them) had problems long before I showed up. I’m yet another guy who won’t commit, so I suppose I make their problems a bit worse, but I don’t think I’m the cause of anything.

        1. Evan Marc Katz

          I’m a Jets fan and I’ve been working hard on the same things as you today, Tron.

        2. anon

          Well, you are honest and laid back, I’m sure you would be a decent enough catch, since you don’t seem to be posturing in any way. Lots of women don’t want commitment either- they would like to split the bills and housework with some one who will do their fair share. That way, you both get to reduce your burden and   have some companionship without making it legal (which is risky when the guys you have choose from are less ambitious and lower earning).   *Shrug* not ideal, but not bad either, there are worse things…

    2. 5.2
      Evan Marc Katz

      Fallacy: “If their rules are more powerful than their attraction to me, well, there must not be much chemistry there.” What everyone here is telling you is that sometimes when a woman really likes a guy, she is more inclined to wait.

      Fallacy: “I do feel that this advice will hurt average women.” Nope. It’ll keep them away from non-committal men and turns those women into “high value” women merely by setting boundaries and having standards.

      Fallacy: “It’s done right at the beginning, to establish dominance.” The “I only sleep with a guy if he’s my boyfriend,” is not said on the phone or over dinner. It’s said when things are heating up, he reaches for a condom and she makes it clear she’s attracted to him but doesn’t sleep with men who are active on Tinder. The right guy – if he likes her – will keep coming back for more. The wrong guy will bail. There’s not much in between. It’s not a power play. It’s common sense and does a great job weeding out men who are more interested in sex than relationships.

      Fallacy: “What percentage of men have to “check out” before women start to experience problems?” Doesn’t matter. If 90% of men don’t want to get married, they can continue to sleep with the 90% of the women who don’t set any sexual boundaries. My clients are the 10% and they only need 10% of men to get on board. I don’t forsee a world in which marriage is obsolete, because, like it or not, happily married people remain the happiest people on Earth. Life is about connection and people without it suffer, whether they admit it or not.

      1. 5.2.1
        Yet Another Guy

        @Evan

        I don’t forsee a world in which marriage is obsolete, because, like it or not, happily married people remain the happiest people on Earth. Life is about connection and people without it suffer, whether they admit it or not.

        I have seen the shift that Tron wrote of with Millennial men.   That cohort is very different than the generations of men who proceeded them.   Maybe, they will change as they age, but I am not counting on it.   My godson/nephew and his friends have no desire to marry and they are all over thirty.   My sister keeps pestering him, but he enjoys not having to spend his earnings on a woman (his words, not mine).   It is not like he cannot afford to do so.   He works in finance, so he makes very good money for a guy his age.

        With that said,   while there is no doubt that happily-married people are very happy, most marriages are not happy marriages.   There are more comfort marriages than there are happy marriages.   I would not call a comfort marriage a happy marriage.   We are experiencing unprecedented growth in gray divorce, something that couples avoided in the past.   I am part of that statistic.

      2. 5.2.2
        sylvana

        Evan,

        few honest questions:

        that sometimes when a woman really likes a guy, she is more inclined to wait.

        How can a man tell if a woman is actually inclined to wait versus just making him wait because she was told to do so? (Has no problems with casual sex, but makes potential boyfriends wait – a common complaint from men here). And isn’t this blog post implying that even those women who are inclined to wait are NOT waiting? How can a man tell what a woman’s actual intensions are when women act so inconsistently?

        turns those women into “high value” women merely by setting boundaries and having standards.

        Whoa. There’s a huge difference between waiting for commitment and not having any boundaries or standards. I know you do not judge women, but this, right here, just plain up said that women who are secure in their sexuality and are ok with casual or early sex are low-value women. Are you actually saying that women who wait for commitment are higher value than those who don’t?

        the right guy — if he likes her — will keep coming back for more. The wrong guy will bail. There’s not much in between.

        What about the guy who keeps coming back for more, but keeps having sex with others while he waits for her to finally be ready? Wouldn’t he be the inbetweener? I totally agree that you can weed out non-committal guys with waiting. But I often feel like women can easily misread this as him being such a sweetheart because he’s willing to wait for sex. No, he’s not willing to wait for sex. He’s waiting for sex with HER, but he’s still having sex while he waits – just with others.

        can continue to sleep with the 90% of the women who don’t set any sexual boundaries.

        Once again, what exactly do you mean by not setting ANY sexual boundaries? Last I checked, commitment is not the only sexual boundary. As a matter of fact, it’s a boundary born out of anxiety and insecurity. Not exactly a positive one.

        Are you trying to say the 90% of women who do not set the sexual boundary of commitment? (In which case, this should be made very clear.) Or are you saying that the 90% of women who don’t need commitment for sex might as well be whores? Because not having sex for money IS a sexual boundary.

         

        1. Evan Marc Katz

          How can a man tell if a woman is actually inclined to wait versus just making him wait because she was told to do so?

          He can’t, no more than you can accurately tell someone’s motives for ANYTHING. But it doesn’t make a difference. If a woman is waiting – for whatever reasons she posits (and I gave a pretty good script about how to make it more palatable) – that’s her right. If the guy just wants to get laid, that’ll be the last date. If he likes her, he’ll come back for more. She doesn’t need to explain (or even know) why she doesn’t want to fuck a guy who is active on Tinder. Pretty much every guy can understand her reasoning without digging deeper. Men may be cads, but they’re not stupid. He knows a) whether he’s just using her for sex or if he thinks she’s girlfriend potential and b) if he’s actively seeking other women online simultaneously. Her boundary, therefore, doesn’t change his opinion of her, per se. It just protects her from a man whose goals are misaligned with hers. It’s a screening mechanism. Because sex isn’t that hard to come by and most men don’t need to be “boyfriends” to have it, guys who are just trying to get laid will usually disappear. Which is the entire point. To weed out players when she’s looking for love. Not sure why you’d have a problem with women doing just that.

          And isn’t this blog post implying that even those women who are inclined to wait are NOT waiting?

          Yes, they’re not waiting because sex feels good, is exciting, releases oxytocin, creates bonding, and is objectively fun. But the same way you don’t have that third drink, it often makes sensee for women to put on the brakes when it comes to sex. Just because hedonism feels good doesn’t mean there aren’t ramifications – for these women (not you). They’re also not waiting because they’re of the belief that if they sleep with these men, it’ll be a path to commitment. Unfortunately, as most of them discover, it’s not. It CAN be – but most of the time, it’s just sex. Thus, my wife’s phrase, “Men look for sex and find love.” In the process of looking to get laid, men accidentally stumble upon women they really like. But since it sometimes takes a few weeks for a guy to realize he enjoys a woman platonically not sexually, I encourage women to wait a few weeks to see how he shows up in a non-sexual way. As always, I am astounded that anyone could have a problem with this very moderate solution.

          Are you actually saying that women who wait for commitment are higher value than those who don’t?

          I’m not saying that inherently. I am saying that ALL of us tend to devalue what comes too quickly and easily. It’s human nature. We want the shiny apple at the top of the tree, not the one sitting on the ground, even if it’s the same apple. THAT’s why all of this advice – which you call social brainwashing – has merit. You’ve seen men right here on this blog talk about how they devalue women who sleep around. Are you also telling me that these men don’t exist? 🙂 They do. Men are sexual hypocrites – they push for sex and often judge women for having it. I’m not saying it’s fair or right or good. I’m saying it happens. So you’re left with two paths: sleep with men whenever you feel like it (and try to detach from any feelings) or, recognizing that if you like a guy you DO have feelings, try to ensure that you’re not sleeping with a man who is not your boyfriend because you’ve discovered it hurts too much. I am fine with your way of doing it; again, I’m not sure what objection you have with mine.

          What about the guy who keeps coming back for more, but keeps having sex with others while he waits for her to finally be ready?

          No problem. He’s seeing those others as temporary fuck buddies, but if he keeps coming back for more despite the fact that he’s not getting laid, he’s highly considering her as a girlfriend.

          Last I checked, commitment is not the only sexual boundary. As a matter of fact, it’s a boundary born out of anxiety and insecurity. Not exactly a positive one.

          I’m not one to judge people for their boundaries. I judge things as effective or ineffective. To many women, it’s patently obvious that sleeping around on Tinder has not brought them much joy. I’ve cited a bunch of studies on this blog that bear out the same notion. So if that’s not working for her, because sleeping with a guy who she’s secretly hoping will become her boyfriend produces anxiety, why shouldn’t she set these boundaries? You seem to think everyone should act like YOU. I don’t. It’s not your place to judge how a woman feels when she sees the man who she hopes is her future husband on a dating site the morning after sex. You may function more like a man in that regard – and I say good for you – but many women do not. That’s okay.

          Or are you saying that the 90% of women who don’t need commitment for sex might as well be whores?

          I didn’t say anything I didn’t say. I’ve repeated a million times that I don’t judge anyone for having sex with whomever they want whenever they want and that this sexclusivity advice is for women who are not happy having sex with men who don’t commit.

          I’m quite sure I’ve answered all your questions. The question is whether you’ll accept that there’s nothing wrong with women who don’t operate like you do and that this is good advice for THEM.

        2. sylvana

          Evan,

          thanks for taking the time to answer all that.

          I asked the first two because I often hear men complaining about women giving in early to some men, but making them wait (not just on this blog). It seems to be something that makes men feel less valuable, rather than more valuable. Just like women are correct when they call men sexual hypocrites, I have to agree with men that this is actually a sign that women are sexual hypocrites as well. I’m siding with the men who say that these type of women have double standards. So it is interesting to hear from a male dating coach about the men’s side of this.

          And for the very last time: I do NOT have a problem with women waiting. I don’t know how many more times I can say that either way is perfectly fine.

          Double standards are different. Don’t claim you’re not comfortable having sex without commitment, then give it up easily to any dude except a potential boyfriend. That’s also known as lying. I don’t think it’s any more all right for women to have double standards than for men to be hypocrites.

          The other questions got turned back around to women waiting. But my questions weren’t related to women who wait, but rather about those who don’t need commitment.

          But I think I understand this now.

          You don’t judge women who don’t need commitment. But if a woman does choose to have sex without commitment, she needs to realize that she is lower value, and none of her boundaries or standards matter, because there is only one that matters to men: Her waiting until he commits before giving up sex. It’s not like she doesn’t have any standards or boundaries, she simply doesn’t have any that matter to men.

          So you’re not judging women who don’t need comittment, you’re simply stating the fact that in reality, for the majority of men, those women have very little value or worth to men.

          I’m perfectly all right with that. Actions and consequences. That’s what happens when you go against cultural, religious, or societal norms. People might end up frowning on you.

          Once again – I was trying to clarify the stamements you made about women who do NOT need commitment, and to learn what you think about men who complain about women’s double standards.

          Neither of which have anything to do with women who prefer to wait. I fully agree with you that they should do so without worrying, and not let some man talk them into anything they’re not comfortable with.

      3. 5.2.3
        Tron Swanson

        If a woman really likes a guy, she’s more inclined to wait? Good to know. I’ve really liked many women, and I’ve never been inclined to ask them out…sadly, it hasn’t always worked. Perhaps this “don’t give them what they really want” strategy will work   better for these women than it did for me.

        If you define high-value women as those who have boundaries, more power to you, but that isn’t how I define them. Now, I’ve had some women very proudly tell me that they’re high-value (or a similar term) because they won’t put up with this or that…it worked for the attractive ones, while the less-attractive ones had to settle for men that they later dumped or divorced. Again, this “My way or the highway” stuff sounds great for high-powered corporate women who are still attractive and have lots of options, but single moms who are struggling with weight and keep losing jobs…they’ll just scare off the guys that might actually give them a chance. I’ve seen it happen time and time again.

        It sounds like the “wrong guy” has standards of his own, while the “right guy” will go along with whatever she wants. The opposite of what you’re telling women to do, in other words.

        1. Evan Marc Katz

          Reasonable people strike reasonable compromises, Tron.

          A woman says “I won’t fuck you while you’re fucking other women” and you say that’s unreasonable – because you want/need/deserve to get laid faster?

          Sorry, man. I’m a man and a pretty objective observer in these gender wars and I would have a hard time making that argument with a straight face. In fact, most men can’t. That’s why they bail when they can’t get laid – because they’re NOT operating in good faith, because they DON’T want a relationship. Your persistence on this issue is all the evidence that I need that this is a smart play. Not a power play. Not manipulation. Think of it as someone who needs a certain salary to take a job and won’t take a job for less than that because she knows it won’t make her happy in the long run.

          If NO ONE is willing to meet her salary demands, she loses. But the truth is that there is ALWAYS someone who is willing to wait a few weeks before having sex instead of demanding it on Date 3 without any regards for her feelings. The only guys who lose out are guys like you.

        2. Tron Swanson

          I’ve been losing out for a long time, Evan–but it’s been on my terms. Without doing anything I don’t want to, or giving up anything I don’t want to. As much as I enjoy sex, I care about my happiness more, and I can’t be happy if I’m compromising.

          For the record, I used to want a relationship, and I didn’t put up with it then, either.

        3. Evan Marc Katz

          So you’re in the exact same boat as my clients. You’ve made your rules. They’ll make theirs. It’s mutually exclusive. So why fight about it?

        4. Tron Swanson

          No fighting here. I’m thrilled that you’ve compared me with your clients! Now, please, do me a favor and praise me the way you praise them. You know, how you slather on the feminism-lite compliments before you give them some surprisingly traditional advice. “(client) is a smart, fierce, the-future-is-female striver, who has high-level meetings during the day and drinks martinis with her girlfriends at night…but she needs to guard her heart and do the things her grandmother did!” You can skip the second half; just shower me with compliments. Think “Leslie Knope talking about Ann Perkins in Parks and Rec”-style. Because, after all, your clients and I have the same “watch out for yourself” philosophy.

    3. 5.3
      Ann

      I have to be honest, I find Tron’s response a bit offensive – especially the part that says “I want women whose attraction to me is so strong that they’ll break all the rules—including their own.”   I think this is extremely presumptuous.   The thing some men don’t seem to understand is that for women, sex is also emotional, and women need to feel safe and secure.   We may find a man extremely attractive, but it’s still not worth it to hop into bed with him on the first date, then essentially be dumped, because all he wanted was sex.   Most women want commitment and a real relationship.   Even if a guy looks like a Giorgio Armani model, is that going to take away the pain she feels when he disappears after getting sex immediately?   No.   Who cares how attractive he was — the woman will often end up feeling used, and frankly like a piece of trash.  
      I also think it’s pretty ridiculous to presume that Evan’s advice will hurt the “average” woman.   Most people don’t look like Victoria’s Secret models — yet they still find commitment and get married.   I doubt all of them hopped into bed immediately.   If a guy really cares about a woman and wants a relationship too, it won’t kill him to wait 3-4 weeks for sex, after claiming her as a girlfriend.   And honestly, if any guy thinks a woman has to give it up because she’s “average” and will lose him otherwise, he’s kind of an asshole and doesn’t deserve her in the first place.

      1. 5.3.1
        Mrs Happy

        Ann,

        re Tron’s

        “I want women whose attraction to me is so strong that they’ll break all the rules—including their own.”

        I’d call it an incredibly common mainstream male fantasy rather than offensive.   And we all get to daydream our own particular fantasies – I know mine certainly keep me smiling.   It is only when fantasies infiltrate real life successful functioning they’re a problem.

        1. Emily, to

          Tron and Mrs. Happy,

          “I want women whose attraction to me is so strong that they’ll break all the rules—including their own.”

          I don’t think that’s any different than a woman wanting a man to be overwhelmed with lust for her. That’s a pretty common female fantasy because a decent portion of men are logical.

          But, Tron, that kind of attraction, at least for me,   is RARE. It’s happened to be me six times in the last 30 years. I’m not sure how that compares with other women, but there are plenty of women who won’t act on that kind of attraction even if they feel it.

        2. Clare

          Tron & Emily,

          Yeah, apparently Evan, me and all the women on this blog can tell Tron and others like him till they’re blue in the face that a woman can feel massive attraction and desire for a man and  still  choose to wait for sex because we don’t want to get hurt. He’s just not getting it. He wants the woman’s desire for him to overwhelm her desire not to get hurt, much like the five year old who wants his mom to buy him the toy, even though she’s got no money in her purse. He’s saying he refuses to wait a few weeks, and stomps his foot insisting that she sleep with him  now.

          Like Mrs Happy said, it’s living in a fantasy world. Unrealistic, selfish, immature. Take your pick of descriptive phrases.

          Also how Tron can claim to know what would hurt the average woman when he, by his own admission, doesn’t date or even have sex with them very often is entirely beyond me.

        3. Tom10

          @ Clare

          “Unrealistic, selfish, immature. Take your pick of descriptive phrases.”

            

          No. Just no.

            

          I don’t get your comments lately Clare; you’re on a blog for women trying to understand men, but instead you’re lecturing men to understand women. Why?

            

          Surely you’ve learned by now that men don’t listen to women when it comes to sex and relationships?

            

          Why won’t we listen? Because what women say they want (particularly on this blog) is completely different to what our dating experiences have told us. I.e. you’re simply wrong.

            

          There is nothing more unrealistic, selfish or immature about Tron deciding to walk than there is about you insisting a guy wait.

            

          Tron is entitled to want what he wants and date in any manner that suits him. Trying to shame him into dating in a manner that suits your dating prerogative is simply a huge waste of time: he doesn’t want to play by tune and that’s his prerogative. Leave him be.

            

        4. Emily, to

          Clare,
          He wants the woman’s desire for him to overwhelm her desire not to get hurt,  
          Actually, I just think he wants her to do all the work.   🙂
          Like Mrs Happy said, it’s living in a fantasy world. Unrealistic, selfish, immature. Take your pick of descriptive phrases.
          I think it’s a bit lazy and risk-averse more than anything. But it’s a fantasy. You can want what you want. I’m still waiting for Rhet Butler to show up … but Clark Gable is dead.   🙂
          by his own admission, doesn’t date or even have sex with them very often is entirely beyond me.
          Yeah, he’d have to get out and about and meet many women for his fantasy to ever happen — it’s rare that a woman feels that way about a man and even rarer for her to act on it. They ain’t going to show up at his front door and plow him over.

        5. Tron Swanson

          Ann, Mrs. Happy, Emily, Clare,

          I’m responding to all of you at once, but please don’t think that means I love you any less.

          My “if she really likes me, she’ll have sex with me” strategy may seem like a male fantasy, but it’s merely the inverse of what Evan has suggested for women. Evan says that men can prove they’re serious by going along with women’s request to wait, while I say that women can prove they’re serious by going along with men’s request to have sex. Of course, Evan means “serious” in terms of wanting a relationship, while I’m using it to refer to a certain level of physical attraction. Regardless, in both cases, we’re asking someone to do something against their nature, in order to prove that they have strong feelings.

          Emily is absolutely right that this is rare. (For men, anyway. For women, well, this unrealistic “Men willingly choose not to have sex” fantasy is often a reality.) But I’ve found that it makes an amazing weeding-out process. The women that have been really into me have been willing to do anything: have sex right away, cheat on their boyfriends, you name it. Women who are truly attracted to me will hook up with me no matter what, and women who aren’t truly attracted to me will always have a reason not to. If a woman has to be talked into sleeping with me, or doesn’t feel “comfortable,” not only will it likely never happen, but it’ll be dull even if it does. I’ve lived by this philosophy for a long time, and it’s never steered me wrong. There’s a great quote that I could put here regarding this, but it’s from a controversial blog, so I won’t.

          Now, keep in mind, this is the sort of generalization that we use to save time and protect ourselves. Women tell themselves that, if a man is really interested, he’ll ask her out–but I’ve never done that, though I’ve been interested in many women. And I’m sure some of the sex-cautious women I’ve known really did want to sleep with me. But, by hewing to generalization such as this, we give ourselves a better chance of finding what we want.

        6. Clare

          Tom10,

          I’m not lecturing men, but I do find the “have sex with me now or you don’t love me” brigade tiresome.

          Of course Tron is entitled to date however he wants. So is YAG.

          So am I.

          What I get tired of explaining is that, just because a woman does not sleep with a man straight away, does not mean she desires him any less. And that is what I was doing.

          “No. Just no.”

          Selfish and immature is how I see Tron’s attitude. Your opinion may differ. Yes he is entitled to it. No one is disputing that.

        7. Jeremy

          LOL Tron, I know the quote very well.   I know it, I know where it comes from, I know the philosophy, its virtues and its pitfalls.

           

          Your point about your philosophy being the inverse of Evan’s advice is a good one.   It’s true.   For the type of sexual experience you want, you need a woman who is eager from the get-go.   Otherwise it’ll never be what you’re looking for.   Giggles and validation.   And for the type of relationship that Evan’s clients are looking for, the man with your attitude is anathema.   Which is exactly why his advice is good.   His advice isn’t to not give men what they want.   It’s to wait.   Slightly.   Until exclusivity (I refuse to use the word “commitment” because it is ridiculously meaningless in this context).   Why a relationship-oriented woman would ever do otherwise is beyond me.   The odds that fast sex will make a man fall in love with you are vanishingly small.

           

          Last week we had a problem where my 3 year-old (who was just moved from a crib to a bed) would come out of her room constantly at bedtime.   It was driving me berserk.   And each time she’d come out, I’d go to her, lie with her, sing to her, try to get her to sleep.   And when I left she’d just come out again.   My wife tapped my shoulder and asked me to let her try.   She told my daughter to go into bed, and my wife waited outside her open door.   When my daughter stirred to come out of bed, my wife walked away.   She told my daughter that if she wants her to stay, she needs to behave and stay in bed.   Sure enough, she stayed in bed.   And eventually fell asleep.

           

          I told my wife that I love her even more for her intelligence, because of course I saw the wisdom of her actions.   You reward good actions, the actions you want.   If you reward bad actions or provide the reward in prospect, what motivation for behavior is there?

        8. Cathalei

          Tom10,

          Nobody is claiming it’s shameful that Tron doesn’t want to wait. It’s his prerogative. Just a one that would lose him certain women who are unwilling to have sex before exclusivity. Differences between what women say here and your dating experiences is irrelevant to this. Tron indicated that he doesn’t want an LTR in any case, so I doubt he suffers much from this loss.

          Yes, Tron has a right to not wait after this declaration is made. However, there is a big difference between bailing after such an offer and attributing a nefarious purpose to it. If a woman prioritizes commitment, it’s normal for her to make sure her date is on the same page to avoid disappointment. It doesn’t necessarly show her lack of attraction. To determine this, you should look at her general demeanor.

        9. shaukat

          Selfish and immature is how I see Tron’s attitude.

          I disagree with Tron a lot (mainly due to the slight entitlement in his posts) but he’s not being selfish and immature for choosing to walk away if the woman he’s talking to doesn’t want casual sex–that’s his goal. It’s no more ‘selfish’ than a woman choosing to walk away from him because she doesn’t want that.

      2. 5.3.2
        sylvana

        Ann,

        Tron will probably shoot me for this. But here is how I interpret that coming from him.

        I think it’s not presumptuous, rather than his way of what he feels is “ultimately romantic.”

        He considers himself extremely low value. He meets a pretty, nice woman who generally doesn’t sleep around. Yet, for some reason, against all odds, there is something about him she finds so attractive (and trustworthy) that she is willing to give him the one thing she values the most.

        She just elevated him to someone extremely special.

        Now that I read it, that actually sounds like your classic romance novel.  It’s a spin on the romantic virgin tale, only minus the actual virgin requirement (discrimination against non-virgins).

      3. 5.3.3
        Emily, to

        Tron,

        If a woman has to be talked into sleeping with me, or doesn’t feel “comfortable,” not only will it likely never happen, but it’ll be dull even if it does.  

        I don’t know how other women feel, but I find sex is infinitely better if the man is the pursuer/aggressor in the beginning. (I’m not talking about taking the sexual initiative once the relationship is underway.) You mention dull, and that’s how sex has been if I’ve been the aggressor. My point is that some women don’t want to take on the role of pursuer even if they’re into someone. It turns them off.   When I was moving, a male co-worker gave me his number and told me to call if I wanted help “packing my boxes.” I was pretty sure packing my boxes was a euphemism and I would have been down with that, but I wanted him to call me and take the initiative, so I never called him. I was afraid his approach was indicative of what he’d be like once I got him alone.

        1. Tron Swanson

          sylvana,

          I did used to be a romantic! And you’re absolutely right.

          Emily,

          Given the type of guy you want, I can’t blame you for thinking that way. My challenge is that, growing up, I was taught that women wanted a man who were more civilized and emotional…and that appealed to me, as I’m more passive than aggressive. Then I found out that, sadly, most women want old-school guys, while I’m very much new-school.

        2. sylvana

          Emily,

          I was pretty sure packing my boxes was a euphemism and I would have been down with that

          It surprises me a bit that this wasn’t enough if you were pretty sure that he was offering sex.

          To me, this seems like a pretty obvious offer, just in a polite, non-pushy way. He did take the initiative by making the offer.

          Let’s say you would have not been interested. Would you still have wanted him to pursue the matter more strongly?

          In this particular case, it reads as if he was just testing willingness, and would likely become more of an initiator/aggressive (in a positive way) once he is sure you are willing.

          I think I would have given him at least one more opportunity, making it clear I am willing, and then see how he reacts.

          You (and I) don’t mind a man to be a bit “pushier”. But I’m sure a lot of women would not be so comfortable with it.

          Then again, you did obviously know the guy, and he likely knew a bit about your personality. Which of course also makes a difference.

        3. Emily, to

          Sylvana,

          I wanted a direct offer. “Hey, I hear you’re moving. I’d like to help. Let me get your number and I’ll call you and we’ll set up a time.”
          Let’s say you would have not been interested. Would you still have wanted him to pursue the matter more strongly?
          I can always say no.   : )     Years ago, I met a guy at a party. It was a Saturday night. He remembered where I worked (he’d asked) and when I came into work on Monday, (he found me on the company’s website) he’d emailed me. It was pretty simple. “Do you want to go out for a beer?” My answer: Yes. Now isn’t that better than “Here’s my number if you want to hang out”?
          In this particular case, it reads as if he was just testing willingness, and would likely become more of an initiator/aggressive (in a positive way) once he is sure you are willing.
          I have no way of knowing that. He could have continued to be just as flim flammy.
          You (and I) don’t mind a man to be a bit “pushier”. But I’m sure a lot of women would not be so comfortable with it.
          I don’t consider it pushy but direct. Going through the front door and not the side.   🙂

        4. Clare

          Emily,

          “Packing my boxes!”

          Thank you Emily for always bringing a light note to these heavy discussions and for your subtle brand of humour!

        5. Emily, to

          Tron and Clare

          Tron:

          My challenge is that, growing up, I was taught that women wanted a man who were more civilized and emotional…and that appealed to me, as I’m more passive than aggressive. Then I found out that, sadly, most women want old-school guys, while I’m very much new-school.

          Two things.

          1.) There are plenty of women who like a more passive man. I have a friend who jokes that’s she’s the husband in her marriage, and her husband likes it that way. She’s in charge, and it works for them.

          2.) To be totally honest, and of course I don’t know you and you can take this for what it’s worth, sometimes I don’t read your comments. Some of them irritate me (to be frank) but it’s mostly that they make me sad. You sound deeply depressed, like you’ve checked out and given up.

          Clare:

          Thank you Emily for always bringing a light note to these heavy discussions and for your subtle brand of humour!

          I hope it’s not subtle. I abhor subtlety! 🙂

    4. 5.4
      Marika

      Wait, someone get John Gottman, Rachel Heller & Amir Levine on the phone! All their expertise and empirical research was a massive waste of time!! Apparently the only thing that dictates how a person behaves with the opposite sex is their value/attractiveness (Evan, are you aware of this?).

      1. 5.4.1
        Noone45

        Eh, it’s not something you say in polite company, but there is some truth to what he’s saying. Unattractive women tend to have more sexual partners according to the research I’ve seen. The operating theory is that women use sex as a means to form a relationship when they are “unattractive “. People who are considered unattractive are paid less, bullied more,   and tend to have poorer health outcomes when hospitalized.   It’s fairly obvious there’s a hierarchy in society. Of course, there are other isms at play, and I’m not endorsing what Tron is saying,   but he’s not entirely wrong. He’s figured out the worst parts of people and cynically decided to play it for what it is. I just walked away when I figured it out. Most you won’t have to experience any of this.

        You can’t understand until you see it. I’ve been told to my face I’m too ugly to turn most men down. Yet, I turn everyone down these days. You can still be ugly and have standards.

        1. Marika

          That sounds really horrible, Noone45. I’m sorry. I really am.

          I don’t detract from your experience at all. It honestly sounds shit. But the thing is,  we all extrapolate from our experience. And the more limited to one particular experience (e.g., casual sex, mgtow’s, bitter divorcees) the less removed we become from how other people think & other possible realities. And the more entrenched in our own beliefs – no matter how narrow or harmful (to be clear, this is not a reflection on you).

          It does sound like you’ve been handed a particularly raw deal. But if Tron’s assertions were correct, that Evan’s advice is worthless for everyone other than the most attractive ‘high value’ women on the planet, he would be bankrupt by now. For many of us, if we can understand why we are attracted to what we are, why we fall for certain people, why we don’t prioritise the things that are best for us in the long-term, how to be more confident etc (all the stuff the research shows), we can make our dating lives better and improve our relationship choices.

          It doesn’t all come down to be hot, have sex.

          I have three friends who are amongst the least attractive people I’ve ever seen. They all have the confidence of lions and are always dating (one is married to) very attractive and also lovely people. There’s a lot to be said for being secure.

        2. Noone45

          “how to be more confident, etc.”

          Why do people say this? It’s always dumbfounded me. Confidence isn’t the issue: it’s other humans. Perhaps the answer is free plastic surgery for US uggos. Either way, women are used for a lot more than sex. Evan has likely discussed this problem elsewhere.   For some people, romantic love isn’t a real possibility.   In my case, men seem to be happy to date me till they can find someone hotter. Even the most intelligent sorts do that. I took stock, realized it was a part of human nature that would not be overcome, and walked away from the idea of romantic love.

          Tron’s diatribe was simply an attempt to not get hurt. He’ll fail in his endeavor.

        3. No Name To Give

          I like you, No one. We’d have coffee and talk, lol!

        4. Noone45

          No name, unlikely. I’m a leftist with a little too much honesty.

          Everyone is trying to play the game and get a different outcome. Thats all I see in the comments. I looked at the general outcome and chose to do what makes me happy.   I’m blessed to have been the “other ” my entire life. The rules don’t apply to people like me as we aren’t welcome to the game.  

          If anything, I wonder why people care so much what others think of their choices.

        5. Tron Swanson

          Noone45,

          You’re right, one of my goals is to not get hurt, and I do fail in that area, sometimes. But, by pursuing this strategy, I won’t get hurt as much as I otherwise would. Nor will I waste as much time and money and effort as I otherwise would. No strategy is perfect, sadly.

        6. Noone45

          No shade for protecting yourself,   but there is a point where you have to analyze your motivations. I’ve been doing that in therapy. My own refusal to date is about protecting myself, but I often wonder if I’m incorrect in the general opinion I have about myself. I was very sure of certain things in life, only to find out I was wrong. What else am I wrong about? Well, no matter. Thoughts for another day.

        7. Cathalei

          No shade indeed, but I get the impression that you can indeed be looking at yourself through a different glass than the outside world. Of course I don’t understand why this post was attacked like that (Evan’s) where self-preservation is vital and just common sense. The issue is, too rigid methods for self preservation turns people away who might be a great match. I am very direct in communicating and there are most likely those who find it off putting. But I am not very good at social niceties and I find them contrived. At the times I try my hand in it, I feel like an alien forcibly deported into another planet. But as I’ve recently found out, there are those who find my ‘much too honest’ approach appealing and refreshing. The ugly truth that isn’t told in ‘polite society’ about confidence is that it doesn’t come overnight in such situations. It doesn’t materialize in a vacuum. When you’re consistently told that you’re ‘wrong’ in your demeanor and things largely out of your control, you need a means to build your confidence. I am confident and smooth; but that took many trials and failures, social isolation and ostracism for years. There was ammunition to be developed to get that confidence.

          As for ugliness, plenty of couples are not epitomes of conventional beauty. In any case, conventional beauty is overrated. But in online dating where you’re measured by the photo you put there, that puts a skew to perception. I think Sarah Jessica Parker has been called ugly many times, yet she has no shortage of adorers. These lyrics which became torch song for hookups reminded me.

          Heart throb never, black and ugly as ever

          However, I stay Coogi down to the socks.

          He was a ladies’ man before he got fame as a rap musician. Go figure.

        8. No Name To Give

          People don’t have to agree on everything to get along. Nevertheless, I do understand some of what you have encountered. I am a misfit in the world of dating and it doesn’t help that I’m not much of a joiner. I don’t believe there’s a place for me either.

        9. V

          Noone45 trying to get attractive  women to understand the struggles we unattractive  women face is  just a waste of air. They are like the really  wealthy 8th generation old money  people you see  chastising poor people for struggling with money.

          Marika once said she looks like the Actress Kirsten Dunst (a beautiful woman) and Clare once went into a long semi-paragraph explaining how attractive she is (while finishing it off by saying I hate how this makes me sound but it’s the truth). So honestly I would not put too much stock into their arguments against the power beautiful people wild in the world of dating.

          Some women can just walk into a room and get at least half the men’s attention but because they don’t personally find any of the men attractive they will complain that they struggle in dating. While the rest of us would consider it Lucky if we could get at least one man’s attention; even if we aren’t attracted to him it’s nice to not feel completely invisiable to the opposite sex.

    5. 5.5
      No Name To Give

      Because you want all the power.

      1. 5.5.1
        Yet Another Guy

        @NNTG

        More like, Tron does not want to relinquish the power to his date.   He made some valid points.   When a woman requires a man to pursue, plan, and pay in addition to enforcing the “no sex until commitment” rule, she is setting the rules of engagement for the relationship.   There was a time when it was easy for women to set the rules of engagement, but that was before women’s liberation and sexual promiscuity.     Women have made obtaining sex ridiculously easy, which has weakened the ability of the average woman to set the rules of engagement.   Women should not chastise/shame men for wanting sex early.   They should chastise other women for giving it up early like they used to before women’s liberation.   After all, slut-shaming was created by women to knock other women out of competition for high-value men.   As long as women continue to practice promiscuity until they no longer desire to be promiscuous, they will be facing an up hill battle with men when it comes to making them wait.

        1. sylvana

          YAG,

          I was with you through the first two sentences.

          Then you had to go off into fantasy land. You do realize that until about 100 years ago, prostitution was perfectly legal in the US, right? Throughout history, prostitution (from low-end cheap to high-end expensive) was always present and available, married men who were better off were known to keep mistresses, and a ton of babies were born out of wedlock.

          So when, exactly, was this time that you are talking about when sex was not easily and readily available to men, with even LESS commitment than nowadays (child support is also a recent thing. Before, even known bastards were NOT acknowledged, let alone paid for by men)??

          As for slut-shaming … Men are the ones worried about legitimacy of offspring. Not women. It’s men’s bloodlines that have to continue.

          Women having to be virgins before marriage and shaming any promiscuous behavior is NOT on other women.

           

        2. Yet Another Guy

          @Sylvana

          You do realize that until about 100 years ago, prostitution was perfectly legal in the US, right? Throughout history, prostitution (from low-end cheap to high-end expensive) was always present and available, married men who were better off were known to keep mistresses, and a ton of babies were born out of wedlock.

          While that may be true, I do not know a single man from my father’s generation or my grandfather’s generation that frequented prostitutes, and they were fairly open with me when I came of age.   Most men in the United States were not well-off enough to keep a mistress.   For these men, sex outside of commitment was much rarer before women’s liberation.   Men of my father’s and grandfather’s generations could not even fathom the hookup culture that exists today.   Heck, it came as a shock to me when I re-entered the dating pool after my marriage ended.   One-night stands were rare and usually the result of heavy alcohol consumption when I younger.   Today, women will offer sex on the first date without a trace of alcohol in their blood streams.   I literally had a woman learn over and ask the question, “Would you think I was a slut if I wanted to go home with you?” That was less than an hour into a first date, and that was not an isolated experience.   Jeremy has repeatedly mentioned that women have made sex cheap enough that men are no longer motivated to step up.   His stance is that men made the effort to improve and establish themselves because they wanted sex.   After a lot of consideration, I have to agree with him.

        3. No Name To Give

          And I’m sure that are tons of Trons out there. I quit the game a while ago but I really fear for my daughter.

        4. Cathalei

          sylvana,

          Shaming from men simply wouldn’t create the same effect especially if they can be with the father. For men, it means material and time investment. Such care of an offspring is a great deal and stakes would be high. For women it would be competition. Of course if a man is “high-value” like that he would set other standards than how quickly a woman would get in the bed.

        5. Tron Swanson

          No Name To Give,

          You don’t need to worry about all the “Trons” out there. Sure, there are a few hundred thousand of us active online…men who are skeptical about the power imbalance in relationships, and the return on investment in male/female interactions. But that’s nothing compared to the millions of young men that we’re constantly trying to warn. You can’t throw a rock without hitting a twentysomething guy who’s heard about us, and is at least somewhat sympathetic to our ideas. In terms of the vocal-online contingent, at least hundreds of thousands of us figured this out by ourselves, with no help from elders. Our fathers and uncles may have inadvertently warned us with their lives, but not their words. How many future men will figure it out with the tons and tons of male blogs and sites that are popping up? We’re using words, now, and it’s definitely having an effect.

          I’m looking forward to the future…

        6. sylvana

          YAG,

          about time we bantered again 🙂

          The problem I see with your and quite a few other men’s posts (not just here) is that you guys are basing everything on the previous two generations, three at best. And then use it as if that was the way it always was.

          I think that’s one of the biggest differences in the way men and women look at this. A lot of “modern” (for a lack of better term) women are somewhat skipping over the past 100 years, and going by centuries of history. Shoot, it’s only been about 100 years since women gained the right to vote. The last 100 years are just a drop in the bucket.

          Even for me as a woman, it’s almost impossible to imagine that my grandmother was the first woman in my family with a right to do something as “simple” as vote (a basic right).

          So when you say “it used to be a certain way,” you’re referring to a drop in the bucket of time during which women were just beginning to gain certain rights, but still had very few opportunities. A lot of women will look at centuries of history and say, um..no.

          But even just in the last 100 years, it was not that uncommon for husbands to cheat. Wives simply turned a blind eye to it because that’s what men do. It was not uncommon for children to be born out of wedlock. But they, and the pregnant woman, were ushered away and out of sight in shame.

          Heck, the whole abortion movement did not come about just because of married women not wanting to birth another child.

          There’s reality versus this fantasy land a lot of men want to create for the past 100 years. Things were not anywhere near as rosy, and women’s intentions weren’t anywhere near as pure as you guys like to make it out to be.

           

        7. Yet Another Guy

          @sylvana

          There’s reality versus this fantasy land a lot of men want to create for the past 100 years. Things were not anywhere near as rosy, and women’s intentions weren’t anywhere near as pure as you guys like to make it out to be.

          Yet, at no point in recorded history has it been easier for men to obtain sex without commitment, especially the top 20% of men like me who are enjoying an embarrassment of riches.   Why?   Because the specter of unwanted pregnancy has been removed.   Back in those days, unwanted pregnancy was a serious social threat.   I have been involved in genealogy for two decades.   In that time, I have read a lot of census pages.   The homes for unwed mothers are enumerated in the old censuses.     While enlightening, the number of women enumerated on those pages would be dwarfed by the number today if women behaved the way that are currently behaving without the aid oral contraception and abortion on demand coupled with massive changes in society.    Sure, there were shotgun marriages during the old days, but they were usually between boyfriend and girlfriend, not hookups.     To say that women hooked up with men at anywhere near the rate that they do today in times past is rewriting history.   For most men then and the unlucky 80% today, obtaining sex involved/involves commitment.

        8. Jeremy

          Sylvana, re: the discussion of history. I find discussions of history to be interesting but ultimately unhelpful. Because no one can seem to agree on what exactly the history was. And even those experts who’ve written about it have exhibited terribly skewed biases.

          Ryan and Jetha wrote “Sex at Dawn” as a counter-history to the standard narrative. The implication of the book was that women, in their natural hunter-gatherer state, were at least as sexual as men, likely more so, completely un-prone to monogamous relationships. And many people liked this explanation, because it fit the narrative they like to believe, the narrative they perceive in their own proclivities. Of course, many in the scientific community wrote counter-arguments to this narrative, citing all sorts of evidence of female coyness and selectivity, not just in the human population but throughout nature. So which narrative is correct? How accurate is it to extrapolate bonobo behaviour onto humans, and even the behaviour of certain hunter-gatherer populations on modern humans, given that those were not the societies from whom most of us descended?

          Stephanie Coontz wrote “Marriage, a history.” A study of what marriage looked like from the start of the agricultural era to the present. An interesting and informative book, to be sure. But she couldn’t keep her biases out of it, and especially out of her last chapter on modern marriage. I was so disappointed in her final chapter that I wanted to throw the book across the room. She writes how women’s emancipation has equalized marriage, how women everywhere are happier now in marriage and free to walk if they aren’t……and how men are better off too because fewer women shoot their husbands now. ‘Cause they can divorce. Seriously. That’s her “balanced” perspective of the male side of things. That her mother was far happier divorced from her father. And her father? No mention. Is modern marriage better or worse for men, how does it affect men? No mention. Other than, you know, the not getting shot as much. I have trouble trusting a historian whose views are so clearly skewed.

          I digress. My point is that it is pointless to try to use history to support our theses, when no one can agree what the history actually was. Because history is broad enough to contain examples of any viewpoint we wish to espouse. It matters less what we believe than WHY we believe it. How much of your views on this issue are coloured by what you want to believe about the world in general because of how you yourself feel? I know my feelings colour my beliefs. I try to keep in mind, though, that as important as my motivations are to me, they are far from universal, and not even common.

        9. Yet Another Guy

          @Jeremy

          Ryan and Jetha wrote “Sex at Dawn” as a counter-history to the standard narrative. The implication of the book was that women, in their natural hunter-gatherer state, were at least as sexual as men, likely more so, completely un-prone to monogamous relationships.

          The problem with the “Sex at Dawn” narrative is that the human genome does not support it.   Our mitochondrial DNA that we inherit from our mothers has significantly more genetic variation than what is found in the non-recombining portion of the Y chromosome (NRY) that men inherit from their fathers.   The fact that our genome points to twice as many women giving birth as men fathering children over the history of mankind does not support Ryan’s and Jetha’s thesis, that is, unless women were being promiscuous with a proper subset of the male population. Furthermore, the polymorphisms in mitochondrial versus NRY DNA points to female migration versus male localization, which supports the evolutionary athropologist Elizabeth Cashdans’s seminal publication entitled “Woman’s Mating Strategies.”   Women have always competed for high-value men, and they were willing to migrate and share men if necessary.

        10. V

          YAG you once said that you lived in a city with about 100,000 people. So let’s assume that at least half are women who meet your dating requirements (age, income, race, weight, height, etc) this leaves you with about 50,000 available women to date.

          Of those women lets say you have personally dated AT LEAST 1% of them or 500 women, though you said that you only started recently dating in the past few years.

          Do you see how silly this looks for you to have dated 500 women in what? 3-4 years? That means that you must have averaged around 4-5 dates a week  with a DIFFERENT  woman in per date, per year!

          Why do I bring this up? Because you go on and on about how you know so many women that  do this or how we would be surprised at the number of women that do that… It’s like you refuse to accept that just because one or two women did something YOU find morally wrong does NOT mean that all women are like that.

          And if you have not dated at least 1% of the women in your city then you need to stop making these claims as if they hold true for every woman.

        11. Yet Another Guy

          @V

          I live in a town of a little over 100,000 people that is in the middle of a metropolitan area that contains just under 10,000,000 people (i.e., it is a very congested area where one town blends into the next).   I date women from the metropolitan area, but tend to focus on those who live within 15 to 20 miles, which spans multiple towns, each of which contains a comparable number or larger number of people (the counties contain 500K to over 1M people).

          While I have not dated 500 women post-divorce, taken at random, 500 is not a small sample size for a population of 100,000; therefore, reasonable conclusions will hold for the population.   Does that mean every women fits these conclusions?   Absolutely not, just as not every man between the ages of 50 and 59 suffers from erectile dysfunction (ED).   However, statistically 50% of those men will suffer from some level of ED, from mild to severe.   I can assure you that the medical community has drawn this conclusion from a relatively small sample size compared to the planet’s population size.   We could also argue that I tend to attract women who are more likely to hookup; therefore, my sample is skewed.   That may or may not be true.   However, from what I have shared with single peer-age men in my metropolitan area, my experience does not appear to be an outlier.   That result may be due to the reality that college-educated women in my peer age group outnumber college-educated men at a ratio of 1.5 to 3 women for every man, depending on zip code, so there may be a “get it while it is available” thing driving this behavior.   I do not know what causes women to hookup, and, yes, women are free to hookup with whomever they choose.   All I know is that if a woman can separate sex from love during a hookup, she can do the same when she finds guy with whom she desires more than a hookup.   Anything else is just playing games and penalizing the guy in whom she is interested.

          In the end, not all women are promiscuous, so they have every right to make a man wait.   However, those women who are promiscuous between relationships should not be surprised when a guy in whom your are interested balks at the idea of waiting.   If you meet a guy where it is his idea to wait, consider yourself lucky because you have won the man lottery.     However, he has every right to walk if he feels that he is being penalized because you are interested in more than a hookup, and you have no right to judge him for doing so.

    6. 5.6
      Tom10

      @ Tron Swanson #5
      “Ultimately, this is just a power play, the same as dating. “You’re paying or I’m not going.” “We’re in a relationship or you’re not getting sex.” It’s done right at the beginning, to establish dominance”.  
        
      I usually find your comments amusing Tron, however, I think you’ve hit on a surprising kernel of truth here. So much of dating, sex, timing of sex/marriage etc. involves power plays; both parties trying to achieve their respective goals and continuously trying to reach a deal. But on their terms.
        
      I’m not sure how big Brexit is over on your side of the Atlantic but on this side of the pond it has dominated the political landscape ad nauseam for the last two years and I find the continual power plays just fascinating. Both parties (the EU and the UK) want a deal. “Need” a deal even. But only on their terms. And both parties are willing to spite their noses to cut off their faces in order to ensure they get the deal on their terms. Ultimately, the more powerful party will “win” in any deal. Therefore, ultimately, the UK will cave. And the EU knows it. The UK will eventually realize; it’s just…taking them a very long time and a lot of pain for the penny to drop.
        
      Similarly, in dating, both men and women want a deal (sex/relationship). “Need” a deal even. But on their terms. So when a woman holds back on sex I concur with you that, in effect, she’s attempting to set the terms of the relationship. As is her wont. As she is entitled to do. However, men are equally entitled to walk. By accepting sex on her terms he is acknowledging her power. By walking he is exercising his power.
        
      I have no problem with either women waiting before sex or men walking. There is no right or wrong here. No man or woman is “wrong” for dating according to their preferred timelines and no-one should be shamed from doing what’s best for them. Both choices are equally valid.
        
      Ultimately, everyone has to make their own decision on what terms they’re prepared to make a deal or no deal.

      “There’s a growing number who won’t, though. I’m genuinely curious about the percentages involved—what percentage of men have to “check out” before women start to experience problems? I look forward to finding out…”
        
      I’m not sure I buy this really though. I know mgtow guys love the idea that “a growing number” of men are “checking out” in their droves these days, however, I don’t think the evidence supports this contention. Sure, marriage rates are dropping; however, the vast majority of men do get married…eventually.
      There are bigger forces at work pushing men and women together than divorce/mgtow/blah blah blah pulling them apart; and these forces will continue to work above all of us for the rest of time…

      1. 5.6.1
        Marika

        Brexit gets a lot of media coverage in Australia too (obviously not as much as in your neck of the woods). I have an Aussie friend living in the UK who keeps us updated on all her views ad nauseam on FB as she’s so worried about the ramifications.

        But personally, I’m not sure how direct the parallels are between political deals and power plays between countries/unions of countries in a volatile political climate and negotiating sex and commitment between two people who care about each other and each other’s happiness and want to show respect and protect each other’s feelings. We’re talking about a burgeoning, hopefully long-term relationship here (Evan, as you know, not being in the business of maximising quality hook ups).

        1. Tom10

          @ Marika #5.6.1

          “We’re talking about a burgeoning, hopefully long-term relationship here”

            

          Well, I’d hardly call the current Brexit negotiations as a “burgeoning relationship”. Just kiddin’; I’ll admit my comparison isn’t perfect.

            

          “(Evan, as you know, not being in the business of maximising quality hook ups)”

            

          Ha. That’s a great business idea Marika! All we need is for a female dating coach specializing in maximizing quality hook-ups and she’ll make a fortune!

            

          @ Jeremy #5.6.2

          Aw thanks for that; I’ve missed our discussions too. I’ve been trying to stay away as the general blog rancor affects my disposition; I’m far bubblier and brighter in person than when reading comments, but, as you know, it’s difficult.

            

          “Is it a power play?   Yes.   Is it a chess move?   No.   Chess is a game played with the objective of winning.   One player wins, the other loses (by definition).”

            

          I agree with you and Tron that it’s a power play rather than a chess move. A game of chess involves both parties playing the same game with the same goal. Dating, however, often involves two parties playing two different games with two different goals. Meeting in the middle is the unexpected, rather than intended, result.

            

          As Tron said, timing of sex sets down a big early mark on who gets to call the shots in the relationship.

            

          Earlier the sex: guy is usually/often in control.

          Later the sex: woman is usually/often in control.

            

          Indeed, now that I think of it, Tron is quite the secret alpha playing the game by his rules and his rules only!

            

          The one exception to this paradigm is when a higher-quality woman, relative to the man, has quick sex with him: she will still maintain control irrespective of timing, as the guy will thank his lucky stars and be her complete doormat.

            

          “Given that (happy) relationships are the primary factor in establishing male happiness over time, it is funny that so many young men eschew them in the name of their own happiness.   They are using the wrong paradigm — the present-outward paradigm.”

            

          I remember discussing something similar with you before and I maintain my previous position: individuals are motivated by instinct, not by happiness.

            

          Now, as our existential purpose is to have children, I can see why men would find deep happiness from having children; whether intentioned or cajoled.

            

          As for “relationships being the primary factor in establishing male happiness over time” I’m not so sure. I think this might be true for naturally relationship-minded guys. However, for casual-minded guys like Tron and YAG I truly believe they’re happiest when operating soft non-committal harems. Relationships straight-jacket them and make them miserable. All in the DNA.

            

          @ Shaukat #5.6.3

          you’re back!”

            

          Hey Shaukat. Ha, it’s nice to take a breather from time-to-time; how have you been? I read your recent discussion but I’m all SMV’d out on this blog. There’s nothing further I can contribute on the matter.

            

          It’s the dynamics of power that currently fascinates me, because of the aforementioned political environment. Trying to parse, analyze and, ultimately, wield, power is my current thesis topic!

        2. Tron Swanson

          Me, a secret alpha? No, I’m just a mild-mannered beta…I’d never downplay my income or talents to keep relationship-seeking women from sniffing around. Because, if women think you’re stable and established, you’ll have a constant stream of recently-divorced single moms knocking at your door, looking for a replacement hubby. Or so I’ve heard. And sure, some extremely-attractive women downplay their looks to keep from getting pestered all the time, but men would never do that with their social status. Wearing jeans when you could afford much fancier clothing, driving a simple, economic car, etc.

          And, as you can see on here, I’m just a passive, almost doormat-like nice guy, I don’t have a “secret backbone” that I use whenever women try to make me do things I don’t want to…

      2. 5.6.2
        Jeremy

        Hello Tom, I’ve missed your input on this site.   Whenever I’m attempting to be dry, witty, and funny in real life, I try to channel my inner Tom10.

         

        Is it a power play?   Yes.   Is it a chess move?   No.   Chess is a game played with the objective of winning.   One player wins, the other loses (by definition).   To imply that the above is a chess move is to imply (IMHO) that it brings one person closer to “winning” and the other closer to “losing.”   And I don’t believe this is the case.

         

        A story – the longest and most bitter argument my wife and I ever had was the decision to have a fourth child.   When my 3rd child was about a year old, my wife began to drop hints that she was ready to try for another.   And I was not.   Our relationship had finally started to normalize – we were both super-busy with work, home, kids, we had finally reached a sexual equilibrium that we were both satisfied with, our relationship was back on its feet….I did not want to mess it up.   I REALLY did not want to.   I let my wife know how I felt, that I did not want to have another child, all the emotional, logical, and financial reasons in my head.   And none of those things mattered to her.   She desperately wanted another child.   But being a highly ethical person, she’d never have tried to coerce or trick me, she knew that for as long as I said no there would be no other child.   Every night we argued.   Every night she let me know how sad she felt, in spite of everything she had, everything I tried to give her and do for her.   And this went on for about 18 months or so, which seemed like an eternity.   I thought that in time she’d get over it, that she’d look at her beautiful family, home, and life and be satisfied.   But she’d always dreamed of having a big family and she did not get over it.

        After months of arguing, I realized that I needed to make a decision one way or the other.   Because as long as my wife felt she had a chance of convincing me, she would not be able to get over this.   But how to make the best decision?   Until then, I’d been focussing on my prerogatives from the present outward.   But which would be the best decision from the future backward (a difficult but necessary bit of mental gymnastics that everyone should try)?   Statistically, do more people regret having an additional child, or a rancorous marriage?   For all that my friends with four kids said that having the fourth was like when you’re drowning….and then someone tosses you a baby, none would give the child back, none regretted the decision in retrospect.   What do people regret, and what do they not?   With this frame of mind, I agreed, and the rest is history.

         

        Were my wife’s arguments a power-play?   In a sense yes, though power wasn’t what she sought.   Not “power” the way Shaukat defined it (as influence over others), but “power” as I define it “the ability to live the life we want”.   But it wasn’t a chess move.   Because while she won the argument, I did not lose.   As I predicted with my frame-shift, my life is far richer with my fourth child.   Someone did indeed toss me a baby, but I’m not drowning.   My prediction of my future self was accurate because the paradigm I used was correct.

         

        Given that (happy) relationships are the primary factor in establishing male happiness over time, it is funny that so many young men eschew them in the name of their own happiness.   They are using the wrong paradigm – the present-outward paradigm.   They need to shift paradigms.   The ploy that Evan is recommending to women is not a losing paradigm for men in the end, if only the men themselves would see it so.

        1. No Name To Give

          Jeremy, you’re a good dude.

        2. sylvana

          Jeremy,

          I’d actually say that was a perfect example of that passive aggression you were talking about on the toxic masculinity blog post.

          It’s not like she didn’t already have one (or three!!) children. Being so “unhappy” because there are a hundred or more reasonable reasons for you two NOT to have a fourth (what if she had lost her life due to pregnancy/birth related complications? She’s willing to risk leaving her children without a mother because she wasn’t happy enough with three?) is a rather selfish way to force you to give her what she (with no regards toward your feelings or her other children), and only she wants.

          Let’s make him miserable or feel guilty until he gives in. Passive aggression at its worst.

          Not insulting your wife, because I’m sure she’s a wonderful mother. But I can fully understand now why you pointed out toxic femininity so strongly 🙂

          Bless you for being able to deal with that. And I’m very glad it worked out so wonderfully in the end 🙂

        3. Marika

          As the third of four children, I say you made a good call, Jeremy. I wouldn’t have said that as a teenager (hahaha!), but as an adult I’m very glad to have a little sis who I can still boss around and whose kids I can spoil. Older siblings are much harder work 🙂

          It may be a ‘thing’. I grew up with four (Catholic) families I can name off-hand where they had three kids, then  lo & behold  (probably when the mother was worried about her clock) a 4th came along, 6-7 years after the third. I know it didn’t play out that way with you, but there’s something about a forth. I hope the third isn’t too jealous of that adorable toddler who’s probably everyone’s favourite…… oh maybe I’m not over it! 😉

        4. Jeremy

          Was it selfish, Sylvana?   Was her desire for another child any more or less selfish than my desire for more of a sexual relationship?   My telling her over and over what I needed, wanted?   The guilt she felt in seeing me upset?   In the end, each of us came to the other and said, “Look a big chunk of my pie-chart, my reason for marriage, is missing here.   And I can’t fill the gap without you.   I need you to see how important this is to me, and I need it to be important to you too.”   We each had to find the reasons to prioritize the other’s missing piece.

           

          I’ve said this before, but I’ll repeat it because it’s really how I feel: “A good spouse finds a way to say yes.”   On this blog we like to talk about boundaries, and I’ll grant that there’s a place for boundaries especially in dating, but boundaries in a marriage have little place.   A good spouse finds a way to say yes to the things that are important to his or her spouse.   He is not entitled to sex, she is not entitled to a baby.   But entitlement is not the issue.   When we marry, we accept a certain responsibility toward the important prerogatives of our spouse.

           

          Ego is the main obstacle.   I told my sister, at the time, that I’d decided to have the child and her words to me were, “You’re so whipped, I can’t even believe it.   Why doesn’t what you want matter?”   That was hard to hear.   Because no one wants to see themselves as being whipped.   But I wasn’t whipped, I was trying to make the best decision for myself that I could.   And it’s not that what I want doesn’t matter, but rather that in this case her want was more of a priority in the make-up of our marriage than mine, because hers was a fundamental piece of her pie chart and mine was not.   The reverse was true for the sex issue.

        5. anon

          Pushing petulantly for a fourth baby when life is already perfect and blessed beyond measure.   First reaction. Your story makes me think that me most entitled, demanding women get the best men. Second thought. This is why women like alphas instead of betas. Not because they crave the ‘bad boy’ transformed by love. Because it is very disheartening to hear stories like this. Forgive me.

        6. V

          Wow! I feel so sorry of you Jeremy.  At this point I believe your wife  could proably kiss another man in your face and you would find a way to explain how it’s your meta-fault while working tirelessly  at  begging her to only kiss you in the future.

        7. Jeremy

          LOL, V.   A few weeks ago I was at a fancy Italian restaurant in Florida with my family.   We went all out and ordered quite an extravagant meal – appetizers, mains, desserts, the whole shebang.   And at the end of the meal as I waited at the table to pay the bill, the waiter told me that it had been taken care of.   An anonymous benefactor had covered all our expenses, though he wouldn’t tell me who.   I was shocked.   Who would have paid my bill?   And why?   Someone who thought my kids were cute?   Someone trying to do a good deed?   The weird thing about it, though, was that as far as good deeds go it was pretty lame.   Because I can well-afford the meal, and had no need for charity.   It was kind of wasteful.

           

          I feel the exact same way about the sympathy you offered.   Don’t need it.   If you saw my life, you’d realize it.   And if your statement is what you concluded from my story, you missed the point entirely.

        8. Emily, to

          Jeremy,

          I feel the exact same way about the sympathy you offered.   Don’t need it.   If you saw my life, you’d realize it.    

          You can deflect, Jeremy, but there is a level of frustration in your comments about women, power, marriage, sex and money. You write a lot about these topics and it’s usually about the male being disadvantaged.

        9. Evan Marc Katz

          Jeremy is the only other married guy here who is representing what it’s like to be a smart, strong, successful man who must compromise to be in a relationship.

          I am about the happiest married man you’ll ever meet and I agree with virtually everything he writes.

          In fact, he often writes more carefully and cogently than I do.

          If you listen to ONE person in the comments about how GOOD HUSBANDS think (now that Karl R doesn’t post), Jeremy is the guy.

        10. Jeremy

          Emily, of course there is frustration. Because as much as I’d like to think of myself as always calm and reflective, sometimes I get frustrated and angry when asked to make compromises. When I feel I get the short end of the stick. Because as much as Mrs Happy likes to claim that none of this is about power, it all is.   When the balance of power tilts we feel it. We want to feel powerful, not powerless. We don’t want to compromise. We don’t want people to think we’re pushovers.   It is the crux of why women don’t want to have sex before commitment. When they do, they feel powerless.   What they miss   though, is that men feel powerless too. In dating we have to look out for our own interests. In marriage we have to learn to compromise…how to give up power…. And when to.

           

          There have been times in my marriage when I’ve felt that the balance of power tilted too far away from me. And there are times when my wife feels the same. If we want a successful marriage, we all need to learn to be equally cognizant of when our spouse feels powerless as when we do, and to take corrective action – even when it’s to our own disadvantage.

        11. Emily, to

          Jeremy,
          “It is the crux of why women don’t want to have sex before commitment. When they do, they feel powerless.”

          That’s exactly how it feels, like you’ve handed your rear end over to another person. As a woman, you know you’re going to get attached if you like guy and you are terrified the man won’t return your feelings and walk away. (I’m talking about dating someone and trying to get to know him. Despite what so many men on here don’t get, there’s a huge difference when a woman likes a man and wants to wait to get to know him and also protect herself and casual sexual interactions that are just something to do.) You lose power if you like someone and have power if you don’t and they like you, but who wants THAT power?

      3. 5.6.3
        shaukat

        Tom, nice you’re back! Was hoping you’d show up in the smv discussion a couple weeks ago;)

      4. 5.6.4
        Tron Swanson

        Tom,

        You’re right, much of this is a giant game of chicken, where one side tries to get the other to blink. And neither side is willing to give too much up. I consider that a win, at this point. Individualism has already greatly weakened relationships–a fact I’m thankful for–and, given enough time, I think it could come close to destroying them.

        There will always be “thirsty” men. Men who are willing to put up with just about anything in order to get sex. There are also lonely men, and men who are still playing by the old rules, because they don’t know that things have changed. And I believe that the majority of women are looking for a small minority of men. But, again, given time, I think that enough men will check out, and it’ll at least put pressure on the “lower rungs” of women.

        There’s also the issue of men not striving for success, and just earning enough to take care of themselves. When women want certain government services, well, there may not be as much taxable income floating around as there used to…

        1. sylvana

          Tron,

          don’t get your hopes up. There will always be plenty of taxable income floating around. It will simply come from high earning women instead of men.

          I mean, hello. You’re on a blog for high-earning women. Lots of women are already out-earning men, and their numbers are growing. High-earning career college degrees are going to more women than men.

          Those on the lower rungs will always exist, regardless of gender. The only change is that you’re seeing a change in who’s on the top rungs.

          Question: In what way do you think pressure will be put on the lower rungs of women? What do you think will change? Pressure to do what?

          If you take a realistic look at women at the lower rungs, you will realize that they are, in fact, already accepting all sorts of abuse and nastiness from men just to have a man around.

          I think what you’re hoping for is for women on the middle or top rungs to topple. That will never happen. A.I. is getting bigger every year. Women of that status are already proving that they will simply go the route of single mom if they cannot find a partner. They don’t need a partner for financial security. And they have the means to hire help.

        2. Tron Swanson

          Believe me, I’m all for the new “women work, men have fun” social dynamic. I think it’s great.

          You’re right that many women put up with horrible stuff just to be in a relationship. (So do many men, of course, though I don’t think we’re generally as driven to have relationships.)

          The thing is, I don’t think there’s much of an economic middle, anymore. It’s shrinking all the time. I’m sure that the most successful women will never have to worry…but I see women panicking all around me, and settling for relationships that they ultimately aren’t happy in. Even women who are more attractive than average. Also, former FWBs of mine, and women that I attempted to be FWBs with, tend to come back around and see if I’m interested in a relationship, yet. They know better, but their options are shrinking as they get older, and that “economic improvement” we keep hearing about isn’t in all places, or on all levels. From what I’ve both heard and seen, women in the increasingly-vanishing middle struggle to afford artificial insemination and all that comes with it. (I initially thought you meant “artificial intelligence” and feared a team-up between women and robots.)

          There will never be some wish-fulfillment moment when women collectively come back to men and say that they were wrong, dating/sexual culture was unfair to men, etc. I know that. But I’m seeing more and more women scrambling to find shelter before a possible storm…and when they check back with me for the third or fourth time, or after years of no communication, I know they must really be desperate. And when I see that they’re desperate enough to put up with a guy like me, it makes me wonder…

      5. 5.6.5
        No Name To Give

        Tron, I’m not worried about you and your brotherhood. My daughter has plenty of positive example of the right kind of guy to choose. I just hope SHE has paid attention.

    7. 5.7
      Mrs Happy

      Tron,

      it’s not a power play, it’s a chess move; they’re different.   Refraining from sex early in dating just allows women (of any value, low, medium, high, rainbow) to more easily cull men who want sex and not a relationship.   It’s a low cost, fast, efficient, statistically powerful chess move, and easy to do.   For women, a no-brainer.

      It will not hurt the average or below average woman who wants a relationship to see you walk away, since you do not want a relationship.   It’s a successful move for her, if you walk, given you were wanting sex without a relationship.   It’s a quick cull, wipes the pawns off the board.

      I can’t believe there is this much discussion about what is essentially basic common sense, and has been handed down to daughters via mothers and grandmothers through multiple generations: don’t sleep with guys too fast, it’s a losing strategy and will prevent the outcome you want (a relationship).   Duh.

      1. 5.7.1
        sylvana

        Mrs Happy,

        this is were you lose women like me. The part about sex too early preventing a relationship.

        Unlike what men with an “I can have all the sex I want, but any potential girlfriend needs to be near pure” attitude like to push, I don’t think a man who truly likes her and wants a relationship will not have one with the woman he truly likes just because she didn’t make him wait long enough.

        Sex does not prevent a relationship from forming.

        Likewise, I’m not at all a fan of telling younger women to basically wield sex like a weapon to obtain a relationship. That is nothing but a ridiculous game of power.

        That being said, I agree that women who do not like casual sex and want commitment before sex should not sleep with men too fast.

        Having sex does not guarantee it will lead to a relationship. Waiting will weed out those who want only sex. But sex also does NOT prevent a relationship.

        There is a HUGE difference between the two. And what you’re essentially saying (and telling your daughters) is that if they do enjoy sex in a casual way, even outside of relationships, they are wrong.

        That’s is a very unhealthy way to program your children. It’s a version of slut-shaming.

        1. Nissa

          Sylvana,

          What you are missing here is that men are sexual hypocrites. It’s not intentional, it’s as Evan says above: people tend to devalue what comes too easily. It does, literally, cause the man to want you less. This is not game playing. It happens without regard to the intentions of the woman involved. That is why you see so many women willing to have sex with men for whom they have no long term intentions, but not with men for whom they actually want a relationship. It’s a recognition of this mechanism. Sex early >less value > less interest. If there’s massive interest up front (or he feels like he has few options or he genuinely wants a relationship), then he might continue with you while looking for other women at the same time.  If his interest starts low and falls, it’s virtually assured that he will disappear. Most women don’t like how it feels when the man she’s having sex with is chatting up other women and seeing them as more valuable than her.

        2. Yet Another Guy

          @Nissa

          That is why you see so many women willing to have sex with men for whom they have no long term intentions, but not with men for whom they actually want a relationship. It’s a recognition of this mechanism. Sex early >less value > less interest.

          However, it is a losing strategy at best and a ticking time bomb at worst for these women.   When a woman states that she does not have sex with men who are not her boyfriend, men take that statement literally, as in she does not have sex outside of a committed relationship, period!   While announcing that rule men may serve to cull the non-seriously interested, it causes those who are left to become more interested because they assume that they are dealing with a special snowflake.   When they learn the truth (and trust me, the truth will eventually surface), most of these men will feel like they have been duped.   Any woman who does not believe what I wrote should tell the next man in whom she is interested that she hooks up with men who do not count while making men who count wait to protect her heart and see what happens.   If the guy does not laugh in her face and walk away, she can assume that he lacks anything approaching options.

          By the way, it is a fallacy that most men do a lot of hooking up.   The average man tends to inflate his number of partners while the average woman tends to deflate hers.   Another reality is that the average woman has more sex partners before age 30 than the average man.     Partner count differences tend to level off after that age is reached because women tend to seek older, more experienced and established partners until they reach their thirties.   That allows men to catch up when they hit their thirties via a combination of peer-age and younger partners.   However, I can assure that most men can easily count their number of partners on one hand with fingers to spare up to age 30 or so.   The reason why women do not realize this reality is because women tend to focus on the top 20% of men.

          The TL;DR version is that the top 10 to 20% of men dominate the world of hooking up and easy sex (three dates or less).   The other 80% wishes that things were this easy and lie to each other about their exploits.     If this difference in the ability to hookup were not true, PUA websites would not exist.   They have a name for the average guy on the PUA sites; namely, Average Frustrated Chump (AFC), which, while offensive, is true for the most part true.   The average guy is frustrated by his lack of success in obtaining sex from women, which is why these guys are more likely to wait for sex.   I seriously doubt that the women who read and contribute to this blog are looking for average guys.

        3. Tron Swanson

          YAG,

          You’re exactly right. I’ve had far more success in my 30s than in my 20s.

        4. shaukat

          but you’re right about the top 10% of men.
          Just read an interesting article last night about this.

           

          Came across this article myself a couple days ago, and it basically does confirm what several posters here say about SMV.

          Waiting for Marika, Clare, and Emily to say leagues don’t exist and it’s all about ‘confidence.’ I kid:)

        5. Mrs Happy

          Sylvana,

          I’m actually just stating how the world works for most adult men.   Evan’s sexual-past-accepting attitude is probably the exception, not the rule, if you talk honestly with men.   Outside white middle class cities in America, (and even within them to an extent), most cultures around the world attribute lower value to women with lots of sexual experience before marriage.   Honour killings, anyone? I’m not saying it’s right or just or correct, but it is the reality.

          I will tell my daughter she can enjoy all the casual sex she wants to, but there may be a variety of consequences.

        6. Nissa

          YAG,

          Well, that’s what it means when I say it (she does not have sex outside of a committed relationship, period)  .   And while I’m an outlier, I surely cannot be the only one. That crosses the line from confident to delusional.   And I agree that there are a lot of men with lower numbers who just don’t want to admit it, especially men who grew up before the current hookup culture.  

        7. Yet Another Guy

          @Evan

          My experience on the dating sites bear this one out.   Match has been sending me updates on how many women have liked and/or sent first messages on a week by week basis when I am active.   Here’s the latest message (Match is urging me to respond back):

          You’re on fire this week! 27 women are interested in you. See what you’ve received this week.

          25 Likes
          4 Messages

          Those numbers may not appear to be large for women, but they are huge for a man. Men are normally the pursuers on dating sites; therefore, women have little incentive to pursue when they are being bombarded with messages and likes.   Most men are lucky to receive 25 likes or 4 unsolicited messages in the same year.   The crazy thing is that my profile was hidden for 5.5 of the 7 days for which Match reported (I was deciding if I really wanted to throw my hat back into the ring after breaking up with the woman I had been dating).     My response rate when I reach out is over 50%, but I rarely have to reach out these days.   Granted, I do not chase age inappropriate women, but most men would kill for a 50% response rate.   The average guy is lucky to have a 10% response rate.

        8. Chris

          That is why you see so many women willing to have sex with men for whom they have no long term intentions, but not with men for whom they actually want a relationship.

          YAG is right that the man who is expected to wait for sex while knowing she had sex early with other men will not feel privileged for waiting, he will feel like a chump. He will be thinking “she’s not sexually attracted to me, she is only interested in me for emotional comfort and maybe money”. However if he thinks she’s consistent with making all men wait, he won’t feel like he’s being used.

           

        9. sylvana

          Nissa,

          Actually, I’m not missing that men are total hypocrites when it comes to sex. They absolutely are.

          What I AM missing is why in the world a woman would want to be/share her life with a hypocrite. Because if they’re hypocritical about one thing, it’s pretty much guaranteed to show up in other aspects as well.

          Also, I believe that most men (and likely a lot of women as well) will still continue to be on the lookout for a “better” partner at least during the first few months of a relationship.

          Most women don’t like how it feels when the man she’s having sex with is chatting up other women and seeing them as more valuable than her.

          I’d say most people don’t. But, sadly, even exclusive dating nowadays is just a matter of continuing with the current partner while keeping an eye open in case something better comes along. Or to see if things will work out at all. It’s exclusive, but still very casual. People do not really date with the intention of seeing if marriage or lifetime committment might work. If it happens to work out, great. But that’s not necessarily the original intent.

          That’s part of why I stopped dated long ago. To me, by the time you hit the exclusive state, dating should be done with the intent of seeing if there is enough compatibility for lifelong partnership. I never saw any purpose in this “dating just to date, exclusive but casual for now, and if something more comes out of it, fine” mindset.

          That’s way too much effort for something that has very little chance of reward.

          But, men being hypocrites aside, I have to say I’m in the men’s camp when it comes to early/easy sex. If you don’t like casual, that’s fine. Then don’t do it. But stick to that across the board. Doing casual with some while not with others does seem deceptive to me. It also signals lack of trust in your partner’s acceptance of who you truly are.

          Which, along with the hypocrite part, is a red-flag to me. If she cannot trust a potential partner to accept her the way she is in this, how can she trust him to accept her in other ways? What other aspects of her core personality would she have to change to get him to accept her?

        10. Noone45

          Who cares what you think about sexual hypocrisy? Really, who cares? It doesn’t matter if a woman has boned a thousand dudes. If she doesn’t want to do that anymore, she doesn’t have to. She’s not obligated to bone some guy because she screwed some other guy in the past. You can change your standards when you want to. You are not obligated to accept something you don’t want to accept simply because you may have in the past.   (General you)

          Stop living in the past and expecting others to live there with you. People are allowed to change.

        11. Emily, to

          Shaukat,

          Waiting for Marika, Clare, and Emily to say leagues don’t exist and it’s all about ‘confidence.’ I kid:)

          Confidence and game. That’s all you need. I was just watching a youtube video in which comedian Steve Harvey talks about how he got this really attractive girl to go out with him when he was in college. This was long before he was famous and rich, and he’s not the most handsome man, but he had unbelievable game. Brilliant game. And it worked.

      2. 5.7.2
        jenny

        So much of Evan’s advice is culturally based and just describes conforming to the ‘morals’ of our present time. The advice 100 years was any woman with ‘self respect’ would not   have sex before marriage because ‘why would a man buy a   cow when he can get the milk for free’. Today if a woman insisted on waiting till marriage   before she has sex she would be considered highly unusual /a weirdo /or a religious nut /and the average man would not hang around. Hence this advice today would not serve women well. Evan’s advice today is similar. It is just what is culturally acceptable today. A man may not want a relationship to start with but this might change over time   with a woman he grows to love ,so some women who wait too long may miss out. I do object to Evans comment’  shows him that you’re sexual, interested, have healthy boundaries and self-respect.’ It may not be self respect at all…rather it may be the fear and insecurity that society and the guy will think she’s a slut’ or easy ‘if she sleeps with him too soon even though she may be really attracted to him and would love to have sex.

        1. Evan Marc Katz

          This has nothing to do with morals, Jenny. Your line tells the whole story.

          “A man may not want a relationship to start with but this might change over time with a woman he grows to love so some women who wait too long may miss out”

          Once again, your plan is banking on the fact that he will grow to love her. If he does not (and most of the time they do not) she – like the client in my video – could sleep with him for three months, fall in love, and get her heart broken. Your advice to her: keep doing that! My advice to her: do something different.

          There is NO moral judgment against people who have sex quickly; I was one of those people for most of my adult life. So please don’t judge women who don’t feel good sleeping with men while they’re secretly praying for those same men to fall in love with them. It’s not weakness on their part; it’s common sense.

        2. sylvana

          Evan,

          I think she meant cultural, not moral.

          But aren’t all women banking on the fact that he’ll grow to love her? Even if she makes him wait six weeks or so, he’s certainly not gonna be in love with her at that point.

          So she can either sleep with him for three months, fall in love (who falls in love that quickly??), and get her heart broken.

          Or,

          She can make him wait six weeks or so, then sleep with him for three months, and get her heart broken.

          I would argue that the likelihood of her getting her heart broken is much higher in the second case. Because now she made him wait, got to know him better, the man offered and investment, yet the end result is the same – she’s single.

      3. 5.7.3
        Jeremy

        A comment about power by any other name is still about power 🙂

         

        How are the kids?   How are you?

        1. Mrs Happy

          My heart sank when the I read the word power.   Here we go again, but at least Jeremy isn’t writing it, I thought.

          My family are well, thank you.   Reading about your wife’s sleep settling technique blew my mind.   I’m still putting my 8 and 6 year old down every night by being right next to them.   Bloody orphanage brain studies.

          How’s the snow and ice?   Our summer is sadly ending, and I feel personally affronted by the weather if I have to wear anything over a singlet top or T-shirt outside, so I’m about to feel very hard done by for months.

        2. Marika

          Yes, I’ve been wondering that, too Mrs Happy. I think you said they were both in hospital? Clearly on the mend, though? 🙂

        3. Jeremy

          Yes, she is clever.   It’s one of the advantages of having a child psychologist around in the house.   The only downside with psychologists is that you can’t tell when they’re going to the bathroom.   ‘Cause, you know, the P is silent.

          [See, I can talk about other P-words, not just my favourite one].

           

          The snow and ice are irritating and have gotten old very fast.   The weather here right now is a grey zero degrees (Celsius), which is my least favourite temperature.   At least snow is bright and crisp.   But spring is around the corner, and we went away twice this winter to sunny beach destinations, so I have nothing to complain about.

           

          I’m glad to hear that your family is well.   You guys were on my thoughts since your last post here.   I only say this because sometimes it’s a comforting thought to know that people, even strangers across the globe, are thinking of you and wishing you well during trying times.

      4. 5.7.4
        Tron Swanson

        Mrs. Happy,

        It’s true: when women lose me, they’re only losing a potential sexual partner and an ego-boost, two things that the vast majority of women can find very easily. I’m an outlier, though. Most of the men like me actually do want relationships…so, when they refuse to play the waiting game and walk away, the women in question actually are losing something.

      5. 5.7.5
        Cathalei

        Mrs Happy

        If a relationship forming solely depend on delaying sex, is it a relationship worth preserving? Actually what Evan says is pretty common sense as it weeds out those who only want sex. But if a relationship starts solely based on the wait while otherwise that would not happen, wouldn’t it sizzle when the novelty wears off?
        It also sets a dynamic where sex becomes like a bribe to get your partner to do whatever you happen to want. It is an attraction killer and turns it into a business contract. Honor killings have many varying reasons, it occurs where “purity” is seen to directly reflect on the familial “honor”. That’s apples and oranges as in that context, we wouldn’t be able to talk about dating anyway. And honor killings are usually prompted by mothers pushing their male family members to kill. In such context, it’s about far more than relationship preferences of men in this post.

        Last but not the least, wouldn’t such stark differences in sexual attitudes reflect sexual incompatibility which is often emphasized in here too? Why would anyone want to be a wo/man where their sexual attitudes don’t match in the slightest?

        1. Evan Marc Katz

          “It also sets a dynamic where sex becomes like a bribe to get your partner to do whatever you happen to want. It is an attraction killer and turns it into a business contract.”

          Nope. Read this.

        2. Marika

          Talk about a storm in a teacup…

          Evan is advocating waiting all of a few weeks for sex.

          This isn’t aimed at anyone in particular – I just can’t believe the push-back from holding off on sex  for what amounts to a blink of an eye, meanwhile you have dinner, chat, laugh, kiss.. etc. It’s really not that dreadful.  

        3. Mrs Happy

          Dear Cathalei,

          waiting to have sex does not in any way equate to “a relationship forming solely depend(ing) on delaying sex”, for me or I suspect many women.   Nor does it equate to a bribe, or a power play, or any other manipulation technique.   Waiting is not “a bribe to get your partner to do whatever you happen to want”.   Waiting simply creates time during which she can decide how much she wants him.   It is simply, seriously, her (or him) just waiting to have sex, until she ascertains whether she likes him enough to have sex and a relationship, and is comfortable enough doing so.   A woman shouldn’t enter a relationship if she doesn’t want to be with the man, thus the relationship does not form solely on the sex.

          People might be at risk of reading too much into it, in ascribing more sinister motivations.   For me it was always a straightforward process.   It’s akin to waiting to get to know a business partner before I enter an important financial or legal contract – it’s not going to happen in one meeting, without due process, and time for me to do my assessment of them, and the risks and benefits for me.

          I agree with you that sometimes “stark differences in sexual attitudes reflect sexual incompatibility”.   I believe that if it’s really important to you that your partner is up for a lot of sex from very early on, then at all times, and no matter what their emotional state or depth of knowledge about you/a person, you should absolutely prioritise finding a very high libido partner who has lots of sex and whose libido isn’t too affected by many external life factors.   That should be a priority on your list of desired attributes, and perhaps trump other characteristics (because you can’t get everything in a partner)   like looks, hot body, stability or kindness.   Vice versa, if you are an outlier in the other direction and have a low libido, you need to find someone who isn’t terribly sexual.

          Your ideas about honour killings are wrong IMHO.   Based on my understanding of maternal instinct and protectiveness, (ever seen a mother bear protect her cubs?), I suspect women wouldn’t ask husbands to kill their daughters very often.   In any case the honour killing reference was to illustrate the breadth of difference around the world outside the USA; there are many places, especially in developing nations, and say among people/men older than 40 almost everywhere, where lots of female sexual experience is viewed as a negative thing.   Many men in those cultures and groups, and many people in those societies, would judge a female with lots of unmarried sexual experience as low in value.

        4. Cathalei

          Mrs Happy  

          You’re right in your assessment about building trust. If it protects from disappointment, it works and Evan’s advice is agreeable on all aspects. I just don’t like putting it as “why buy the cow when you can get milk for free” way. Evan doesn’t advocate waiting until marriage. It’s for pragmatical reasons and spot on advice. I don’t get the pushback against this.

          My point about sexual attitudes wasn’t solely about having sex, but values surrounding it. If a woman like sylvana happen to enjoy NSA sex, why should she date a guy who thinks less of her for it? If one partner has NSA while the other advocates waiting until marriage is the right thing (deliberately exaggerated the disparity to make the point) they are incompatible. I think we can all agree upon that.

          We should also keep in mind that Evan’s advice is culturally based. In a culture where “honor” killings are rampant, Evan wouldn’t be writing an advice column like this. We wouldn’t talk about online dating here. The reason such things occur is that sexuality is linked to the “honor” of an entire family and a girl doesn’t have to necessarily have sex to be targeted. Going to the cinema could be enough. The boys are killed as well. Actually, mothers don’t go to their husbands for this, they go to their  sons.  Because they believe their girls’ dating is a stain on family honor and their motherhood by association. Such beliefs are very rarely limited to one gender to be entrenched in a society, both genders enforce this in their ways. That’s why it’s apples and oranges because in such an environment we wouldn’t even write here. As for those societies, it’s expected that they think like this as marriage age is considerably lower than what Evan predicates here. My father was 20 when he first married and that wasn’t an exception. In a place where people marry at mid 30’s the rules of engagement would change drastically.

    8. 5.8
      sylvana

      Tron,

      I somewhat have to agree with you there.

      The other thing that somewhat baffles me about the “make him wait” thing is this:

      A woman dates a man. She makes him wait, meanwhile, he’s having sex with a bunch of other women, since they aren’t committed yet, and he needs to get laid. She has no problem with that, since she’s not “one of many” he has sex with.

      He agrees to commit, all of a sudden, she feels safe to have sex with him because right now (currently), she’s the “only” one he sleeps with.

      Well, no. She’s just the “current” one he sleeps with. When they end things (and chances of that are relatively high), she’s still just “one of many” he was and is sleeping with. I guess she can claim she was one of his girlfriends instead of one of his more casual hook-ups.

      If she got him to marry her before she had sex with him I can somewhat see a difference. But with the casual way dating and exclusive dating are handled these days (basically being nothing serious), I’m having a hard time understanding what the big deal is.

      And there is that little pesky problem that you men always like to mention. A lot of women (who don’t have problems with casual) feed into the “make him wait” theory. So they make potential boyfriends wait, because that’s what they were told to do, but have no problems with causal hook-ups with other men.

      And – rightly so – the potential boyfriend gets upset when he finds out. Can’t say I can blame men.

      These women are basically being told to play games with potential boyfriends.

       

      1. 5.8.1
        Nissa

        Sylvana,

        Think of it this way. What if someone offered you a job in your chosen field for good money, but in a country halfway across the world where you don’t speak the language? On one hand, it’s what you want – your chosen field, good money. On the other hand, there are a lot of unknown variables – new country, foreign language, leaving behind your family and friends. You would need some time to figure it out – to ask questions about things important to you, to find out more so that you make an informed choice. Only then can you genuinely make a decision. But, you wouldn’t take the job before doing this. Nor would the employer offer you the job before reviewing your qualifications and deciding they are a good fit.

        It’s the same thing for men. When they meet a potential wife, they are seeing things they want – she’s attractive, seems to be on the same page. But choosing her means cutting off other opportunities. How is he supposed to make that choice without getting to know her? So he gets to know her a little, gathering data. She does the same, and if he meets qualifications, offers him the “job” of boyfriend. Once he takes it, it might be an entirely different situation than he expected (for her, too). No one would stay in a job they hate just because they had good reason to believe it was a good fit, before they had all the facts. It’s the same in dating.

        Frankly, IMO this only makes the case for not having sex, even once you are boyfriend/girlfriend. After all, there’s a probation period for every other job. It’s not an issue of “being safe”. It’s an issue of knowing that you don’t know who someone is while they are on their “best behavior”. People will promise the moon and stars. Observing their actual behavior over time is much more reliable.

        The idea that someone would feel that the only benefit of being with me for sex is sad to me. In my experience, sex takes care of itself if there is real friendship and love there. But I also can’t expect instant friendship and love – it needs time to grow into being, and that’s what the “probationary” period is accomplishing.

        The older I get, the less I worry about the wrong man leaving. I’ve seen man after man fall head over heels for women that on paper, are completely wrong. I’ve seen women that are great on paper treated like they walked in with toilet paper on their shoe. Men choose who they choose, and almost never reveal the “actual” reason they rejected particular women. That’s why working with a coach is beneficial for a lot of women. It offers a chance to hear the awful truth of why you aren’t being chosen. It’s hard but improves your chances of getting to the relationship you want.

        1. sylvana

          Nissa,

          Frankly, IMO this only makes the case for not having sex, even once you are boyfriend/girlfriend.

          Now this, right here, I can fully understand and agree with. If sex is that big a deal to you, wait until you have an actual committment (aka marriage, or at least engagement), not just a commitment to “let’s date for now and see what happens”. Because chances are way to high that “what happens” will be the relationship ending for one reason or another.

          I think being boyfriend/girlfriend IS the probation period, like you said. Anything before that is merely research.

          But choosing her means cutting off other opportunities.

          With the modern dating climate, I kind of disagree with that. Marriage (or at the very least engagement) would mean cutting off other opportunities (at least hopefully).

          Simply dating each other (boyfriend/girlfriend) does not mean much nowadays. If a better opportunity presents itself, or – as you said – you don’t like the “job”, people simply break up. The chances of relationships ending are much higher than those leading to marriage.

          That’s why either keeping a more casual outlook about sex, or waiting until you have an actual committment (engagement or marriage or close to that point) makes sense to me.

          Putting great emphasis on waiting until you get him to commit to have sex with only you until it’s time to split up does not make that much sense to me. If anything, I think a woman would feel way more hurt and betrayed this way. Because now, the chance of feelings being involved are that much higher.

           

           

           

  6. 6
    Ames

    Many men will not take seriously a woman who has sex early. They’ll sleep with her sure, but she’s out of the running for a relationship. By waiting she weeds out guys looking for hookups and also raises her own value while protecting her heart. I’d honestly rather my date be hooking up on the side until he decides to make me his gal and we go into it clear headed with similar goals and values. If I sleep with a guy right away it’s because I only see him as fun but someone with too many problems to choose as a long term partner. A roll In the hay with an alcoholic can be fun but after that I don’t have to deal with his alcoholism, or lack or solvency, or temper or whatever makes him updatable in my eyes.

    1. 6.1
      ezamuzed

      Ames

      Many men will not take seriously a woman who has sex early. They’ll sleep with her sure, but she’s out of the running for a relationship.

      This blanket statement is not true. Maybe for some guys, but it is a minority of men. There are plenty of men who would rather have it the opposite. The making him wait will lower her value.

      1. 6.1.1
        Ames

        I agree sexual compatibility is important. So many men have told me they would never take seriously a women who has sex early on versus you and your open mindedness. How can I know which type of guy I’m talking to? When is too soon or too late? Seems smarter to go to bed when it feels natural for both people. For example, if I have feelings for my colleague and we go to bed early on it’s a natural progression. Suppose I meet a stranger, we go on 3 dates and spend total 8 hours together. It’s going to feel bizarre to arbitrarily get naked and put our parts together just because it’s 3rd date lol. Sex is partially emotional for me so doing it with a near stranger isn’t fun, even is he’s the hottest guy around.

      2. 6.1.2
        Yet Another Guy

        @ezamuzed

        There are plenty of men who would rather have it the opposite. The making him wait will lower her value.

        I have to agree with Ames on this one.   The men for whom you are speaking are grossly outnumbered by men who will think less of a woman who offers sex too early.   I catalog this one under it is complicated because it has a caveat.   The average guy desires a woman who waits because he has been made to wait his entire life.   Waiting is normal for him, so he expects every desirable woman he dates to make him wait.   A woman who wants to get naked early in dating game will either make him feel special or ruin his special snowflake opinion of her (i.e., he will think that she is a slut who sleeps with every man early).   That is the caveat.     Men know that obtaining sex is significantly easier for women than it is for men, but most prefer to live with the fantasy that access in the sex game is equal for all men when nothing could be further from the truth.   Women can have more sex than men because a proper subset of men is having sex with a lot of women.   We refer to these men as ‘bad boys,” “players,” and Casanovas.

         

  7. 7
    jenny

    It will not hurt the average or below average woman who wants a relationship to see you walk away, ‘since you do not want a relationship.   It’s a successful move for her, if you walk, given you were wanting sex without a relationship.   It’s a quick cull, wipes the pawns off the board.
    Nooooo…that is so simplistic..A guy /girl might want a relationship AFTER they get to know someone and have great sex!

     

    1. 7.1
      MilkyMae

      My favorite teacher, Miss Mann back in the third grade had a sign in her car “Single but Looking”.   Today, this doesn’t fly.   I know many single women who want bfs, want relationships and want to be mothers.   However, the world tells women to keep their mouth shut. A single woman who wants a husband is a poor thing.   Don’t ask and don’t tell.   Don’t act like a desperate fool.   And for pete’s sake, don’t tell single men.

      I lost count of the number of women I know who joined eharmony to “see what’s like”. The real stigma and the shame is “single and wanting” and if speak up then you want. Not intimacy because women don’t have to ask for that.   If you sleep with a man, you don’t have speak up and to reveal what you really want to keep him around.     “Dear mister date, would you please have sex with me?” said no adult woman ever. If you want serious relationship, speaking up makes people cringe. Today, slut-shaming is being replaced by want-shaming.

      1. 7.1.1
        Jeremy

        “Want shaming.”   What a fabulously accurate term.

      2. 7.1.2
        sylvana

        Milky Mae,

        That, I actually fully agree with. That goes for both men and women, though. Those who are willing to admit they would like a partner to share their lives with are often considered “weak”.

  8. 8
    Marika

    Interesting idea re the quality hook up coach Tom! But, as you said, men don’t listen to women on this stuff.

    I’d like to weigh in on what you said to Clare, as I think it’s an important topic. Agree Tron can do what he wants. But as to learning about men, not to speak for her, but certainly with me, I’ll grab a pen whenever the, eg, Evan’s, Jeremy’s, Karl’s – who write relevant, on topic, useful information about how men and women can form mutually beneficial relationships -teach something or weigh in. There are others too, but those guys stand out.

    Whenever guys come here specifically to contradict Evan, to write about wanting no-effort sex with hotties, tell us how we’re less appealing to them as we age, fill us in on their hypocritical views re sex   (doesn’t apply to him specifically) etc etc – what’s to learn? Do they think we haven’t heard this millions of times before? At best it’s repetitive and obvious, at worst some of these guys come here to actively encourage women to act against their own self interest in order for them to get their needs met (which is why some women are here in the first place – to learn to avoid doing that yet again).

    Can you see how sometimes that could get a little frustrating? Upsetting even? We’re only human.

    Of course Tron won’t listen to us or do anything anyone on here says. But as he chooses to be here he may at least try to hear how we feel. No matter what your dating experiences have shown, I guarantee women want to feel heard and understood. And have their feelings acknowledged.

    1. 8.1
      Tron Swanson

      Please keep in mind that “listening” and “agreeing” are different things. I’m listening, but I refuse to surrender my sexual strategy–and I advise women to refuse to surrender theirs, whatever it may be, as long as it’s working for them.

      That said, I will caution women not to surrender too many of the benefits that come from modernity. I think that sylvana and jenny make good points: there’s a lot to be said for modern female sexuality, and all the advantages and opportunities that women have now. Be wary of those who try to act like the Sexual Revolution is some sort of problematic thing that needs to be undone (either fully or partially). Am I furthering my own interests by telling you this, or going against them? Maybe a little of both…

      1. 8.1.1
        Marika

        Glad to hear you are listening, Tron.

        The thing is, what you do in your bedroom is really not my concern. I honestly couldn’t care if you like to wear a monkey suit, swing from a chandelier, bark like a dog or get whipped while wearing a nappy (diaper) with a stick up your nose. Maybe you’re into 3 ways or 5 ways. Are there 7 ways? Whateves. Bring.It.On. Honestly.

        Whatever you’re into there’s clearly women out there willing to oblige.  I just don’t think there’s anything for us to ‘learn’ or ‘understand’ from you here. If you want to sleep with a woman you’ll make some minimum effort and she’ll sleep with you. If she wants more, you’ll bail. If she doesn’t want to sleep with you you’ll move on. Got it. I’ll give you credit & kudos for not pretending to want more and misleading people, as well as for not holding any hypocritical views on sex.

        But that’s really all there is to it. And yet you keep telling us that same story for some reason.

        Beyond that, the only other thing you do here is run down women and run down relationships. And as I’ve said before, I think coming to a site for women who want relationships to run down women and relationships isn’t particularly smart or helpful. IMHO

      2. 8.1.2
        Tom10

        Dear Marika,
          
        Thanks for your lovely comment.
          
        “Whenever guys come here specifically to contradict Evan, to write about wanting no-effort sex with hotties, tell us how we’re less appealing to them as we age, fill us in on their hypocritical views re sex   (doesn’t apply to him specifically) etc etc — what’s to learn? Do they think we haven’t heard this millions of times before? At best it’s repetitive and obvious, at worst some of these guys come here to actively encourage women to act against their own self interest”
          
        Can you see how sometimes that could get a little frustrating? Upsetting even? We’re only human.”
          
        Yes that is all fair comment and understandable.
          
        I’ll admit I’m perplexed by Tron’s comments; they’re just so incredibly repetitive and boring; Tron seems to think that Tron is very interesting, as all Tron talks about is, um, Tron.
          
        Tron does this. Tron does that. Tron likes this. Tron likes that. Tron, Tron, Tron, Tron, Tron. Aargh, who cares!!!
          
        And YAG just loves to keep telling us how he’s blessed with alpha genes; that because he’s a top 10%er he inhabits a different world to most other guys who are just beta provider chumps. Blah, blah, blah. No attempt at insight, introspection, learning or trying to change.
          
        You’re right. Such input, even if true, isn’t of much benefit to anyone. Particularly the target audience of this blog.
          
        I suppose, on second thoughts, I reacted a bit strongly to Clare’s comment; I was just struck by her harsh put-down of Tron for saying he will only have sex according to his timeline, while she simultaneously stating that she will only have sex according her timeline. Pot. Kettle. Black. Neither position is superior; in fact they’re exactly the same.
          
        “I guarantee women want to feel heard and understood. And have their feelings acknowledged.”
          
        Okay, that is fair. I suppose it’s the disconnect between what women here tell us what they want, versus what men discover women actually want through experience, is just so large that we find your (general you) comments hard to comprehend, thus, take seriously.
          
        What women here say they want: for guys to court, ask a woman out, make an effort, lead, plan, act chivalrously, escalate in a time-appropriate manner etc. etc.
          
        What our experience tells us woman actually want: guys who are tall, handsome, funny, charming, educated, home-owning and career-driven. When a guy meets these criteria the courting, planning, chivalry stuff suddenly doesn’t seem to matter.
          
        What gives?
          
        That’s why there was such a visceral reaction to this blog post: are you telling us the deep truth about what women want, or is it really just a power thing, wrapped up in post-rationalizations with the implicit agenda of furthering your dating prerogative?
          
        Granted, the Trons and YAGs have likely dated one type of woman their whole lives (the chemistry-seekers), rather than the other type of woman who come to this blog (the relationship-seekers), so I’m sure this accounts for much of the disconnect.
          
        Thanks for your effort at encouraging us to try listen and understand Marika.  For, admittedly I’ve got a bit of YAG and Tron in me too, and I don’t like it, so I’ll do my best to take on board your comments henceforth and learn from you. 🙂
          
        #8.1.1
        “I honestly couldn’t care if you like to wear a monkey suit, swing from a chandelier, bark like a dog or get whipped while wearing a nappy (diaper) with a stick up your nose”.  
          
        Dear Lord, you certainly have a vivid imagination! 😉
         

        1. Yet Another Guy

          @Tom10

          What women here say they want: for guys to court, ask a woman out, make an effort, lead, plan, act chivalrously, escalate in a time-appropriate manner etc. etc.

          What our experience tells us woman actually want: guys who are tall, handsome, funny, charming, educated, home-owning and career-driven. When a guy meets these criteria the courting, planning, chivalry stuff suddenly doesn’t seem to matter.

          You hit the nail squarely on the head with this post.   That being said, I do believe that most of the women who comment on this blog are fighting an internal struggle with the difference.   If they were not fighting with difference between what they say they want and what attracts them, Evan would be out of a job.   The reality is that guys who meet the criteria outlined in paragraph number two have no incentive whatsoever to play by the script in paragraph number one.

        2. Evan Marc Katz

          Aha. That last line is where we part ways again. I am a paragraph 2 guy who chose to conduct myself in a paragraph 1 way. The reason? I wanted to get married and didn’t want to repeat 20 years of chemistry driven mistakes. I stopped having sex with non girlfriends in 2005 and got my two best girlfriends in 2006 and 2007. The last one is my wife. All it takes is one person to hold these standards for the process to work.

        3. Clare

          Tom10,

          I don’t mind that you had a strong reaction to my comment. I know it sounded harsh; it was born out of sheer frustration rather than my being a harsh person who doesn’t try to understand others (the very opposite it true).

          I also know that men and women think so differently about these things; in real life, I finesse these differences and get along with men extremely well (two brothers whom I adore and lots of guy friends and a boyfriend).

          On this blog, I have the luxury of venting about people and ideas I find tiresome – I don’t even read Tron and YAG’s self-absorbed ramblings about their sexual exploits. It’s all so boring and absolutely nothing for the rest of us to learn.

          “What women here say they want: for guys to court, ask a woman out, make an effort, lead, plan, act chivalrously, escalate in a time-appropriate manner etc. etc.

            What our experience tells us woman actually want: guys who are tall, handsome, funny, charming, educated, home-owning and career-driven. When a guy meets these criteria the courting, planning, chivalry stuff suddenly doesn’t seem to matter.”

          I think it’s very sad that this is how you, and evidently YAG, and probably many other guys like you, have interpreted it. But let me be clear: it  is  an interpretation, a perception only. Evan will back me up on this, I’m sure. What he says very often (and which I love) is: Nice guys don’t finish last. Nice guys  with no balls finish last.

          And what I think is sad is that many men will do what in their minds is everything “right” (call her, communicate, ask her out, move the relationship along, pay for dates, be chivalrous), and then not ultimately get anywhere with that woman, so they’ll conflate the two. The side of the equation they’re completely ignoring is their own lack of strength, boundaries, will, willingness to stand up for themselves, self-containment… all the things that make a woman  respect  a man, the things that make anyone respect another human being.

          To feel desire and attraction for a man (I believe), women need to admire and respect him. And no woman admires and respects a man who is a pushover or too eager to please. Who has no balls. No human respects any other human like that. Women (like people generally actually) are also drawn to a man who is self-contained, has his own life and hobbies and friends going on, and is not just going to drop them because he starts dating someone.

          This does not mean you need to be a jerk; it means you need to be a strong, confident individual who knows who you are.

          I’ve seen it so many times in the guys that I date and in guys that I know: a man will be taken with a woman and so he will do everything he can to please her, fall over himself trying to do things that will make her like him – buying her things, doing things for her, censoring and changing himself to be someone he thinks or hopes she will like more, rather than just being himself. He lets her get away with bad behaviour (which she is doing partly to see if he has a backbone, even though this may be quite unconscious). Then she will leave him because she feels smothered and overwhelmed and he will cry into his soup about how women don’t like nice guys.

          Evan understands this and explains it really well in a few of his articles – how to be a nice guy WITH BALLS. Women love these. It’s got absolutely nothing to do with being so funny and charming and successful that women don’t care whether you’re being chivalrous and planning. Be confident. Be strong. Be someone she can respect.

        4. Yet Another Guy

          @Evan

          However, you were ready to settle down and marry.   That is the one point in his life where a paragraph number two man will play by the script in paragraph one.   Very few paragraph two men will play by that script before they are ready to marry or after they divorce with all of the children they desire (i.e., a man is only a faithful as his options).   That leaves a lot of women in quagmire because there are more women who desire a relationship with a paragraph two man than exist in the male population.   Sure, they can attempt to play the paragraph one script card with a paragraph two guy and hope that he is ready to settle down.   However, catching one of these men when he is ready to settle down is a long shot at best, which brings me full circle to teaching women to be attracted to men who are willing to play by the paragraph one script.   That is why there is a need for dating coaches for women.   I have yet to read anything published by a dating coach for women that does not teach women to de-emphasize paragraph two attributes and emphasize the value of finding a guy who will faithfully play by the script.   Why do we not see the same thing on the male side of the equation?   Maybe, it is because a relationship is a side effect more than a goal for most men when dating?

        5. Evan Marc Katz

          I remember reading one Match study that said 75% of men wanted a relationship. But they’re more than willing to sleep around – like I did – until finding it. Thus my saying, “Men look for sex and find love. Women look for love and find sex.”

        6. Marika

          Dear Tom

          I actually was going to take a little break…don’t laugh at me…for Lent! I grew up religious and my very kind hearted mother still is, so I thought I’d take a break from bossing people around on blogs for a bit in a nod to this time ;). And her.

          But I just had to write to acknowledge and thank you.

          I do take on board what you said too – and agree. I am such a woman you speak of. I married the funny charmer – it didn’t work out well for me. I’m trying to do something different. With Evan’s (and Jeremy etc) help 🙂

        7. Marika

          Oh and PS, not a vivid imagination, just my typical Friday night (hehe jokes) 😉

          Look, Tron is far too lazy and YAG is too arrogant and fixed on his rules. You could probably do some serious damage…you’re right about what appeals to some women (like me). What works for us (and you, if you ever want a long term relationship) – different story. Don’t break too many hearts 🙂

        8. Jeremy

          Clare and Tom, re the discussion above, I think that Clare’s description of the “nice guy with balls” is something that she (and other women) have no trouble picturing, but isn’t so meaningful to men.   What “nice” and “balls” mean to men and women is different.   I’d like to parse it out in a way that will be more meaningful to men.   Parse it in terms of power.

           

          Women (in general) are aroused  by men who are Power +1.   You can respect a man who is Power+0, but can only admire a man who is Power+1.   But women (in general) are most  comfortable  with men who are Power+0, just as they are most comfortable with female friends who are Power+0, equals in the social hierarchy they deny being aware of.   And this dichotomy leads to all the confusion for men.   Because, IME, what many women will do as soon as they meet a man who is Power+1, a man who arouses them, is try to equalize their power.   Hold off on sex, make him put his own priorities on the back burner in favour of hers, to give her more power.   Make him plan and pay and court so that she can feel more powerful.   Make him commit marriage to equalize their assets and power.   Take him down a few rungs if he’s too arrogant.   And the problem, what they don’t realize, is that the more they equalize their power, the less aroused they will be.   As the man drops from Power+1 to Power+0, the relationship will go from passionate to comfortable.   As it goes from Power+0 to Power-1 it will become contemptible. And none of it will be done with any conscious intent.   Because when women say they want a “nice guy with balls,” the “nice” means Power+0 and the “balls” means Power+1.   Can’t be both.   Can be one and ACT like the other, but why would you?

           

          The manosphere recognizes this.   It advises men to always maintain Power+1, because if a woman is very aroused by you it doesn’t matter whether she’s comfortable.   At least, not if all you want is sex.   But what happens if sex isn’t all you want?   What if what you, as a man, want is marriage?   The manosphere still advises you to maintain constant frame, power.   But I advise something else entirely, something that many of the women here won’t be happy to hear.   My advice is that if a man looks at a woman and perceives this dichotomy in her, he should realize she is not marriage material.   She needs to grow up a bit.   Until she can realize that it is the “nice” that should be the attractive part and not the “balls,” she is not ready for marriage to a man.   At least, not the sort of man who’d be a good marriage partner.

        9. Emily, to

          Jeremy,

          Because, IME, what many women will do as soon as they meet a man who is Power+1, a man who arouses them, is try to equalize their power.   Hold off on sex, make him put his own priorities on the back burner in favour of hers, to give her more power.  

          Here we around in circles … power, power, power. UGH

          To put in simply, women want a man who values himself and won’t kiss their ass … for sex, validation, etc. Being handsome, rich, tall, successful, the qualities Tom mentioned, are all secondary to this. An essentially nice guy with a little bit of swagger and a sense of self.

        10. Jeremy

          The power thing is important, Emily.   Because there’s no woman less willing to compromise than one who gets her way 90% of the time but thinks she gets it 50%.   And there’s no woman more sensitive to the balance of power than the one who denies that power plays any role in her decision-making.

           

          I raised the issue of power because of the dissonance in Clare’s comment – dissonance that the men on this thread picked up but the women mostly missed.   You want a man with a strong sense of self, of his own priorities….but who will set his priorities aside in favour of yours because you’d rather wait for sex.   So which do you want, the man with his own priorities or yours?   I don’t think women are wrong or misleading when they say they want a nice guy with balls….but what they neglect to say is that they want him to be “nice” when they want, and they want him to have “balls” when they want, and to inherently know when to do each.   Translation to man-speak is: I want him to be power+1 when I want, and power+0 when I want, but if he asks when to be which he’d be power-1 and that would be unattractive.

           

          Without the acknowledgement that waiting for sex puts men at a power-disadvantage, that courtship does as well, women won’t be cognizant that they begin relationships at power+1.   They will think they’re beginning 50/50.   When you acknowledge that you are power+1, you find a way to give power to your partner to allow equalization.   When you think you’re 50/50, you don’t.

        11. Emily, to

          Jeremy,

          I can’t read   your entire comment. I’m starting to skim them like I do YAG’s and Tron’s due to the repetition of theme.

          You want a man with a strong sense of self, of his own priorities….but who will set his priorities aside in favour of yours because you’d rather wait for sex.    

          If a man isn’t ok with waiting 3 or 4 weeks for sex, then he and I shouldn’t be dating.   If that means, to you, that I grabbing the power, so be it. You don’t anything about someone when you start dating … if they’re dating someone else, sleeping with someone else, if they’ll even call you back. It’s like any relationship. It takes time to get know someone. If a man’s priority is quick sex, that’s fine, but he’ll need to move on and find another woman who’s ok with that.

        12. ScottH

          @Jeremy-   “She needs to grow up a bit.   Until she can realize that it is the “nice” that should be the attractive part and not the “balls,” she is not ready for marriage to a man.   At least, not the sort of man who’d be a good marriage partner.”

          Excellent analysis!   +1 to you.

        13. Chris

          A “nice guy with balls” is one who can pass what the “manosphere” calls “sh*t tests”, or fitness tests to be more polite. Such tests are are borderline unreasonable requests which the women is making, but which if the man obliges will cause her to, ironically, subtly lose respect for him.

          I see posts from some ladies here that the early dating period is supposed to be one where he proves himself to her by jumping through all sorts of hoops. Perhaps they are sincere, but a man who tried to please her in this way would actually lose out.

          Is asking him to wait a few weeks for sex a fitness test? Not at all, but with some provisos. There needs to be constant flirtiness and teasing and non-sexual touch, so she communicates she is strongly attracted to him, but is forcing herself to wait. If she treats his attempts to escalate coldly and dismissively, than that is a test which he can only pass by walking away.

        14. Adrian

          Hi Emily,

          You said, “I can’t read   your entire comment. I’m starting to skim them

          I actually noticed this about my own comments a while back; they were getting longer. I asked myself, WOW! Would I want to read all this? So I’m working on short and direct answers.

        15. Emily, to

          Hi Adrian,

          I actually noticed this about my own comments a while back; they were getting longer. I asked myself, WOW! Would I want to read all this? So I’m working on short and direct answers.

          It’s not length of the comment. It’s repeating the same comment over and over again. Some of the   longtime posters (and I’m sure I’m guilty of this, which is why I’m trying to avoid the c word) have 3 or 4 pet topics they keep bringing up (despite what anyone tries to writes to the contrary). It’s the song”Wish You Were Here” by Pink Floyd. “Running over the same old ground. What have we found? The same old fears   …”

        16. Jeremy

          Skim away, or ignore entirely, Emily.   The comment here was not directed at you.   But I am truly perplexed at your comment otherwise.   This is a website dedicated to helping women looking for marriage better understand men.   Given that the problems women have with men tend to be systematic, would one not think that certain themes would recur?   Would one not fully expect to have the same conversation repeatedly, as each new situation was merely a variant of the previous?   If you ran a website for frustrated  nice guys asking repeatedly why women dumped them, would you not expect to have to repeatedly write “because you lack balls”?   And would you not be frustrated when, having communicated with those same men for months or years, you still see them writing about how women love jerks?

        17. Adrian

          Hi Emily,

          Yes but be honest, at this point I think we have no “wild cards” among the regulars; that’s why we are regulars. Regardless of the subject you pretty much know who’s going to say what-even if they word it differently the core will be the same message.

        18. Adrian

          Hi Jeremy,

          You said, “what many women will do as soon as they meet a man who is Power+1, a man who arouses them, is try to equalize their power.   Hold off on sex, make him put his own priorities on the back burner in favour of hers, to give her more power.   Make him plan and pay and court so that she can feel more powerful.   Make him commit marriage to equalize their assets and power

          1). So what should a man do? Women are taught a good man would naturally do these things by relationship experts!

          2). What does the man gain exclusively from this?

          a). They both gain the benefit of

          >sex (not just the man)

          >being in the company of someone pleasant

          >finding a  relationship oriented partner

            b). She gains the benefit of

          >his planning, paying, initiating calls

          >control of him waiting for sex while being loyal (sorry Sylvana most men don’t go have sex with other women while waiting for the one they are courting).

          Not to quote Tron or Tim but it looks like the man is giving more in the “beginning”. We are told that he gains the benefit of her company but doesn’t she enjoy his company on the dates also? When they finally have sex doesn’t she enjoy it also? So why is sex treated like it’s ONLY his reward???

          As the commentor Chance use to say why not just advise men to find a woman that doesn’t make him jump through so many hoops if in the long run they both will be giving equally in the relationship; why should one have to give more in the beginning?

          Why are we told that a good man would naturally do these things?

        19. Jeremy

          Hi Adrian.   You asked what men should do.   I think men should do the same thing I think women should do – seek out what you want, be cognizant of what your partner wants, realize that neither of your imperatives is objectively “correct,” realize that the less you both have to compromise the better the relationship will be, but when you do have to compromise it should be 50-50.

           

          You’d think it’d be obvious, eh?   But look at the post Evan just responded to.   The commenter thinks that remaining friends with one’s ex is inappropriate, her BF doesn’t.   She let her BF know how she feels and hopes he’ll do the “right thing.”   Not only does she want what she wants, she believes what she wants is “right.”   What chance of compromise is there?   How can one share power when one doesn’t even realize that power is the issue?

        20. Nissa

          @Jeremy – You said:  So which do you want, the man with his own priorities or yours?  

          I would say: neither – I want the man whose priorities match mine. Now, I’m sure someone will fire off a note saying, no man wants to wait for sex and it will never be his priority. If that’s the case, what’s to stop him from being civil when he’s dating someone else, or spending more time with her when it’s convenient for him, getting to know her either way? This would enable him to have commitment free sex while getting to know her. Then once he’s decided he is really to wait for her, he can ask her to be his girlfriend then. Simple. However, I really think that two people who have such different views of sex are not compatible.

          The other thing that really troubles me about what you said is that it assumes the intentions of women. That’s a very slippery slope to assume we know the minds of others better than they know themselves. It’s arrogant and disrespectful. I know because I have the urge to do it too :-).

          I just have not experienced what you describe. When I’m into someone, I’m always into them. I was with my husband for 14 years, with no decrease in desire. I ran into my first love (after 17 years) at a restaurant a few years ago. I was looking at him, thinking how attractive he was, when I suddenly realized who he was. I dropped money on the table and left ASAP. But it illustrated for me that I’m very consistent in my desires.

        21. Marika

          Hi Jeremy

          FWIW, I don’t think anyone could ever doubt the goodness of your intentions in posting here – no matter if from time to time misunderstandings occur or offense is taken. You are valued.

          Not to speak for Emily, but perhaps the concern/block to sometimes hearing the message is to do with things like saying particular women need to ‘grow up’ or certain women shouldn’t marry, or a man should protect himself & his assets from certain women etc. It may well be true. It may be good advice to give to a male friend out of ear- shot of the woman.

          These poor people are often used as the example – but in the same way I would imagine that hearing book club ladies declare their husbands as being ‘immature’ (and that then being communicated to a man – which I completely understand would feel pretty demeaning), it’s not particularly helpful to put it that way to the audience themselves. Even if it makes you throw up your hands in despair as the advice itself is good, and as it comes quite naturally to you to be logical & to think things through.

          I personally rarely feel the need to rally against Evan’s advice, and keep coming back for more, even if everything doesn’t always sit well, because it never comes off as ‘moral highground-y’. He has a knack of communicating a somewhat moralistic message (eg prioritise kindness & consistency over chemistry & swagger) without sounding patronising. It’s hard to do. If we could all do it (me included – I’m certainly guilty of jumping on my high horse), there would probably be less angst on here.

        22. Nissa

          Clare,

          While I see your point, it does skip one important thing – it only holds true if the man asking meets the minimum attractiveness threshold. While I agree to some extent that they are conflating two ideas, I see it as because when a man (or woman) does not meet the minimum attractiveness threshold, they get nowhere, no matter how fabulous their personality. So I can see how Tron and YAG would think that they need to meet some impossible standard. After all, people look for in others what they value in themselves. If you value fitness, fat people are just not going to float your boat. If you love Jesus, Sean Connery himself couldn’t get into your knickers.

          I can understand why men might be frustrated, because most women won’t come out and say: I am not interested because you are short/poor/ unattractive / have no class/ unsuccessful. So they tend to assume it is whatever they feel they lack that is the problem, and work on that – which may not have been the issue at all. For example, I’m sure there are a lot of chubby women who think that it’s their figure that keeps men back, when it’s something more akin to having a negative attitude or being no fun.

    2. 8.2
      lily

      I have started two very serious, long-term relationships by having sex early on. Having been in a 30-year marriage with bad sex, I view sex as a crucial element in getting to know a man. If it’s not really, really good, I’m not going to date him. I am older…I already was in a long-term marriage, had children, and raised them. I was one UNHAPPY cow in bed after I got bought.

  9. 9
    Paula

    The judgments thrown around in these comments saddens me.   Whatever happened to live and let live?   Whether you do or don’t want to wait for sex, if your potential partner isn’t on the same page why isn’t it enough to just move on?   I’m very clear and up front with men that I won’t have sex so long as we are both still on dating apps – the sense of entitlement I’ve been met with at times is nothing short of appalling- I had one guy say to my face that ‘I don’t know how to date.’   If a man doesn’t like what he perceives to be a power dynamic of sex,   he can move on to his next conquest.   I’m happy and presumably he’s happy.   So why all the angst?

  10. 10
    Tara Nielson

    Yes, great point and well said! I personally believe only in sex in marriage, so would take it even a step further. As women- – scientifically proven lots of bonding chemicals released during sex–seems dangerous to play with that, outside of not just committed, but spousal relationship. My two cents….

    1. 10.1
      Chris

      I suspect all this theorization about bonding chemicals during sex is mostly pseudo science. There would be a little bit of truth in it, but its just one variable among many determining the health and longevity of marriage and similar LTRs.

      I also think the normalization of pre-marital sex was driven largely by women, rather than men. As YAG points out above, most men find don’t find it easy to get casual sex. They are probably going to lose out in a culture which delays marriage while encouraging casual pre-marital sex.

      Women might say they would prefer a culture with zero pre-marital sex, but the reality would be under this most will end up only ever having sex with the one average or below average guy who they never had any sort of strong chemistry with.

      1. 10.1.1
        Yet Another Guy

        @Chris

        Women might say they would prefer a culture with zero pre-marital sex, but the reality would be under this most will end up only ever having sex with the one average or below average guy who they never had any sort of strong chemistry with.

        If more than 50% of women are having to settle for a man that they find to be of less than average attractiveness, then we have a problem with what qualifies a man as being physically attractive.

        1. Cathalei

          @YAG

          I don’t think it’s about attractiveness in general as much as sexual chemistry/compatibility. A man would come off as good looking from far away and same goes for a woman too indeed, but that doesn’t automatically translate into physical attraction.

  11. 11
    Tara Nielson

    Some great scientific facts showing bonding chemicals released during sex– especially for women. Worth researching, and makes total sense from a biological perspective for a woman to be bonded to the man she’s procreating with. Society’s view may have shifted, but biology hasn’t! Book How to Avoid Marrying a Jerk by Jon Van Epp, great place to learn more about this as a starting point. Also the millionaire matchmaker makes similar points etc. Any coach who would say otherwise, would be misleading clients.

    Women used to get lifelong commitment through marriage from a man BEFORE having sex, and shared themselves w/a husband who loved them/ wanted to be the mother of his future children, etc. Now, with the supposed “sexual advancement” of women, what do they get for/with sex? All too often, no commitment, no marriage, no love- – just a few fleeting moments of pleasure from someone using their bodies. If you think women have “won” in that scenario, and are more empowered and free, I would strongly suggest otherwise…. I know it’s a radical idea to many today, but the concept of sexual fulfillment through marriage with someone who actually cares about you and is committed for life- – really isn’t such a bad idea- – for men or women, in my opinion.

    1. 11.1
      sylvana

      Tara,

      you are putting a way too romantic spin on marriages that were nothing more than essential to a woman’s survival.

      Women used to get lifelong commitment through marriage from a man BEFORE having sex, and shared themselves w/a husband who loved them/ wanted to be the mother of his future children

      You mean she married because she had very few other options to support herself, then was forced to have sex with and breed an heir for a man she likely had very low chemistry with? You do understand that she had NO CHOICE in whether she wanted to have sex after marriage or not, right? She had NO CHOICE in whether to have children or not.

      It was the price she had to pay to be supported.

    2. 11.2
      Jenn

      Tara,

      Amen, sister. Seems to me that men were a lot better off before the sexual revolution too: they weren’t treated like monsters for simply telling a girl they thought she was pretty. They knew their role as men was to do the asking, planning and paying for dates, and women knew their role was to be the fairer sex and appreciate and encourage their men. These days, it seems women are all too quick to denigrate and demean men, not build them up and show respect for them. Saving sex for marriage also allows both the man and the woman to truly get to know each other as people, to really love each other for who they are without focusing on how good they are in bed. Ours is the minority opinion though but we still have many who agree that sexual activity isn’t something to take lightly.

  12. 12
    V

    “Jeremy is the only other married guy here who is representing what it’s like to be a smart, strong, successful man who must compromise to be in a relationship.  I am about the happiest married man you’ll ever meet and I agree with virtually everything he writes”
    Evan no one doubts that Jeremy is a good father or husband and we are truly greatful for your site. But I fear I must say what many other women are afraid to say and it’s that you don’t come off as good husband material initially either. Like YAG I think you can not see this about yourself and only see what a super great catch you are.

    – You spoke about how you had about 300 dates in 10 years; sorry but according to the math that’s only about 2 dates a month; low numbers. I bring that up because

    – You said you Never had a relationship last longer than 6 months. Over 300 dates in 10 years and not one single long-term girlfriend? Being over 35 years old did you suddenly learn to “compromise” because sudden maturity or a fear of growing old and alone? What woman wants to be chosen for that reason?

    – You said that you broke up with your wife (then girlfriend) because you didn’t feel strong desire (chemistry) for her. A week before you asked her to marry you. What woman wants a man that married her because he chose logic and not love?

    – You’ve admitted that you actually envied your friends when you were dating your wife because you wanted to feel strongly and passionately about her like they did with their girlfriends. Again what woman doesn’t want to be seen emotionally not just logically desirable in her boyfriend’s eyes?

    – Lori  Gottlieb insulted (in my opinion) your then girlfriend (now wife) to your face by calling her looks unimpressive and saying she’s seen you date more attractive women. You didn’t get upset, you didn’t get angry, according to you-you weren’t bothered by it. Why? Because your decision to marry your wife was based off logic. What woman doesn’t want her man to defend her before his friends?

    – Your wife tells the story of giving you a Mulligan after hearing you say “another woman is the sexiest woman you’ve ever seen.” Yes we all know other women are prettier or thinner than us, but it doesn’t mean we want to hear our boyfriends tell us out loud.

    Because you chose logic over chasing emotions you founded the “don’t chase chemistry” philosophy of “7 in looks 10 in compatibility” which we all benefit from and are thankful for. And you just commented recently that over time you fallen deeply in love with your wife which is beautiful.

    However just like you want us to understand that your stories were meant to inspire us and NOT insult your wife, I hope you can understand that it’s not easy for us to be as logical in relationships as you and Jeremy. We get saddened By Jeremy stories because we all like him as a comment her but more importantly we see him in ourselves when we see someone who is with a partner that doesn’t show them strong desire. It practically bleeds through his comments

    1. 12.1
      Noone45

      Perhaps romance is a luxury for the beautiful and well-off lol. The rest can settle for the “logical” paring.    I’m happy alone these days. I’m fairly certain only illogical feelings could get me in a relationship these days lol.

  13. 13
    Michelle

    Agree with Evan; waiting it out a bit is a win/win.   Everything is better when you wait, especially the sex.   The right guy will wait, the wrong one won’t.   Voila, instant perfect weeding out process. When a woman has sex too soon; the odds are not in her favor for happiness.   I’m not slut shaming here at all.   If you want sex and only sex, go for it.   That is your right as a woman.   Just be clear on your objective and prepare for the outcome.   However, I think even in this age of the swipe right and hookup culture, not much has changed with women and how we are built emotionally.     Most still get a twinge of regret when they guy they slept on the second date never called again or “is distant” or “just wants to come over after 11:00.”   There are exceptions to this; I have a friend who has an amazing husband and they had sex on the first date.   She is the exception…the rare exception.

  14. 14
    J

    Hi Evan, I haven’t read all of the comments above; however, I read your blog about sex and dating and tend to agree with your assessment.   I am fairly recently divorced, and am so totally curious about everything to do with men, as I was married for a long time.   I can liken this to a kid in a candy store.   I have slept with several men, but most of the time without a good outcome.   I have a healthy appetite for sex, but I realize that this does not come without a price.   I used to believe that I could separate love and sex.   I now know that I cannot.   No matter how you might try, sex always muddies the waters.   You cannot clearly see the relationship for what it truly is, but rather only how great the sex might be.   It’s hard for women to distinguish the two, as we become emotionally connected, and not just physically involved.   Men can be strictly physical without emotion.   I was hurt recently, and I slept with this man on the second date.   I really didn’t want to, but I gave in.   We then went on to have an amazing next couple of dates, all of which also involved sex, which we were both into.   And then, well you know, he ghosted.   And it hurts.   That is when I discovered this epiphany about myself.   From here on in, once I heal, no more sex until I know that the man is also investing.   It’s just not worth it.

    1. 14.1
      Paula

      Similar realization and experience here, J.   While I have slept with a few men I knew weren’t relationship potential (and so spared myself any hurt feelings) I just didn’t find those experiences to be gratifying.   That too is where I believe men and women differ – men derive much the same level of enjoyment whether the sex is emotionally meaningful or not.   As women, once we’ve had it with someone we’re in love with – that’s it.

Leave a Reply

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