DISCOVER HOW SMART, STRONG & SUCCESSFUL WOMEN (THAT'S YOU!) CAN FINALLY Find Your Man
Take this short quiz
to discover what you need to do now.
And to protect yourself from being hurt by a man, you:
Choose not to date at all.
Try to make him earn your trust.
Pull away from a guy at the first hint of trouble.
Tell him your relationship goals on the first few dates.
Want to clarify where things are headed in the first few months.
Those are all perfectly rational. The problem is: the only thing you’re protecting yourself from is the possibility of falling in love.
If you’ve built up a layer of protection to ensure that you never get hurt again, no one can blame you. But you’ll likely find that there aren’t many men who are willing to fight their way thru your layers. You may think you’re scaring off the bad ones, but you’re likely scaring off the good ones, too.
Before I tell you how you can start to change this, I’d like you to take a second and see if this resonates with you. My client, Michelle, is a 48-year-old, never-married woman.
There are 50 million married men in the United States. Apparently, SOMEBODY wants a commitment.
She’s attractive. She’s successful. She’s got a big heart.
As far as I can tell, there are only 2 reasons she’s never been married.
1) She’s gone out with a bunch of commitmentphobic jerks.
2) She’s convinced that all men are commitmentphobic jerks.
No one is going to deny Michelle her life experience. It’s as real as the nose on her face. What her experience doesn’t encapsulate is the other side of the coin:
There are 50 million married men in the United States. Apparently, SOMEBODY wants a commitment.
There are dozens of men who have wanted to commit to Michelle that SHE didn’t want to commit to in return.
There are legitimate reasons why some men wouldn’t want to commit to Michelle. Without sounding too critical of my lovely client, here are 3 off the top of my head:
She’s fearful. Any man can tell that Michelle has got her guard up when he out with her. She gets nervous and quiet, like she’s on an audition, and isn’t her natural, playful self.
She’s volatile. Michelle’s hell-bent on not getting hurt, so the second a man does something that seems like a red flag (not calling for 24 hours, canceling plans at the last minute due to work), she overreacts.
She’s mistrustful. Because of all the disappearing guys, it makes sense. However, each new man shouldn’t have to pay for the sins of Michelle’s exes, no more than Michelle should have to pay for the sins of any of her dates’ former flames.
Because of these characteristics borne out of her negative experiences, Michelle inadvertently comes across as uptight, anxious and needy, as opposed to confident, fun and serene.
And it should go without saying that a lot of men are not going to stick around to find out what lies beneath. I would suspect you wouldn’t be too crazy about an uptight, anxious, needy man yourself.
I’m not saying that you are like Michelle, per se. I’m suggesting that it’s extremely normal to find yourself in her exact same position.
I don’t know you personally. But if you’re anything like most of my readers, you probably work a minimum of 40 hours a week. You probably have friends and hobbies and family. You’re probably really, really, wary of men.
And because of your previous experience, you do everything in your power to prevent the “wrong men” from getting in. You’re vigilant about looking for the signs. And you find them everywhere you go. As a result, you remain single.
Think of it like a visual metaphor.
You live in a house.
Mr. Right is walking down the street, trying to find his Ms. Right.
There are two houses right next to each other that look identical. They’re gorgeous, modern, spacious, well decorated, inviting. Except for one minor thing.
The house on the left has a 10-foot brick wall around it. The house on the right has an open door with the smell of chocolate chip cookies wafting.
Which house do you think Mr. Right is going to peek into?
A good man doesn’t need to break down or scale your wall. He’s just going to look for a warm, inviting, open door.
It’s kind of a no-brainer.
Now you can make the argument that the RIGHT man would try to figure out how to scale your 10-foot wall.
You can make the argument that the REASON there’s a wall is that there’s some crime in the neighborhood and you’ve been robbed twice before.
You can justify that protective wall in every way possible. But it doesn’t change the bottom line:
A good man doesn’t need to break down or scale your wall. He’s just going to look for a warm, inviting, open door.
To take it even further:
– A good man will not be able to find you if you’re working 11 hours a day.
– A good man doesn’t need to earn your trust if he’s never done anything wrong.
– A good man may have a number of characteristics that you might not like.
– A good man takes relationships seriously and can’t promise that he will know after a few months that you are destined for the altar.
And although I deeply empathize with you if you’re trying to avoid “wasting” time by trying to figure out the future before HE knows the future, just know that you’re sabotaging any real chance you have to form a real trusting connection.
You have to go in with a clean slate, an open mind, and a clear head. At any point, you have the right to determine that a man’s not the one for you, and he has the right to determine that you’re not the one for him.
That’s the dating process, for all of us.
Instead of trying to figure everything out up front to protect from getting hurt, give yourself to the process and let your man reveal his character over time.
Opening the door and assuming the best will make the good men gravitate towards you. Treat him as if he’s going to hurt you and he’s not going to want to stick around.
This is all well and good, but I think it’s also a bit naive. I know that I wouldn’t leave the door wide open in a bad neighborhood, for example…heh.
There has to come a time when you draw the line at excuses and bad behavior, though. I have a habit of saying exactly what Evan thinks works: “Oh, he just had to work. Oh, I need to be chill and not talk about expectations.” In return, yeah…the guy would turn out to be non-serious. He’d be lying, or not that interested. It didn’t work out.
Granted, for the last year, I haven’t dated much as I set up a new life in a completely new city (a relationship simply isn’t a priority next to earning enough to live and finding a great apt), but I did date some. However, there needs to be more advice on WHEN to draw the line, and how to not walk around like some clueless Nancy when it’s a societal thing for many men to not show the best character or care of women.
Evan…I do believe that this is my issue. I have been divorced now for six years after being married for 22. I am determined to not fall for the wrong guy!! Once a few red flags show, I’m out of the relationship! And I don’t mean little things. No one is perfect. But I feel that if I ignore seeing these flags, that I am being stupid like I was when I was 20 by only thinking how I was in love and everything will work out. I want to get married again, but I am trying my best to make sure I pick the best one for me, so my chances of another divorce are lower. I do fear the longer I go on like this, I will end up being alone.
“And although I deeply empathize with you if you’re trying to avoid “wasting” time by trying to figure out the future before HE knows the future, just know that you’re sabotaging any real chance you have to form a real trusting connection.”
This is a hard one…because a guy could be walking the fine line of relationship ambivalence and a woman may not know [until after she’s made a significant emotional investment]. 🙁
For ex, she trusted the connection, and as a result allowed herself to open to how ever a relationship may form, but the guy just knows that he’s open to a relationship in the now [closed to the future]. I think that scenario is what a lot of us are trying to save our selves from. The guys who won’t open themselves up to a “yes” to see however things may form, or those who are ambivalent or scared of the connection.
It is innocent for us women to not want to invest heavily in men who aren’t open and to be scared of getting caught out there in that space. So, I guess the question a lot of us women would ask is: how do you weed out the guys who aren’t open to ‘how ever’ things may go. As you mentioned, it is def best to let the direction of the relationship happen organically, and u don’t want to bombard them w/ ur goals from the beginning, so this is all a bit confusing.
Good post Evan, as I have some of these tendencies myself as a 30 year old. The only thing I’m really confused on is dating while assuming the best, versus keeping too high expectations too soon? For me assuming the best means that I know there’s a great man out there for me who will want to marry me and treat me well (as I will treat him well). But isn’t that technically having “expectations”? While I may not be asking a guy I’m dating where we’re headed in the first few months, I will still be assuming the best about him until he proves otherwise, which basically means to me he’s a potential life partner (key word potential). I guess I’m just confused at how to separate them…
It’s nice in theory Evan, but in reality, when there’s no wall, every idiot in the area seems to come running into the house for cookies. I’ve gone in openly, trusting, believing the best…. many times…. and inevitably draw in men who aren’t emotionally available. They’re not sure if they ever want to be committed to a long term relationship. Or they’re sociopaths who have learned to say all the right things to draw in a nice girl, only to show their true colors months later.
How can we balance being open and trusting with not getting drawn in by unhealthy men?
Hi there,
I liked your question a lot and found it very valid. My response, personally, would be: healthy boundaries. That’s how.
On a personal note: yes, i am in a healthy, committed relationship and we’re starting to get very serious (thanks in large part to EMK!), but I’ve struggled with healthy boundaries and Evan’s advice has helped me a TON. I believe that what he means here is, assuming you have healthy boundaries – i.e., you have a hard-line stance when it comes to what you NEED versus what you want, and are realistic about those things (that requires a lot of self-work, by the way) – THEN you should leave your door “open.” But if you’re someone who is unclear on what red-flag behavior is and isn’t, then you should probably step back and clarify that for yourself before getting too involved with dating for the moment.
Evan assumes that you will really know what the red flags are, how to watch for them and protect yourself in a reasonable manner (i.e., not freaking out when he doesn’t call for 24 hours, but maybe stepping back when he is very secretive and only wanting to see you once a week – just as an example), and that you trust yourself and your decision-making process innately before you step into the dating world (or are working on yourself and on getting to that point).
Sorry if it sounds like I’m trying to speak for EMK; not at all, just telling you *my* interpretation of what he’s saying here. I believe it comes down to those healthy boundaries, self-knowledge and self-trust: knowing when to say “uncle,” trusting yourself to do so healthily (and not on a knee-jerk basis), and forgiving yourself, ultimately, for making mistakes. Forgiving yourself, but NOT letting that mistake affect any future relationships you may have, as you realize it’s not the new guy’s fault you had a total DB for your last partner!
So when you have established the ability to have healthy boundaries, to say “uncle” kindly when you’ve had enough, and without yelling or berating, to speak your truth directly but not meanly…and on the other end, when you have made sure you don’t have “loose” boundaries – i.e., letting too many guys with red-flag behavior in your door – THAT is when you can start leaving it open, with the knowledge that you’ll close it, kindly but firmly, if and when you need to. And if one of the bad ones gets in in spite of everything, you’ll forgive yourself, and move on with the next clean slate, not letting the past experience mar your future relationships.
That, in my opinion, is how you let the right one in. Good luck!
I’ve been hurt so many times, betrayed by friends, and had all the reasons to close my heart from the world. But I decided to let go, I’ve met a few good friends, who have been with me thru thick and thin. The same with men. I have decided to let my guard down, but that does not mean I empty my head or ignore signs. Sometimes I think we even look for them, expect them. Yes, I think its good to let your guard down and stop being in control of the world. You need to expect the best out of everyone and everything, that includes men. Just becuse you have been disappointed or failed before doesn’t mean you should give up and expect the worst.
I’m letting my guard down and am expecting the best….out of everything
I think what Evan has been trying to say in his blog and book is that it is reasonable for a woman to feel scared, and want to protect herself. But being scared is not effective in finding the right relationship.
In theory I agree with what you say, Evan. However, in reality, I find it hard to do so. Just last night I felt jealous of my bf’s ex, how he took his ex on vacations but not me, how he wrote her poems but not me….I know, he was in a new relationship with her back then, I know he was not working while with her so probably had more time back then. I’m worried the reason he is with me is only because he cannot have her (she cheated on him after 2months of dating and broke up with him). I wanted to call him right away and ask him to give me assurance that he loves me as much as he loved her. But I thought of what you said, and bit my tongue. This morning, I still cannot get past the feeling that he loved her more than me, and I’m afriad one day I will not be able to control my emotions and let fear take over.
He’s just like any other normal guy, wants to be considerate, but often forgetful. Forgets to call me sometimes when he is out with the boys and bad at planning romatic dates. Wants to get married someday, maybe in another 2 years, but not sure if I am the one- we’ve been dating for 6 months only. He definitely falls short from my ideal boyfriend, who will always thinks of me first, calls me all the time, showers me with gift and attention, and mention he wants to marry me by now…but when I think back and compared him to other guys I’ve dated (should I not? Since I should enter a relationship with a clean slate?) he’s just another average guy. When we have connection it’s great, but when he is doing his own thing and forgets about me for a little bit, I feel insecure and needy. I used to think I broke up with those other guys because they did not treat me well enough (not attentive enough, did not give all they can, should want to spend more time with me, etc) But being in several relationships that ended the same dissapointing way made me wonder, maybe I was the one with unrealistic expectations. Maybe I was too intense and needy that I drove them away.
You know, I have to agree with those speaking to how difficult it is to let down one’s guard, assume the best, and be open-minded. As a man with a mixed bag of a dating history, including getting burned by women who weren’t ready for or available for committed relationships, it takes effort to drop off the cynicism and suspicion. I can do it, and I do it more now than in the past, but still, it’s not always easy.
I think a main thing in learning how to distinguish being open and positive, with just becoming a doormat. I actually believe it’s just fine to set out your dating goals early on with someone, for example. In talking about my desire for a long term, conscious relationship, I have been able to weed out women who were either not ready for that, or who have zero interest in such a thing. You have to be able to present that kind of stuff while letting go of the potential outcome, though, because otherwise you’ll end up saying things to try and keep someone around, or to get rid of them quicker – both patterns I did in the past.
Also, being trusting of others doesn’t mean that, for example, you have to invite a stranger into your home two hours after you meet him or her. You can maintain appropriate boundaries, and still view someone as being a good person worthy of consideration.
I think that most women need to be able to be with themselves so they can learn to like themselves before they can be with someone as a partner! Today that just doesn’t happen. It seems that women, young ladies, these days think that they are nothing without a man in their lives and Ladies….that is not true! Until you can love yourself for who you really are, be comfortable with yourself through being alone, then why look to put a man in the middle of that mess! Men want women who are comfortable with themselves, self-confident and who are not clingy, needy and in a hurry to be in a serious relationship. Until we can learn to love ourselves, entertain ourselves and be happy with who we are and not rely on a guy to make us happy…. then a relationship is the last thing needed! Just saying!
I like men, I like how they think, so straight forward most of them. Not tortuous like most women I know.
I actually think I understand what most men think most of the time.. it is so easy: “what you see, is what you get” – no more, no less – you just have to look and see, and listen without positive or negative prejudice. http://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/201104/6-clues-character
I have no trouble thinking what men want of me.. I don’t distrust them, I am not easy to lead around, since I just have learned to listen how consistent they are. I don’t to build a future dream castle in minds eye about “soul mate”, as he is just a man with man’s interests.
I guess my secret is that I am openminded but I actually don’t care either way, when I have zero sexual interest in 95% of them, therefore I see them as they are.
And those few (5%) that actually are interesting, they are the same inside as the other men – no more, no less, and same rules of judging his character apply.
So, why am I here reading this blog then?
I don’t always agree with Evan, but he is a man, and I like how he thinks. =D.. it is fun to see and hear of his real life as he uses it as an example, and to hear what is his view of problems presented to him, even if he shows a bit one track mind in his replies.
Other similar columnist whom I follow is Carolyn Hax from Washington post
I almost always agree with her, and I think I learn more there, way more often than from Evan, but I also like some of other regular commenters here.
I have not found a way to solve my problem here.. (it is that I don’t get smitten, and if I don’t get smitten, I get bored with the man after sex, and I get out when I feel suffocated as I feel I should feel something, and there is no more than liking in me for him.
End result has been that “why bother with men like that in the first place?”)
So these days I meet men mostly for social company – I may go out with a man for date once or twice.. the moment I see real emotional interest in his eyes, or an expectation of sex and I feel nothing in return, I am out, (if he is not sexually hot – what men in their 40’s seldom are. =/)
No point settling when sex with doesn’t do it for me, recipe for misery for the man and for me..
And unlike most women Evan say are writing to him here, I have been out regularly. Last week I put an ad about having a picnic and within a day I had one with a man I met for the first time. He was ok, but nothing more there and I have couple other men almost arranged to meet for a picnic later.
Too bad it is almost certain that nothing comes out of any of them, none of them looked that lively in a picture.. but they might be good company for a picnic, as I try to have a good conversations about everything between heaven and earth.
Some of the men might be the basis of new social network to me in this new town where I am now – if I stay here for longer.
(Not that I am likely to stay here, most likely in 6 weeks I am gone to other pastures.) The summer is too short anyway, therefore now it is time to do, and enjoy the warmth of summer while it lasts.
After 500+ first dates I have so many stories in my mind, that I have no idea who has told what, but even if I have forgotten the man in question, at least the some of the stories the men I have met, have told me still remain. =)
ckay asked: (#3)
“I guess the question a lot of us women would ask is: how do you weed out the guys who aren’t open to ‘how ever’ things may go.”
Katie said: (#5)
“How can we balance being open and trusting with not getting drawn in by unhealthy men?”
Let’s turn the question around.
My first serious girlfriend cheated on me. How can I be open and trusting … and also ensure that I don’t get cheated on again?
My second serious girlfriend had severe intimacy issues. She only wanted sex twice a month, and she put absolutely no effort into making the experience pleasurable for me. How do I find out whether a woman is frigid before I emotionally invest in the relationship?
I dated several women in a row who had no interest in a long term relationship, but they enjoyed being treated to shows and restaurants. How do I avoid wasting my time with women who aren’t into me?
ckay and Katie,
Imagine going on a date with a man whose agenda upfront is to find out whether you’re fun in bed, whether you’re a cheater, and whether you’re into a serious relationship with him. And he wants to know the answer to those questions before he spends much time with you, before he emotionally invests at all, and before he trusts you.
Would you find that man fun? Would you find him charming? Would you look forward to spending more time with him?
I had to trust that my dates weren’t cheaters, and then find out in due time whether that trust was misplaced. I had to assume they were fun in bed, and then find out for certain when the relationship progressed to that point. I had to accept that I would end up spending a certain amount of time with women who weren’t interested in a relationship with me, because that’s part of the process of dating.
There’s no way to stay open and prevent yourself from being drawn in by unhealthy men. If you discover that you have been drawn in by someone unhealthy, disentangle yourself and leave. It’s painful, but pain is part of the process.
There’s no way to ensure that the man (or woman) is open to a long-term relationship. Therefore, you’ll end up in some relationships with people who are just in it for the short-term. When you discover that’s the case, leave (if they haven’t already left you).
I got a lot better at relationships when I accepted that I would get hurt … and I would get over the pain.
I have to agree with Evan’s post. Just because it isn’t easy to do doesn’t mean you shouldn’t try. If you keep an open mind, open heart and show a man warmth, he’s going to respond positively to that. A man is going to want that 2nd or 20th date because you make him FEEL GOOD. If you are scared of opening yourself up to someone because you are concerned about getting hurt again, this completely changes the tone of things and how you appear to someone. Bottled up, needy, nervous about the future, none of these things make a person want to get close to you. As for a ‘deadline’ of when he SHOULD KNOW, this line does not exist. People are far to complex for there to be a set of rules and timelines that will hold true for everyone. I think this part takes some common sense and listening to your gut. Does being with him feel good? Are you happy with where the relationship is RIGHT NOW? If yes, then don’t worry so much about the future! Enjoy where you are at right now, let him pick his relationship tempo. When he’s ready to move forward, he’ll let you know. However, you shouldn’t wait forever on him. Once again, how long is too long? Use your intuition. Your time is valuable and you know it, he should too. If it comes to the point where you feel you must have some sort of answer, or promise of commitment, you have to be super careful with how you set up this conversation. You can’t just blurt out a question you’ve been tossing around in your brain for weeks and expect him to come up with an articulate answer on the spot. He’ll feel attacked, the walls go up, and you’ll be taking steps backward. Start with a fun topic, bring up some fun times you’ve had together, get him feeling at ease. Then, something like, “You know, I’ve really enjoyed getting to know you. I’m very happy with where we are right now in our relationship. I would like to get married and have kids someday so maybe if things continue to go well we can talk about that some time in the future. However, I can only continue to date you if you think this is a possibility.” This may seem upfront and a tad brutal, but really, he will appreciate your HONESTY in this NON-DRAMA fashion that doesn’t make him feel attacked. It will also let him see that you know what you want but you aren’t forcing it on him. You cannot assume that your perfect relationship is exactly what he wants too, that is unrealistic and selfish. But you being upfront about what you expect puts it on the table for him, and let’s him know that you are being selective about whom you’re spending time with, and if he doesn’t fit the bill you’ve got no problem moving along.
I think that the key to being open but at the same time protecting yourself is to do things in a stepwise manner, based on RECIPRICOCITY.
I have to say that I disagree with Evan that a man does not have to earn your trust – in modern, urban society, EVERYONE you meet for the first time has to earn your trust, whether that be a work colleague, neighbour or someone at your local tennis club. This is not to say that you start from a position of MIS trust, simply that you start from a neutral position – you neither trust not distrust this person. All the neighbours in my block seem perfectly pleasant, however I would not give all of them the spare keys to my apartment. The ones across the hall, whom I have known for 2 years and who collaborated with me on getting the stairway painted, I would trust with my keys. The ones downstairs, nice as they seem, who only moved in 2 weeks ago, I would not. This is common sense.
With men, I think its about offering a little bit of trust and seeing what you get in return. He takes a step forward, you take a step forward. He takes another step. So do you. Proceed at HIS pace. If he is being a little open about his feelings, you should be a little open too – but no more than he is. Don’t change the subject, but don’t pour your heart out either. If he starts wanting to see you more often, agree to see him more often. Return the amount of trust and intimacy and openness he is displaying towards you – no more, no less. If he is illusive about what he does with his time when you’re not around, you should be similarly mysterious. If he doesn’t share his feelings about you or how the relationship is going, you shoudn’t either. One final thing I would say is to beware of men who press you for details of YOUR life/past relationships/hopes and dreams without actually sharing their own. Men like this can appear to be interested and good listeners, caring etc… but if they are pressing YOU to open up whilst not sharing any details themselves, THAT is definately something to beware of – men like that are generally manipulative and controlling, wanting to find out what makes you tick without revealing any of their own vulnerabilities.
@#13
Makes perfect sense to me Helene.
ERINLEE you articulated this very well. Once again thanks Evan for more insight.
@#13
Makes good sense to me as well Helene.
After reading Evan’s posts for about a year now if you apply his sensible rules, #1 being don’t sleep with him until he is your boyfriend, you can’t go wrong.
Just don’t get too involved too quickly and wait to see what happens naturally.
In my experience if a man is interested he will quickly show his interest and do all the things Evan says they do, ring you or contact you regularly, make plans in advance, introduce you to family and friends etc. My ex made sure he had me locked in after a month of dating. I didn’t have to do anything, he did it all.
If he isn’t doing these things he probably isn’t going to be your boyfriend and that’s ok, not every man you meet is going to be ‘the one’.
Give him that 6-8 weeks time to sort out his feelings and if he hasn’t stepped up to the plate just say goodbye nicely.
We have to use wisdom and common sense. While I agree that we should see others in the best light in as much as that is possible, we do have a responsibility to ourselves. It is a delicate balance. “Keep thy heart with all diligence for out of it are the issues of life. Proverbs 4:23.
KariB #9 said Men want women who are comfortable with themselves, self-confident and who are not clingy, needy and in a hurry to be in a serious relationship.
I agree, AND I think women want men who are comfortable with themselves, self-confident, not clingy, needy or in a hurry to be in a serious relationship. Why shouldn’t we expect to offer qualities similar to those we hope for in our partner? Working on ourselves should be a constant process. Dynamic, healthy relationships come about for me when I’m the most self-aware; when I know I am putting the work into myself to be consious of my patterns, my behavior and my choices.
Sadly the more I’ve had my guard up in the past the easier it’s been to push potentially great romantic relationships into friendships or just away. I don’t think I’ve ever learned much from playing things safe – it’s when I suffer and push my boundaries and wrestle with the feelings that come up from trusting someone that I grow, and offer the other person a chance ot see me.
This article really hit me close to home. It’s good to be reminded that our fortress keeps us safe, but isolated.
I’m a guy and I get what Evan is saying. You can be receptive and friendly, while keeping certain things private until he shows he has earned them.
–When I approach a girl I haven’t met, I don’t expect her to give me her number 5 seconds into the interaction before she even has gotten a sense of who I am. But I do expect her to be receptive to me coming over to talk to her.
–When I meet a girl for a first date, I don’t expect her to have sex with me right off. But I do expect her to be *receptive* enough to greet me with a smile and (maybe) hug me.
–When a girl and I are dating, I don’t expect her to open herself up and give me the keys to her emotional garden 2 or 3 dates in. But I do expect her to be *receptive* enough to let me know that she is enjoying getting to know me.
The problem is how you women go into dating. It seems to be either all or nothing for so many of you. You seemingly have to decide during the first date whether you have “chemistry” and if you do, you’re rushing into things because he is the rare man who makes you feel that way. You’d be better off, both genders would be better off really, if you gave it at least a couple dates before you decide whether something is really there or not. For starters you’d have more prospects which would make you less needy (and more attractive) and you might also make better choices in whom you keep around.
Bree #18: Well-said. I’m a guy who has been meeting a lot of women and doing my share of dating. I really am making it a point this year to learn what I can about your gender for your sake and for mine as well. I want to eventually find one special woman. Until then though, I want to do well by the women I date. Hopefully we can stay friends.
Anyway, to get back to what you wrote, I sometimes get shot down when I approach, and sometimes it’s in front of other people. I sometimes go on a date with a woman whom I’d really like to see again but she isn’t so keen on me. If I decided to just stop approaching and stop going on dates and maybe just make do with porn, I would save myself a lot of pain from rejection, and I’d guarantee that I wouldn’t make a fool of myself again in that regard ever. I wouldn’t achieve what I am hoping for in my life though, as you pointed out in your post.
Gee, it seems like everyone is making so much sense on this one. In terms of trust, it really does come down to common sense. But I also think that maturity, self-acceptance and confidence in relationships only comes with age and experience. Put another way — the best way to get better at reading people and trusting your instincts about others is to keep getting out there and meeting new people, even if it’s awkward or uncomfortable sometimes, and even if it leads nowhere. The only way to become more relaxed and less fearful of hurt is to experience hurt (sometimes over & over again) and survive it in tact. We’re not as fragile as we think we are. If there’s anyone out there who has never been rejected, betrayed, or hurt by love, I feel sorry for them. Not to get all masochistic about it, but consider taking pride in your battle wounds, because you didn’t get them by sitting at home. You chose not to be that single person we all know who sits at home and is cynical and miserable but feels all self-righteous because she’s safe and unscarred — and yes, she’s the same one who tells you you’re crazy to even bother with dating…. especially on-line dating. Well sure, that’s one way to ensure you never get burned again, or betrayed, or disrespected. But in my book, that’s for lightweights.
But about the concept of “wasting time”….. I’m just as covetous of my free time as the next person, and there are times when I’m sitting across from a man for the first time, and it’s just not happening between us & find myself feeling resentful, and daydreaming about the billion other things I could be doing with this precious time. As Evan has pointed out at some point, as long as you’re there, you might as well make the best of it; and really, is time spent meeting someone new ever a waste of time? Even if it simply makes you more appreciative of …oh, I don’t know, the less obnoxious people in the world?
Loved the house analogy! In addition to painful experiences, I also believe that because people lead such busy life styles they do not want to ‘waste time’ with the wrong person, so they do not actually give people a fair chance at times.
Michael 17 #19 – I think you make some great points, especially the all or nothing approach. I know I have been guilty of this in the past. I guess it comes from a place where you really want to meet someone and after finally clicking with someone, you just want it to work out. But if you end up suffocating the guy, he’s going to be heading for the door as fast as he can.
I recommend that women read your post about how they may be passing up their soul mate without knowing it.
The revelation that average women rate 80% of men as below average attractiveness is a big part of the reason that there are so many broken female hearts.
When all they do is chase the most desirable men, then complain that they got test driven, it is hard to sympathize. When 60% of the women are crowding around 20% of the men, please do not be surprised that those men view you as an expendable commodity.
But most women would rather gamble their period of youth and beauty in the alpha male casino rather than invest in a beta male business.
But when their get rich quick plans fail to work out, they feel entitled to blame all men, forcing the nice guys to “earn” their trust.
Sorry, but those girls can buzz off. I’m not going out of my way to compensate for their bad dating decisions. I’m already paying the price by having to date them after the best of their youth and beauty has been given to men that hurt them. I’m supposed to act supplicant for the privilege as well? Sorry, no.
You need to own your bad decisions. If you’ve had your heart broken more than two or three times, then you are a girl who is dating out of your league and using sex to try to cement the deal.
Maybe you should try apologizing to all the nice guys for ignoring them for so long out of foolishness, rather than expecting the nice guys to apologize for the sexual selfishness of the alpha males you lost out to.
Michael17
Honestly, men do the same things you’re complaining that women do
It’s hilarious how many bitter men populate these comments. I’m sure those unattractive attitudes just ooze out of you guys in person — but the problem is with women and you’re just the ones to tell us alllllll about what’s wrong with us.
Jack @23: You sound kind of alpha, actually. Or are you the nice guy in the scenario you describe?
I’ve learned that trust has almost nothing to do with the other person and everything to do with you- in other words, you have to trust that you will be okay no matter how things turn out with the other person. It’s about trusting you, not them.
That doesn’t mean you spend your free time jumping in front of obvious bullets; if a person proves themselves untrustworthy then you are right to get them out of your life. But trusting yourself to be okay regardless makes moving forward with your dating life a lot easier.
@ Karl R,
“My second serious girlfriend had severe intimacy issues. She only wanted sex twice a month, and she put absolutely no effort into making the experience pleasurable for me. ”
So eventually you left her for this? Sorry, hope I don’t come across as rude. Just that I am currently in a relationship very similar to this, and feel bad if I leave an otherwise quite good relationship over sex.
Don’t feel bad about leaving an otherwise quite good relationship over sex. Its the one thing that doesn’t respond to rational negotiation and compromise – it either works or it doesn’t. I left both my marriages, ultimately, because the sex was not in tune with the rest of the relationship, and the men weren’t interested in making it any better. A good relationship will ultimately disintegrate it that intimate bond isn’t there – don’t waste time on it. You can go to the movies or go skiing with other people if your partner doesn’t share your interest in these things, and that’s considered ok, but you can’t really maintain a healthy relationship and get your sexual needs met elsewhere… society, your partner and your soul won’t tolerate that….
Trust no one until their actions justify your trust-especially in dating.
@helene
Thank you for clarifying it for me:)
“A good relationship will ultimately disintegrate it that intimate bond isn’t there…”, this is exactly how I start to feel now, which makes me sad and scared. But you are totally right, I think it’s time for me to get prepared and move on.
@ Margo
just pretend to just everything they say or do until we’ve deemed them reasonably trustworthy.
@ Jack
I’m so sorry women don’t find you physically attractive and you have to fall back on your personality to get a date. I’m sure that must be difficult
But I’ll start saying I’m sorry for accepting advances of attractive men when men start apologizing for only contacting the top 80% of women. Most people behave very nicely when they want something regardless of they’re actual intentions. Last time I checked being unattractive didn’t necessarily mean nice so it’s a gamble either way. The odds may in the crappier casino but if you’re most likely going to lose why not play in the casino with ambiance?
Sheyna and Sharon:
Both of you are using what is called “feminist shaming language” (google the phrase and learn a little about yourselves) to attempt to deflect the truth of my comments. Being called a bitter loser by an internet tough-girl? Please. Think whatever you want about me.
But my original comment still stands. Good men are under no obligation to make up for the bad men who have hurt you.
And when someone serves up the truth, only a person in denial of that truth looks for ways to dismiss the truth with charges of “you’re bitter” or other callow taunts.
Anyway, I am not going to play the role of a romantic/relationship liferaft for a woman who is a 5 who has spent her youth and energy chasing men that are out of her league who are only to willing to use her sexually and move on. Nope. I’ll either get a woman who has been honest enough to admit her 5 status all along and shop for men accordingly, or I will remain single. Sure, being single and alone has its drawbacks, but it beats being married to a 5 who thinks she is an 8 because male 8s used to hook up with her back in college.
And who thinks she is “settling” for me, when in fact I am the one who is doing the settling. Dealing with the shattered pride and dreams of an unrealistic person is no way to spend the rest of your life.
These women are fun to date, though. Casually, only. I don’t mind all the whining and drama in small doses, and many of them are quite interesting to know due to their extensive life experience. But marriage is off the table.
Jack
You can’t write bitter posts and expect people not to call you bitter
I’m totally with you, Jack, about not wanting to be the life raft who is asked to pick up all the pieces, nor the one who is settled for by a woman who thinks she can’t get anyone better anymore.
But Jack, you sound almost as fixated on looks as the women you are frustrated with. And the comment at the end about it being “fun” to date dramatic, broken women really weakens everything else you’re saying. Just makes it sound like you enjoy toying with these women, which certainly isn’t something “good men” do.
I think this is a scenario in which I wish men were willing to understand women a little better. When women have been hurt a lot in past relationships and they’re still working through it, many men don’t stop and think how they could approach her differently. I’m not saying it’s his job to tear down her defenses, but men’s ability to compartmentalize past hurts and relationship fears is not the same for women. So we get castigated for having walls up while still being expected to completely understand the the how’s and why’s behind the way men behave, think and act in relationships.
Another way to approach the first few dates is from a place of curiosity, no judgement involved, but being being observant of the other person’s behavior, your own feelings and the interaction between the two of you.
First, I stated that I really don’t mind being called bitter. I was more interested in pointing out that people use such accusations because they either can’t or won’t address the point that the person is making.
Interesting question about being “fixated on looks”. As I consider myself to be a “5”, and have had a lot of life experience to validate this view, I am extremely weary of women who are in my general dating market area act as though they are much hotter. Sure, many of them have had short term sexual attention from higher status men, followed by “he won’t commit” episodes.
Let’s turn the scenario around: I bet you anything that I could find a super-hot girl who would let me be her buddy, hang out, “letsjustbefriends”, etc.
Average men getting LJBF’ed by attractive women is the social-dynamics equivalent of average women getting used for sex by highly attractive men. They may or may not be morally equivalent, but in the dating market place, they may as well be considered FUNCTIONALLY identical.
The handful of times when I approached an very attractive woman and got shot down, I was pretty cool about it. Funny thing – the real hotties are the most gracious at rejection, generally speaking.
It is the average girls who are often the worst about declining an offer of a date. Suspected reason: The really cute girls are secure enough in their self-image that a “lowball offer” from an average guy does not damage their self-concept.
However, the more average girl recognizes the average guy as a REAL, market-realistic offer. This “average” guy is like a mirror, held up in front of her, showing her that she is – horrors! – average as well.
Culturally, men are under much more social-message pressure to be “realistic”. Women are more often encouraged to “follow their hearts”, which for many of them is implicit permission to go only after the men who “sweep them off their feet”.
If men held out only for women who were attractive enough to inspire such sweeping-off-the-feet, the human race would have become extinct long ago.
Only about 2% of all women are attractive enough to quicken my pulse. But guess what? Those women also quicken the pulse of millions of other men, meaning that I could not get one of them unless I suddenly became a rock star or billionaire, probably.
So I focus on dating women that are average, like me. But an amazing number of very average women are spending all their time and energy on and endless series of heartbreaks by chasing and putting out for men who have options, options, OPTIONS. When a man has that many options, expect him to take advantage of those options. Most women are not cute enough or interesting enough to hold the attention of men with that many options.
Yet, they often try – wasting precious years and embittering themselves, saying stupid things like “I only attract jerks”. Such a statement is equivalent to an overweight person saying “I only attract hot fudge sundaes!!”
When a woman complains about all the jerky men she dated, just imagine an overweight person who is fully convinced that one day – ONE DAY – they will find a calorie-free hot fudge sundae. COULD happen. But the thin people are the ones who aren’t hoping to beat the odds. They learn to develop a taste for healthy food. But this kind of personal growth is not fun, of course. So many women will continue to hope that they will beat the odds and find the one tall-handsome-funny-wealthy guy who is single, and who is willing to commit to their very average self.
Good luck, but calling me bitter does not mean that you aren’t unrealistic.
It’s not woman’s fault that you guys let yourself go. I mean after age 40, most of you are very unattractive and naturally we women are not interested. We require visual just as much as you do.
I am really getting tired of that tired accusation that women are chasing after tall, dark & handsome superstars. I believe men are much more fixated on women’s looks than vice versa. I see way more couples where SHE looks “out of his league” than vice-versa, but most couples I see are pretty evenly matched. Lot’s of average, slightly above and slightly below average looking men are married, so there must be women who (like me) aren’t looking for rock star good looks, but someone with a kind heart. Don’t get me wrong, I have to be attracted to him, but the typical guy I am attracted to is about the same level of attractiveness as myself, plus or minus a point. And I usually prefer cute over drop dead handsome.
And women are being encourage to “settle” “give a guy a chance” etc. I think “follow your heart” just refers to staying with a man you love, even if others disapprove, not being swept off your feet.
Women are more often encouraged to “follow their hearts”, which for many of them is implicit permission to go only after the men who “sweep them off their feet”.
Jack, several times I have seen this same comment made by women about men, so it is not unique to women. I can’t argue with any of the facts in your post but the tone of the post is what is drawing the “bitter” comment. Yes, I get that you don’t care. But there are ways to be honest without being so brutal about it.
Jack,
Finally another guy on here that tells it like it is. Keep posting.
To Jack
I would not expect you to make up for any men , just as I would hold you accountable for anything some man in my past may have done, just as I don’t want to be held accountable for the things other women have done. I want to stand or fall on my own merits. Not everyone is that way.
“when men start apologizing for contacting the top 80% of women”
What? There is no such thing as a “top 80%.” 80% isn’t selectiveness, it’s open admissions – almost everyone with a pulse. That being said, it’s not even true. While men *rate* on a bell curve, 66% of their messages were aimed towards the top 33% of women.
Jack –
When many men see attempts to maximize their attractiveness (whether it’s something as simple as choosing the right picture or as involved as choosing a new wardrobe) as inherently effeminate, un-American or both, one of the unfortunate consequences is being found less attractive. Also, online daters are not a random sample of people. They are self-selected from the general population. Some may wish to expand their already sufficient dating pool or find someone within a specific niche. Others may use it as a venue of last resort. Online daters – of both genders – *may* very well be disproportionately less attractive than average. If less attractive 35 year old men are looking at less attractive 21 year old women online – as the same data source shows that they frequently do, it makes sense that they find them disproportionately attractive, even when that less attractive 21 year old’s age peers are finding so many prospects in college and/or various social activities in an age group rife with singles that they wouldn’t even think to go online. The asymmetrical matching that men desire may inflate their female attractiveness perceptions, and women’s passive methods of finding dates online where they only look at the profiles of people that look for/message them may cause them to underrate men online in general based on the profiles of the men who contact them the most often in particular. The known tendency of men with a lower than average response rate to react to this by e-mail blasting women with form messages could definitely be a contributor.
jack – isn’t belief in a soulmate one of the problems? That there’s only one person in the world meant for you who will finish your sentences and revolutionize your life, when in reality there’s a fairly large group of people that would be more than sufficient, but probably not *perfect* for you?
Also, this whole business happens with “betas” and men as well. A dude used to text me whining about how I’m the only girl who wants him and how sad he is because he can’t find someone to be with – who fit the appropriate criteria – until I finally had to have a “Come to Jesus” convo about it. He said outright that he wanted to have sex with me, but not a relationship – despite his self-professed, much lamented profound lack of female options re: either one. I refused to sleep with him, but the circumstances were exactly the same as the alpha male/average girl scenario that you say is created by a surplus of average girls aiming for highly desirable guys.
@37
I’m curious Jack, if you only had your pulse quicken over 2% of the population what were you doing trying to date average women? I mean what were you hoping to achieve…a platonic relationship of some kind? or do you find you can begin to desire a woman once you get to know her even if she is average? I know that’s what can happen for me. An “average” man becomes attractive once I know him.
And what about the #9’s and 10’s who weren’t punching above their weight, but still ended up in unhappy relationships and are still looking for love? Do you find any person whose “been damaged” as a possibility?
Jack’s being labeled “bitter,” but he actually is just voicing the frustration of living what Evan has written about in some of his other posts.
Many, many women go for the hot alpha and wind up with a broken heart. Evan has warned us about the reality of the hot alphas. Not the best relationship material. Even worse for the average girl who’s just being used sexually by them.
I was friends once with a girl who was a 4 – 5 in looks. Personality, a 3 – 4. Insecure, shy, socially ackward. BUT she had NO interest in average men who gave her attention. She ONLY wanted the hottest, alpha men who could easily get model types. I use to point out nice, attractive but average men, and she poo-poo’ed them without a glance.
YES, cute men would use her when she made it easy for them to. YES, she did get her feelings hurt often. Resulting in even lower self-esteem.
She wound up marrying a man her equal who adored her. But I often wondered if she felt like she settled and didn’t appreciate him. He puts up with, and nurtures the baggage of her own making.
I think what Jack is voicing is the frustration of of dating these types of women who don’t date in their own league and appreciate the wonderful beta men who should be recognized as the PRIZES they are, and not day-old-bread to settle for because they’re all that’s left.
@Starthrower: I calibrate how “brutal” I am by how general my terms are. When talking about large groups, I will be brutally honest about my thoughts. If I was discussing a particular person’s situation, I would be much more diplomatic and have more empathy. Individual people are often wonderful. But put them into a group and the group dynamic makes them into monsters.
@Collector: Thank you.
@BeenThereDoneThat: Fair enough. But please understand that I am accounting for trends rather than seeking to explain any individual person’s situation.
@Annie: Thank you for this question. My pulse also quickens for a whole bag of Doritos more than it does for a bag of carrot sticks. That visceral attraction for those amazingly hot women is a low-level biological response, it is not based on knowing anything I know about them, or their relationship suitability for me. And I know this about myself.
I have slowly trained myself to not eat foods that are crap. I ate salad until I began to crave those foods. Correlation to dating: I avoided looking at or pining after hotties, since I knew I could not get one. I concentrated on average girls, you know – the ones with a the less than perfect complexion, but a cute figure. Or the one with the cute face, but a chunky trunk. It is not irritating to be ignored by hotties. It is irritating to be ignored by average-looking women who insist on getting pumped and dumped by the bad boys they keep chasing.
Now that I have turned 40, these women are suddenly appearing out of nowhere (kid in tow), and giving me lots of interest. Singleness has never looked so good. Some of them have been very sexually forward with me, but even though they still look pretty good, I’m not going to take advantage of them since I will not commit to them.
Regarding the 9s and 10s who are unhappy, sure why not? I’m 80% about personality anyway, as long as a girl is in reasonable physical shape. I’m 5’6″, which of course eliminates me from probably 70% of all women’s interest since I know lots of 5’2″ girls who will settle for nothing less than a 5’10” guy (the heart wants what it wants, I guess). It is a bit off-putting to be told you are not tall enough by a girl 4 inches shorter who has a chunky butt (guess I’m just a “bitter male” – ha!).
To finish my answer to Annie’s question, I focused on the women that were in that middle group, but so many of them were fixated on competing with their more attractive friends that they would rather go dateless than “settle”. It is my intent to assist these women in finishing their commitment to not settle. I will not be part of them leading a life of dissatisfaction by settling for an ordinary nice guy like me. They held firm for 20 years, and they should see it through.
Know what phrase I get to say a lot these days? “Let’s just be friends”.
@Jadafisk:
I would have to ponder your thoughts on the online situation more, since I am speaking more about in-person meeting/dating.
Isn’t belief in a soulmate one of the problems? That there’s only one person in the world meant for you who will finish your sentences and revolutionize your life, when in reality there’s a fairly large group of people that would be more than sufficient, but probably not *perfect* for you?
Yes, this is an enormous problem. Soul-mate-itis has been inflamed by pop-culture cues taken from movies, TV, and so on. Some religious denominations also contribute to this in fair measure. Most of us would probably be happier being married to someone our parents picked out for us than someone we picked ourselves.
Also, this whole business happens with “betas” and men as well. A dude used to text me whining about how I’m the only girl who wants him and how sad he is because he can’t find someone to be with – who fit the appropriate criteria – until I finally had to have a “Come to Jesus” convo about it. He said outright that he wanted to have sex with me, but not a relationship — despite his self-professed, much lamented profound lack of female options re: either one. I refused to sleep with him, but the circumstances were exactly the same as the alpha male/average girl scenario that you say is created by a surplus of average girls aiming for highly desirable guys.
Thank you for bringing this up as well. You are 100% correct that it is not a female-only characteristic.
In my opinion, the major difference is the level to which it is encouraged/accepted culturally regarding males and females. With men, we are more willing to admit the truth about the ugliness of human motivation. Lots of guys want to get laid, but not commit. Beta males are a bit more commitment-oriented, but they are still males, after all.
The point is that the girls should be a whole lot more careful about giving it up for ANY male. Historical injunctions about premarital sex were not there to prevent the having of fun, they were there to protect most women, and beta males. Alpha males need very little protection – obviously.
A young man is usually horny enough to lie to himself and a girl about his intentions. Result = sex. The girl is often gullible enough to believe him. Men were the forwards, women were the goalie, and while there was a lot of frustration, everything eventually worked out much of the time.
Then, feminists starting promoting a deeply misbegotten notion of the “double-standard”: “Why is it that a man is a stud if he sleeps around, but a woman is a slut?”
First, this was false from the get-go. Truly high-status men were SOOO high-status that they could AFFORD to indulge in low-character behavior. The female notion of locker-room high-fiving over who got laid is a work of complete fantasy. Such back-slapping is only the domain of a handful of frat-boy types.
Religious people used marriage as the starting point for legitimate sex. If you are of a secular persuasion, you will need to find some other standard to use to determine an appropriate level of commitment. Wait until you’ve moved in together, whatever, but third date sex = social destruction.
But men, most men, even beta men, will USE YOU FOR SEX if you make it easy enough. Just like women will USE MEN for oil-changing, spider-killing, and sofa-moving if men make it TOO EASY. (Beta orbiter syndrome).
We need to recognize and ADMIT this unchangeable truth about men and women:
Many men will use women for sex if they can get away with it. With predictably bad results.
Many women will give it up very quickly if the guy is high-status enough. With predictably bad results.
“I would have to ponder your thoughts on the online situation more, since I am speaking more about in-person meeting/dating.”
I discussed online dating because the stat you cited about female rating of male attractiveness came from data analysis exclusively from online daters.
Also, in the circumstances you delineate, how are women expected to satisfy their natural sexual desires if they’re expected to play gatekeeper with few “slip-ups” (lol) throughout 1-2 decades of singlehood? In the olden days, early marriages – often preceded by “oops” pregnancies because people couldn’t keep it in their pants for even that long – were the norm because of an understanding that people just aren’t good at that. Are perhaps years of celibacy between boyfriends really a realistic prescription for most adult women? If a woman wants to couple up really badly so she can have sex on a regular basis again, that’s going to have an adverse effect on her decision-making.
This sounds a little bit like me back in the day. I was extremely hurt by an ex girlfriend and immediately put my guard up and swore it would never happen again. How can a big strong macho man like me
get all cut up when a woman he has allowed himself to fall for ceases to have the same feelings?
This meant that in the relationships I had later on suffered because of my lack of commitment. I did not allow myself to fall in love and I never let a girl fully get to know me inside out. Then, I met my current girlfriend. At the beginning I was my usual guarded self, determined that I didn’t want a serious relationship.
However, as time passed and we went through a lot of things together, my feelings began to change. I started to see this girl for who she was and not compare her to previous girlfriends. She was nothing like them. My guard lowered and I found my soul mate.
Every single girl/guy out there is different. You must not judge anyone on someone else’s behaviour. If you treat a new partner like your ex, it will be likely that they will start behaving the same and you will
experience the same problems. A new relationship is NEW, so start afresh. Don’t live in the past.
@45
Interesting comments. I’ve been reading more about religious understandings of human sexuality and I will now humbly admit, I think we got things a little bit wrong. And that’ a lot coming from me considering how much of a religious-hating athiest I’ve been most of my life(not so much anymore though).
The one thing that bothers me about your comments is perhaps the unfortunate implication that men only want women “for sex”. I know sex can be a huge motivating factor for people(particularly men), but given the ‘free sex” culture, if a man doesn’t want to commit because he can have sex with as many randoms that he wants, do I really want him?
I don’t like the idea of artificially inflating the “cost” of sex. I don’t want men commiting only because they now think this women is going to provide him with sex the rest of his life, while he provides her with financial means. It’s little more than socially acceptable prostitution.
Add to that, there are plenty of women that are using men also, and it seems to be along the lines of attention(including sexual attention). IF a woman gets hurt having sex with a guy she doesn’t know, then what was her motivation for having sex? Was she having sex because she wanted him to “like her”? Or just because she wanted to enjoy that experience with that man? I think some women really do lie to themselves about how much they are willing to use sex to get a guy, rather than have sex because they want to enjoy that experience with that man.
So I tend to agree with what you are saying, I just find the whole idea of not putting out to get a guy to commit is a fairly repulsive. It just seems so manipulative. I would like to think a man wants to be with me, because of who I am…not JUST because he wants access to a vagina. Does that make sense?
Well, most of my guy friends admit that main motivation for them in dating is sex. So, i don’t know – i think it IS main motivation.
Jadafisk:
I will say that I think it is probable that the selection effect of online dating is less so now that it is a more mainstream thing. A good friend of mine meets a lot of very attractive younger women on POF, even though it seems these women also meet men elsewhere.
But I do believe that the view that 80% of men not being “attractive enough” is easily observed in popular culture, even though it may be difficult to quantify to the same level of numeric accuracy.
Part of the problem is that with the marriage age moving later in life, young men and women are seeking “fun partners” rather than good marriage prospects. When you select for entertainment value, men will select for hotness, and women will select for hotness/status.
Some attributes that lead to this:
Men like variety. A virtual harem is just fine for many men (note the rock star/groupie dynamic). Ultra-famous men COULD pick one super hot girl and keep her, but it seems many of them prefer and endless stream of average-to-hot women, variety being more exciting than a single hot girl. Women don’t like being in a virtual harem, but many will tolerate it in exchange for attention from a rock star. This dynamic plays out similarly to less degree with all high-status men.
Women have less preference for variety, preferring one very high-status man to multiple average-status men. High-status (i.e. super-hot) women COULD have man-harems, but don’t seem to do that. They may trade them in a lot (Liz Taylor), but the only time they are working on two men is during the trade-in period. Also, most men are not willing to share access to one woman.
This is further modified by the fact that it is empirically shown that women prefer a man who is higher-status than she is. Higher income, taller, more socially dominant, more famous, etc. I recommend googling the phrase “apex fallacy” for more on that topic.
Dating was once a means to marriage. Now it is a separate consumer-society event, with entirely different rules and dynamics. As such, we have become spoiled, viewing the whole world as a giant customer-service department created for the sole purpose of fulfilling our consumeristic desires (whether material, career, or romantic). Hence the soul-mate disease.
**Side note: One does NOT “find” a soul mate. One must put in much personal effort to mate two souls. This is a do-it-yourself thing.**
To your final question regarding gatekeeping and celibacy.
If you are religious, go with your beliefs. If you are not religious, you could always let your conscience be your guide, but doing so is fraught with risk. Your conscience may not be the best method to ensure that you maximize your relationship potential.
Your question:
“…how are women expected to satisfy their natural sexual desires if they’re expected to play gatekeeper with few “slip-ups” (lol) throughout 1-2 decades of singlehood?”
I am not promoting abstinence, although it is a legitimate technique. Rather, I am promoting not being stupid with your resources. When a high-status guy starts flirting with Average Alice, ask yourself if he wants a relationship or a roll in the hay. You get one guess.
Just like most young naive men think they can beat the odds and drive like maniacs without getting killed (I’m a better driver then them!!), so too do naive young women trust so completely in their instincts when giving it up for guys (I just knooowww we had a connection!!)
Let logic be your guide. Women who DESIRE RELATIONSHIPS should not put out for men until the men have demonstrated some high level of commitment. Hint: Your emotions are not a reliable means of detecting commitment. Ever. Yes, not ever.
The teenage fantasy of being ‘swept off your feet’ and ‘just knowing’ is foolish and destructive. Instead of “follow your heart”, we should be saying “use your head”.
Jack
Everything you say is absolutely 100% correct – so women listen up !
When [email protected]voices the comment that only 1 in 20 men are sexually attractive, she voices the opinion of most women, and like comments can be read all over this blog.
Saying that’s fair because men are only interested in 8 out of 10 women just will not cut it. It is down to women to compromise, because it is THEIR standards that are too high.
On a topic that was brought up earlier, I’m not sure that ‘never giving up’ is such a good idea. I’m open to persuasion on this.
My experience of life is that “what doesn’t kill you makes you stronger” is completely untrue. We are damaged by life events, and we never completely heal. So if we are continually rejected by others, I can agree that the pain may be less severe, but we are still being damaged, if only subconsciously.
I believe that it is only worth enduring failure if you have some chance of succeeding. Rich people become so because of their dissatisfaction with being poor. Married people become so because of their dissatisfaction with being single. They are motivated to changing their lives.
However contentment comes from accepting your current condition.
Evan has said that unhappiness comes from not having your actions aligned with your goals, but I think a true recipe for a life time of unhappiness is having your actions aligned with your goals, but always failing.
For many men it may be better to turn to pornography, than suffer a lifetime of rejection. Equally many women are just not in the game.
I know one dating Guru on the net who makes it clear – do all you can to attract a partner. Put yourself out there. Create a decent profile. But if that fails – GIVE UP, maintain a positive attitude.
I realise this is controversial, but sometimes goals are unobtainable. A friend was once asked by her teacher, what is it that you most want in life ? To be taller she replied.
Funniest line of the day: “Individual people are often wonderful.”
Annie:
I am refraining from bringing my moral views into the discussion because many people will not share my moral/religious beliefs, and therefore we will not be discussing the issue from a common perspective.
Absent SOME sort of moral foundation, whatever it may be, humans will generally behave just like reproductively-obsessed animals.
Look at how many years it takes to turn a slobbering infant into a productive citizen – it is not an automatic process. And some parents do a better job than others.
While I share your view that it would be optimum if men and women approached each other with respect and with love as the real goal, we have to face the fact that many people are not that way. This means that certain self-preservation methods should be used. It can seem a little cynical, but we only get one shot in life. You must have your guard up at least a little bit.
This is why CHARACTER MATTERS. Without character, without a shared value system, most relationships are a roll of the dice. It pains me to see how many people will compromise on character because they are looking to optimize sexual attraction (often at the expense of EVERYTHING ELSE).
A common whine I hear from men and women both “You can’t help who you’re attracted to.”
Oh, yes you can. Just like you can change your preference for healthy foods, exercise, career advancement, academic success – all of these take WORK, WORK, WORK. And sacrificing pleasure for personal growth.
For some reason, so many people will maximize sexual attraction, and then whine about how bad their relationship is. That is like a fat person maximizing meals for flavor, and then whining that they are 300 pounds.
As a side note, sooner or later people are going to have to learn the difference between “love” and “lust”. Too many female friends of mine only date men who give them a high level of physical response. They are predictably very unhappy people.
There are lots of assumptions here I could comment on and attempt rebuttals to, but I don’t feel like it would be worth the energy.
So, I’ll just make this point. A lot of the problem in my view is that many of us are so damned attached to things we desire in a partner, that we can’t see what’s important and lasting and what’s basically fleeting and not so important. Looks are fleeting, end of story. Money and material possessions are fleeting, end of story. The initial romance is totally fleeting, as is the chemistry high that comes with it. And yet, these kinds of things are often treated by both men and women as areas of non-compromise when younger, and grudging compromise as we get older. Which is sheer stupidity if you ask me.
We compromise on the that which matters most, like integrity, mutual support and friendship, compassion, etc., and then wonder why we’re alone and miserable, making gross generalizations about the dating pool all around us.
@ Jack #44
I didn’t get that you were commenting on trends, however I don’t date trends; I date individuals.
@44 and 54: I dated a trend once. It was up and down.
I find Jack’s post extraordinarily helpful. One dilemma for women is that our friends are always telling us how beautiful we are. And if we show up with a 5, our friends tell us that we “deserve” better. So it’s very difficult to know our value in the dating marketplace.
Let logic be your guide. Women who DESIRE RELATIONSHIPS should not put out for men until the men have demonstrated some high level of commitment.
This still produces the aforementioned practical dilemma… it can be years until a woman finds a man who is willing to “demonstrate a high level of commitment.” What you’re suggesting would indeed entail prolonged states of celibacy for many adults. Additionally, the vast majority of men won’t move in non-platonically with a woman that they’ve never slept with.
Practical dilemma, yes. Tragedy, no.
Nothing is free. And if the price of a good relationship later is that one must not have uninterrupted access to sex, well, tough cookies.
No pain, no gain.
Kate, #56,
This is often true for me. I’m known for being attracted to men who by society’s standards would be considered average. To ME they are not average looking. I always find interesting features more attractive than classic features. Add humor and integrity and I’m VERY interested.
My friends joke that I’ll never have to worry about one of my friends wanting my men because physically, they’re not all that. And they’d tell me I’m not dating in my league at all. I started to second guess my choices but the answer is to know thyself.
I know what I’m attracted to and I’m comfortable with it. My “average” guys have treated me very well (can’t always say that for their “hotter” husbands). And at the end of the day, I’m the one who be living with the man I choose to marry, not anyone else.
Kate candy said: (#56)
“One dilemma for women is that our friends are always telling us how beautiful we are. And if we show up with a 5, our friends tell us that we ‘deserve’ better.”
One of my friends is 50. She’s slender and extremely fit (and she exercises hard for that body). She has a flawless complexion that any 30-year-old would envy. She’s a hottie.
Her boyfriend is 53 and looks his age (or slightly older). He’s tall, thin with a full head of hair, but he’s kind of goofy-looking and not toned at all.
Once you get to know them, you realize that she’s lucky to have him. She openly admits that she has anger issues. I’ve been around her enough to realize that she’s critical of almost everyone, and she gets frustrated by some of the most inconsequential things. He, on the other hand, is happy, friendly, outgoing and very laid back.
Once you move past the superficial, you realize that he’s a better catch than she is.
If your friends (or your family) tell you that you deserve someone who treats you better, that’s advice that you should strongly consider. If they think you deserve someone who looks better, then you probably don’t want to rely on their advice.
Well the better catch is obviously dating her for her fit body. So to him she seems a catch, right? Equal exchange type of situation…
When women tell their women friends “you can do better honey”, are they actually trying to optimize their female friend’s dating life? Or is it something a little more destructive than that?
1) If an average-looking woman starts dating an average man, it puts a “market value” on her. Then, her average-looking friends will start to push her to dump him because it highlights the truth – that this is the type of man they can realistically get. If they can all remain single, picky, and catty, then they are all able to maintain the self-delusion that Mr. Big is just around the corner; one need only be stubborn enough to hold out for their soul-mate (loin-mate is more like it…)
2) They are possibly jealous (men don’t typically have “frenemies”). Some women will sabotage the happy dating life of other women because they themselves are single. I’ve seen it happen; some female friend of mine will start dating an average guy, and the rest of the women start a whispering campaign about what a “dork” he is. Eventually, guy gets dumped because women are afraid of falling outside the fence of popular approval.
Women are cultural enforcers. While men are often in the most visible positions of power, the cultural enforcement that women exercise over each other is very evident.
Men don’t have “frenemies” ?????? They don’t try and sabotage their buddies love life ? Read the blog entry ” I cheated on my girlfriend . . .”. When a player guy thinks he’s going to lose one of player buds, trying to get him to cheat on his girlfriend is NOT uncommon behavior. In fact, it’s pretty common for male friends to rag on their male buddies as soon as they become monogamous with a girl. Calling him “p—-y whipped” etc.
So the theory being pushed above is that men only really want sex and women only really want relationships. Thus women holding on to the sex card until she gets into a relationship because she will be hurt otherwise.
Personally as long as I know I’m having casual sex I’m not likely to have my feelings hurt. It’s the misleading and lying that sucks. And to which you say “Of course men and lie and cheat for sex. It’s par for the course.” To which I say yes men have to lie and cheat for sex because of the slut shaming society we live in that forces women to limit their partners. Which means women will focus their efforts on the best candidates (i.e. high status)
For example last week I went to a friends house for dinner and ended up in a threesome with her and her husband. I’m not particularly attracted to either one of them but I was bored and horny and I have to relation obligations at the moment.
Now in the straight community this story decreases my status as a partner. I’m a less exclusive club to get into. In the gay community it’s brunch conversation. And someone despite have oodles of unfettered access to shame-free sex they’re still fighting tooth and nail for the right to marry because most of them want to marry at some point.
At some point in my mid twenties I lost the sexually free person and was trying to a “good” girl for some man I’m supposed to meet at some point. Screw it. I Think the world needs more happy friendly sex. I’m reinstating the karma fuck (Ego building sex with the neediess man you find preferably out of town so you can slip away like some craptastic romance novel without dealing with needy) Level of awe derived for needy guy should build your ego while random sex with hot girl should give needy a little bit of the confidence he so desperately needs. Practiced annually or when you’ve indulged to heavily in a particularly hot jerk. IF we all threw a little bit more out their these bitter whiny guys that have let themselves go may make more of an effort more pleasant in behavior and appearance.
Orgasms for all!
I think it is crazy that Michelle blames her relationship problems on the “commitment-phobic jerks” she dated in the past. Did it ever occur to her that she might have been doing something to end up with those guys? She probably either (a) did something that made those guys not want to marry her, or (b) overlooked many marriage-minded men so that she could date the type of guys who were either out of her league or would otherwise probably never consider marrying her in the first place.
#62- lol…love it!
@ Shanon #62,
I noticed on Facebook that Sunday is National Orgasm Day.
lol great we already have a holiday.
I am a divorced middle aged woman. I am very popular on the internet dating sites because of my looks. Normally get 15 to 25 emails or winks per day. I have dated many guys in the short time that I have been divorced. Only had one LTR and he turned out to be disordered. My experience plays out like this. I get the email, exchange a few, then the phone chat, then the first date. Usually the first date goes like a charm. Then comes the daily texting, then the second date. By the second date, the hands are touching my butt, shoulders and anywhere else they can get to on a bar stool. Then they work the word “sex” into any part of the conversation they can. They ask me why i am so reserved. Then the walk to the car and then the attempted tongue down the throat which I fend off. They take this as a rejection even though I say nicely that I am not comfortable with that on a second date and could we just have a nice sweet kiss. Then the “I had a nice time with you” text. Then they disappear. Men at middle age are usually divorced and ready to sow their oats and relive their young adulthood. If your legs are not wide open they point and click and find someone whose are. Ask any middle aged woman.
shanon-
Too many of those, however, and you won’t get a man to commit to you. Guys care about the number. Even “man-whores” care about the number.
True.
But your willingness to give pity sex to “needy, whiny men” is quite philanthropic of you. Sort of sexual marxism, is it not? To each, according to his needs, from each, according to her abilities.
Now there’s a redistributionist plan that might not be so readily accepted by “strong” feminists.
@52
Thanks Jack, I appreciate your thoughts.
I think you are right. It is ultimately character that individuals have that defines a relationship. I am also unsure of why people end up in repeatedly bad relationships, based on “attraction” without realizing there is a problem. I suspect it is an inability that we have to accept we are actually animals at heart, and that we have to work on our humanity and restrict our pleasures to gain something greater.
Not sure though. It is a some-what new line of thinking for me. 🙂
[email protected]: Speak for yourself only, please. You cannot speak for all men.
It’s always funny to me when guys do that. Seems unnecessarily defensive. As in, safety in numbers. Ha!!!
Or are men as a group just more socially brainwashed as to what it means to be “a man” and can’t speak as individuals?
What your idea of Marxism is missing, just to point it out, is an acknowledgment of the “needs” of the woman, which would also get their due under your “redistribution” plan. His “needs” are not more important than hers in this scenario.
Jack said: (#68)
“Guys care about the number. Even ‘man-whores’ care about the number.”
I don’t care how many sex partners a woman had before dating me. I don’t even know how many sex partners my fiancée had (and she doesn’t know how many I’ve had).
Some men care about the number of sex partners. Jack, I’m sure you care about the number of sex partners.
Why is the number important to you?
Why do you believe the number would be important to a man-whore? (A man-whore definitely isn’t going to care about the morality of promiscuity.)
What possible difference does the number of sex partners make?
It doesn’t tell you whether the woman has an STD. I dated a virgin who had an STD; she’d gotten it from a transfusion.
It doesn’t tell you whether she’ll cheat. The most promiscuous man I know has never cheated on anyone.
It doesn’t tell you how much experience she has. A person gets a lot more experience from one ten-year monogamous relationship than they’ll get from 50 one-night stands.
It doesn’t tell you whether the woman will be a good lover. Effort, enthusiasm and a willingness to learn trump a large amount of experience.
It doesn’t even tell you much about a woman’s moral standards. I knew a woman who had no moral objections to premarital sex, but she remained a virgin into her late thirties. She was unattractive, socially awkward and painfully shy … which doesn’t lead to an active sex life.
Given how little information you can learn from the number of sex partners, why does it matter to you how many a woman had?
Bettina-
I am accurately speaking for most men. Since “too many” is a relative number, to concept is valid. Each man has his own idea of how much sexual experience is “too much” when it comes to deciding on a woman’s LTR potential. (cue the “double standard” music, please).
A girl with “too many” one night stands is a deal-breaker for most men. Double standard? Sure, but life is full of double standards, and most will not ever be eliminated.
Women complaining about this is pointless; it is just as pointless as low-income men complaining that a hot low-income woman will not date them. Life is not fair. People will not generally go against their human nature just because someone has decided to scold them about double standards.
Personally, I am beyond the reach of such attempts to scold public opinion. I’m a bad person by your definition? Okay, whatever.
I want a girl with a low partner count because I think it is an indicator of good impulse control and a good indication of future faithfulness. I am one of a multitude of men who feel this way. And all the attempts to scold this preference out of us is likely to meet with failure.
karl and jack going toe-to-toe. i’m popping my popcorn right now! we need evan to do a boxing announcer kinda thing….
jack said: (#72)
“I want a girl with a low partner count because I think it is an indicator of good impulse control […]”
For about two to three years in my early twenties I was somewhat promiscuous (and deliberately avoiding monogamy). About half my sex partners are from that short period of time. In the past 16 years, I have only had sex within longer, exclusive relationships. I’ve accumulated sex partners much more slowly during that period.
Some of my romantic relationships didn’t become sexual, but of the ones that did, I think the median time between the first date and the first time we had sex was about 6 weeks. I don’t think too many people would refer to that as “poor impulse control.”
My current relationship (with my fiancée) is my first relationship to last past 1 year. If you do the math, you’ll notice that you can fit a lot of 3 to 9 month relationships into 16 years.
If a woman becomes sexually active in her teens, she could easily reach 10 sex partners (more than the lifetime average for men or women) by her late 20s just by having monogamous relationships.
Using the number of sex partners as an indicator of impulse control is like using the size of a car as an indicator of gas mileage. It works great if you buy a Mini-Cooper … and not so well if you buy a Maserat Gran Turismo.
You want to marry a woman who has good impulse control? Find one who has good impulse control. It’s the best indicator.
jack said: (#72)
“I want a girl with a low partner count because I think it is […] a good indication of future faithfulness.”
An ex-girlfriend of mine had one sex-partner before me, her ex-husband. He was her first sex partner, she was his first sex partner.
His second sex partner was the man she caught him in bed with.
Just out of curiosity, do you have a low partner count?
I have to agree with Karl. What possible difference could the number of sexual partners make? I also have to add why would a person even ask another person that question? Or why would a person volunteer that information to another person?
Karl made some good points about how the number of sexual partners means nothing. Take me for example. When I was 20-years-old and a virgin, I was raped. As is often the case, after I was raped, I began having sex indiscriminately, racking up a significant number of partners. Realizing it was a problem, I went to therapy and found out why I was behaving in such a manner.
Then I met my now ex-husband. For 20 years, I was with no else, only him. In the 5 years since the divorce, I have only been with two guys. One of whom I am still with today.
So, if Jack looked purely at my “number,” he’d reject me as woman with “too much” experience instead of getting to know me and finding out that the truth behind my “number” is something entirely different.
It is sad that Jack and men like him may have missed out on so many wonderful women, just because they care about a woman’s “number.” Kinda goes to what Evan was saying in his blog entry, “You have to assume the best in men, rather than the worst in men.” The same is true with women.
@72
It’s not a double standard as long as one accepts that some women also want the same thing(Like me). I have no interest in being with a man whose had lots of 1-night stands, watches copious amounts of porn or visits prostitutes.
Who wants to be with a man who cannot bond with a woman sexually?
For dating, I don’t care either.
Perhaps I should have said “marriage” instead of LTR, because I was intending to discuss the LTR-to-marriage situation.
Studies show high partner counts are closely correlated with divorce and other issues. I’m just a fan of science, I guess.
Women should care more about how promiscuous a man has been, but I always shocked how little the will weigh that in the final analysis.
People who cheapen sex by making it a short term recreational pursuit instead of relationship glue are a bad bet for relationships. A ugly truth, but a truth nonetheless.
In selecting a potential mother for my children, her “number” is extremely crucial. If the reason is not obvious to you, Karl, then have at it. High-number girls are plentiful.
I think the real issues here is that we want to differentiate between “fun” relationships and “serious” relationships but once you have sex with someone that line gets blurred. You have a natural tendency to fall in love and someone gets hurt. Someone always gets hurt not matter how often people say that it’s just a “fun” relationship. Once again…i think women jeopardize their own relationships by having sex too soon, and they make it harder for other women who seeks serious relationships because those guys say, oh you don’t want to have sex on a first date, FINE there are TONS of women who will. So…often women have nobody to blame but themselves.
“it is just as pointless as low-income men complaining that hot low-income women will not date them”
But…I work with low income people and that happens all. of. the. time. I see smoking hot low income girls with families that they built with class peers or boyfriends that they acquired from their social circles. The prettiest girls often seem to be among the very first to end up pregnant, unless they have very strict parents. Some of these women financially support their boyfriends. Some of them met their boyfriends/spouses at work, in positions where they draw similar incomes (in many restaurants/retail stores, .50 is considered an adequate “raise” after two or three years), or schools that are segregated by class. Many of them think of men from “higher” classes as inherently effete and largely unappealing for that reason, and/or way less pious than they’d be comfortable with. If these low income men who are complaining are themselves lacking in charisma or looks, then that’s where the reason lies. They may be complaining about hot guys without money getting hot girls without money, and that deserves a big ol’ eyeroll. But most people – including the exceedingly attractive – date (or, um… “talk”) and marry primarily within their own income level, no matter what it is.
@ Jack #72,
I want a girl with a low partner count because I think it is an indicator of good impulse control and a good indication of future faithfulness. I am one of a multitude of men who feel this way. And all the attempts to scold this preference out of us is likely to meet with failure.
That’s a fascinating statement Jack, considering all I have seen from you on here is scolding of women. You can be angry all you want to about what women do but you can’t change it by complaining about women any more than we can change men by complaining about them.
““it is just as pointless as low-income men complaining that hot low-income women will not date them””
I did not assert that it doesn’t happen. I asserted that when it does happen, it could seem unfair, but there it pointless to complain about it. I was not describing an issue, I was making a comparison.
Karl:
Wow! You found an exception? Holy cow – I have to rethink my whole thesis. You are making the mistake in reasoning that a concept is invalid if there are counterexamples. Your personal anecdotal experiences are not going to sway me away from the larger truth.
Regarding impulse control: There are a lot of ways to screen for poor impulse control. This is just one of many.
Annie:
Thanks for understanding my point.
jack said: (#77)
“Studies show high partner counts are closely correlated with divorce and other issues. I’m just a fan of science, I guess.”
I’m a fan of studies that I can read. Would you mind citing to the studies you’re referring to? I’m a fan of science as well, so I like to verify that the scientific method was used. (Most of the studies on this topic come from conservative Christians, not peer-reviewed scientific journals.)
As far as I’m able to tell, there is one academic study that supports your position … sort of. There’s not a correlation between the woman’s number of sex partners and the divorce rate. There’s a correlation between the woman having had premarital sex (or cohabiting) with anyone besides her husband. So if you believe the study, the only relevant number is 0. The difference between 2 and 20 is inconsequential.
More interestingly, I could find no studies which investigated whether the man’s number of sex partners correlated to the divorce rate.
Barring evidence to the contrary, I suspect that men’s behavior has similar impact as women’s behavior. Can you see any logical reason that it would be otherwise.
Jack, that implies that you’ve already screwed your chances if you’ve had sex with two women. And if you’re utterly convinced that the number of sex partners impacts your marriage, you should have started with the person you actually have control over.
jack said: (#77)
“In selecting a potential mother for my children, her ‘number’ is extremely crucial.”
And for the potential father for your children the number is … somewhat relevant?
If you’re absolutely opposed to premarital sex for moral reasons, if you intend to show up to the altar as a version, if it’s important to you that your wife share that value, then I’d agree that the number (zero) is going to be important.
But I’ve rather directly asked you about that already, and you seem to be avoiding answering.
jack said: (#77)
“People who cheapen sex by making it a short term recreational pursuit instead of relationship glue are a bad bet for relationships.”
If a woman has 10 previous sex-parnters, all from previous monogamous relationships that lasted months (or longer), I would say that she is a much better bet than a woman who has 3 previous sex partners, two of whom were one-night stands that occurred during her marriage to the third.
Everything is in the details, including whether the woman (or man) views sex as a cheap recreational pursuit or the glue for relationships. The number of sex partners, disconnected from those details, tells you nothing.
jack said: (#77)
“If the reason is not obvious to you, Karl, then have at it. High-number girls are plentiful.”
You know what’s obvious to me? I’m not marrying a “partner count.” I’m not marrying “studies.” I’m not marrying a “correlation” or an “indicator.”
I’m marrying a person.
And it doesn’t matter how many scientific studies indicate that the correlations are in your favor, if the two of you can’t get along, day-in and day-out for decades, if the two of you can’t decide that you want to be together (not just once, but day-after-day for decades), then your marriage is going to fail.
And since you’re “a fan of science,” you might want to learn the difference between a correlation and reality.
Karl’s responses to Jack- wow, amazing. I just wish this was televised! lol- I knew who’d I’d pick as the winner.
Jack, since “number count” is that important to you, may I ask how you normally go about obtaining this number? Because, well, of all questions I’ve been asked on dates, no one has ever asked me this one, and I haven’t asked anyone either. One, it’s probably going to be pretty darn high, and two, what do I care? How do the partners he had before me affect me here and now?
I’ve got good news for you though, if you’re looking for a “low-number girl” (sheesh), you will certainly get a low-number girl – meaning, a girl who, in answer to your question, will give you a low number. Personally, I would not date a guy who’d try to slap a number on me and have that number define me as a person. Even if the darn number is low in his opinion and I pass his test, I’m still not interested.
I find Jack’s position reasonable.
Karl,
Have you heard of how many women in marital relationships lose interest in sex completely? Why do you think this happens?
Have you heard of men, that are incapable of “making love” to their wives, unless their wives “do certain things” to titilate them?
This is what happens, when your early and main sexual experiences are based around lust and not love. You lose the ability to connect with your partner sexually. The fact that you love them..simply does not create “desire” for them.
It is problematic for men, because they are easily able to seperate their emotions from the woman they are having sex with. If this is all they’ve experienced, then a woman is there to titalate..she is a means to an end. He is not attatched to HER he is attatched to SEX.
It is problematic for women, because our desire is not based on testosterone…therefore there is no significant hormone to keep our libido’s high. The female libido, is highly dependant on the male and if our sexual encounters are not connected with love, then sex becomes either attention based, or meaningless to us.
Humans are not naturally monogamous. This is a given. But IF you are looking for a LTR(marriage), then your best bet is to find some-one with the correct values to match your own, and some-one who has not used sex for titilation and attention but has willingly chosen to associate sex with love.
Sex has one of the strongest reward/response systems in our brain, more powerful than even the reward of food. We are easily conditioned by our sexual experiences.
The grand-daddy of porn, Hugh Heffner can have sex with as many beautiful women in a row that he can get his hands on…he is also incapable of climaxing with a woman. He can only orgasm, looking at still pictures of women. That is the end result of using sex for titilation. He’s done an outstanding job, of taking the one thing that can truly bond a man and a woman and turn it into something completely unnatural. The inability for a man to even become aroused.
You are the one attempting to change my mind. I have already said you are free to screen as you please. I’m sure you would be able to find opposing studies.
I am confident that my screening criteria is valid for me, and that is all I care about.
Annie #85,
“The grand-daddy of porn, Hugh Heffner can have sex with as many beautiful women in a row that he can get his hands on…he is also incapable of climaxing with a woman. He can only orgasm, looking at still pictures of women. That is the end result of using sex for titilation. He’s done an outstanding job, of taking the one thing that can truly bond a man and a woman and turn it into something completely unnatural. The inability for a man to even become aroused.”
Hugh Hefner is 85 years old. Most people his age don’t remember who they are or where they live. I’d say it’s pretty difficult to remain alive at 85, much less aroused. If not being able to climax with a woman is this guy’s biggest problem, and he got to that point by using sex for titillation, why, then I should start doing the same right now!
I would agree with the rest of your post to a certain point – it’s probably a good idea to like a person somewhat and envision a possible future with them before getting in bed together. Not for the sake of keeping your number low, or saving yourself for THE ONE, or whatever, but just because it’ll feel better that way.
I can understand why Jack would want the mother of his children to have a “low number.” It’s his preference.
At the same time, my preference was that the father of my children would have a “low number,” based on my personal idea of “low.”
So… I say as long as men are willing to be held to the same standard that they hold for women, it’s all good. Now I know Jack or someone else might say that women don’t usually care if a man was sexually promiscuous in the past, so my point is null and void.
For me, however, it wasn’t. Quite a few men were rejected by me for this very reason, and to this day, they probably don’t know why exactly I turned them down. I don’t hold sexual double standards, and I found that the “formerly” promiscuous men usually excused examples of cheating that they saw among their male friends. Birds of a feather…
Now, on Karl’s side… how does anyone really know what someone’s “count” is? Asking someone how many partners they’ve had is just sooo… high school? No one has asked me that question since I was 21 — over 10 years ago!
What was ultimately more important to me than an arbitrary number was the person’s general mindset about sex and sexuality. If I met a guy who said that he was “tired of the bar scene” or “tired of meaningless sex,” that was my cue to run… because it meant his promiscuity was in the recent past, or not in the past at all (and thus, he probably had a high partner count). I found that the people who were too forthcoming in sharing their past usually were the ones I wanted to avoid, ironically… I notice the tendency of people to want to be an open book about their lives when their pasts are very “colorful.”
Now, I’m not saying this was a perfect estimation of one’s sexual values, but I usually found myself making the correct analysis. To this day, I have no idea of my husband’s number, nor does he have any clue of mine, but I think we both felt comfortable believing that neither one of us led promiscuous lives over an extended period of time. He might have had a promiscuous period in college — who knows — but since that was 20 years ago, it’s irrelevant.
jack said: (#86)
“I am confident that my screening criteria is valid for me, and that is all I care about.”
Do you care if your screening process is effective?
First, based on the comments above, it seems women (and men) consider questions about the number of previous sex partners to be a personal and invasive question. Are you able to ask these questions without jeapordizing your ability to get additional dates?
Second, can you get an accurate answer from the woman? You might want to consider this study which investigates the discrepancy between the median number of partners for men and women.
Quoting the article:
“In fact, he added, the survey data themselves may be part of the problem. If asked, a man, believing that he should have a lot of partners, may feel compelled to exaggerate, and a woman, believing that she should have few partners, may minimize her past.”
Now if women are minimizing their sex partners on an anonymous, computerized survey, what do you think the odds are of a woman minimizing her number when talking face-to-face with a man who disapproves of lots of sex partners?
Third, if a woman has a low enough number to meet your criteria, do you have a low enough number to meet her criteria? I’m guessing that the woman isn’t going to tell you her number, then let you weasel out of answering the same question.
Your screening process is counterproductive if it limits your pool to women who won’t marry you.
Fourth, as I pointed out above, your screening process doesn’t provide the information you think it provides (your confidence in it notwithstanding). Even though you acknowledge (#80) that there are many ways to screen for poor impulse control, you have chosen to rely on the number of sex partners (which doesn’t provide that information unless you compare it contextually with the details of those relationships).
Fifth, you can’t even point to results to demonstrate that your screening process is effective. Are you happily married? Are you engaged? Are you in a promising long-term relationship?
If you are trying to get married, then your screening process isn’t effective just because it screens out bad partners. It also has to let at least one good partner through, and that partner has to marry you.
jack said: (#86)
“You are the one attempting to change my mind.”
Not really. I’m just pointing out how your screening process is not based in logic, is fundamentally irrational, is potentially letting through women that you don’t want, and almost certainly ruling out a number of terrific women.
And just in case you haven’t noticed, you’re not the only person reading this. There are a number of other people reading this who have their own screening process, and it’s easier for them to recognize the flaws in your screening process, then draw parallels to their own.
Regardless of whether you’re a man or a woman, the same fundamental truths apply to a screening process. Your screening process is (at most) going to exclude one man from a woman’s dating pool (you). It’s not going to interfere with her dating on a regular basis. On the other hand, your screening process is going to get in your way every single time.
Annie said: (#85)
“Hugh Heffner […] is also incapable of climaxing with a woman. He can only orgasm, looking at still pictures of women.”
It’s well-documented that Hugh Hefner uses viagra, but this inability to climax seems to have escaped the media’s notice entirely. May I ask how you know this? Based on your previous posts, I’m guessing that it’s not due to personal experience.
Annie asked: (#85)
“Have you heard of how many women in marital relationships lose interest in sex completely? Why do you think this happens?”
A combination of reasons. According to doctors, the reasons for low libido in women:
Anemia, alcoholism, drug abuse, diabetes, post-natal hormonal changes, hormone abnormalities, side effects of medication, depression, stress and anxiety, past sexual abuse or rape, serious relationship problems and sexual hang-ups from childhood.
According to doctors, the reasons for men:
Aging, depression, stress, low testosterone and side effects of medication.
Annie said: (#85)
“This is what happens, when your early and main sexual experiences are based around lust and not love. You lose the ability to connect with your partner sexually.”
The doctors seem to have overlooked that cause.
First the media is overlooking Hugh Hefner’s performance issues, now doctors and psychologists are missing the primary cause of low libido. Good thing we have you to set the record straight.
Who are you, anyway?
Annie asked: (#85)
“Have you heard of men, that are incapable of “making love” to their wives, unless their wives “do certain things” to titilate them?”
Do you mean people with sexual fetishes? It’s not limited to men.
Of course, according to the information I found, “The causes of fetishism are not clearly understood.” Apparently the world’s leading psychologists need to talk to you, so you can set the record straight.
I don’t ask the number, for many obvious reasons. The precise number is not as important as knowing about where the number is.
As far as efficacy, I am convinced of it, based on many observations and also on what I have read.
Regarding the double standard:
“So… I say as long as men are willing to be held to the same standard that they hold for women, it’s all good. Now I know Jack or someone else might say that women don’t usually care if a man was sexually promiscuous in the past, so my point is null and void.”
I do not assert that women shouldn’t care. I assert that my observation is that they don’t seem to care about the issue to the degree that men seem to care about it.
There is a very logical reason for this, but I will avoid going into it, because it is politically incorrect.
By the way, out of courtesy for EMK’s blog, I am refraining from escalating against Karl’s somewhat emotional responses.
I really don’t care how wrong he thinks I am. And let me explain a little of my reason for sharing my views. First, I am not interested in trying to change many minds. If you can have your mind changed by a blog comment, you may be a little too open-minded.
I share my views because they are views that are being held by an increasingly large number of men. That is a reality. All the snark and scolding are not going to change our minds.
This will eventually lead to a smaller and smaller number of eligible men who are available for marriage. I suppose women could just say “good riddance”, but that still does not solve the problem of those seeking marriage.
I have not formally opted out of marriage, but I think that it is increasingly unlikely that I can find someone who would be a good fit for me. These women are available, but the competition for them is fierce.
Anyway, I reject the idea that someone who is accustomed to casual sex is a good risk for marriage, since casual sex is not congruent with sexual loyalty. People who are constantly seeking novelty are more likely to consider marriage stale and boring. Past behavior predicts future behavior.
jack said: (#90)
“This will eventually lead to a smaller and smaller number of eligible men who are available for marriage. […] I think that it is increasingly unlikely that I can find someone who would be a good fit for me. These women are available, but the competition for them is fierce.”
That doesn’t sound like evidence of a shortage of eligible men. If there are a shortage of eligible men, then you should be seeing fierce competition among women for you.
It’s like musical chairs. The fierce competition for chairs occurs because there’s a shortage of chairs, not a shortage of people.
SS said: (#88)
“What was ultimately more important to me than an arbitrary number was the person’s general mindset about sex and sexuality.”
I agree.
Not only is that much easier to determine (people find it less invasive of a question), but it also seems to be a lot more relevant to the long-term success of a relationship.
jack said: (#90)
“I don’t ask the number, for many obvious reasons. The precise number is not as important as knowing about where the number is.”
And how do you determine “about where the number is”?
Do you, perhaps, find out what “the person’s general mindset about sex and sexuality” is, and then use that to estimate a number?
I’ve already pointed out that you can’t use the number of sex partners to determine a person’s mindset about sex. You also can’t use a person’s mindset to determine their number of partners.
jack said: (#90)
“I reject the idea that someone who is accustomed to casual sex is a good risk for marriage, since casual sex is not congruent with sexual loyalty.”
I’m going to have to reject the notion that you’re using the number of sex partners as a criterion. You’re not asking what the number is. You don’t know what the number is.
You somehow believe that you can guess the number, probably based on what the woman’s stated mindset and attitude towards sex are.
SS doesn’t pretend to know her husband’s number. She evaluated his mindset and attitude toward sex. I don’t pretend to know my fiancée’s number. I evaluated her mindset and attitude toward sex.
Since you don’t ask the number, and you don’t know the number, you can’t use the number in your decision-making process.
So even if a woman wants to date you, her actual number is irrelevant.
jack said: (#90)
“Past behavior predicts future behavior.”
Really?
In my early twenties I preferred casual, non-monogamous sex. For the past 16 years I’ve only had sex as part of a longer, monogamous relationship. I’d say the last 16 years are probably a good indicator of my future behavior. The previous three years, not so much.
This is a fairly common pattern amongst adults. Many have a period of casual sex during the teenage years or early adulthood, then they settle down into a pattern of behavior that they carry forward.
At the age of 20 (a voluntary virgin), my past behavior was a poor indicator of my behavior for the subsequent few years. In my mid-20s, my past behavior was poor indicator of the behavior of the subsequent 16 years. More importantly to this conversation, my number of sex partners will always reflect that period of extended virginity and that period of casual sex, regardless of how much time transpires.
Jack,
Have you changed at all from the time you were a teenager? Have you changed from your early twenties? If you’ve changed over time, why would you expect differently of women?
@ Karl #91,
Jack said: By the way, out of courtesy for EMK’s blog, I am refraining from escalating against Karl’s somewhat emotional responses.
Really? Even if I disagree with you on occasion Karl, one thing I can’t say is that your responses are based on emotion. I don’t mean that as insult, either. I concur that you take time to respond in a reasoned, rational manner and I know for a fact Evan agrees with you.
@ Jack #90,
You said: All the snark and scolding are not going to change our minds.
THAT is the POT calling the kettle black…..
I don’t scold. I inform.
@ Jack #93,
You said: I really don’t care how wrong he thinks I am. And let me explain a little of my reason for sharing my views. First, I am not interested in trying to change many minds. If you can have your mind changed by a blog comment, you may be a little too open-minded.
So then what is the purpose of informing us? Would you say that if we hold one view and then change to your way of thinking are we still too open-minded? I’m just trying to make sure I’m getting this.
I’m explaining the reason why many men are exiting the dating/marriage world.
I still date a little for fun and companionship, but marriage is largely off the table for me. Many women are surprised to learn how many men are beginning to feel this way.
Good riddance to us? Okay. The supply of men interested in marriage is decreasing.
@89
Hahaha…definately not personal experience. It was written about by ex-playboy mansion playmates, who made the claim. I suspect it might be true, because it’s happened to other men as well, and no these weren’t “bitter” ex-playmates.
Doctors are struggling to actually figure out why the female libido is low and there is a lot of misinformation about it. Obviously testosterone play’s a part but it isn’t that simple to determine. For example, viagra doesn’t affect the male libido, it affects male arousal. Women can become aroused but have absolutely no interest in sex. So it’s quite different for men and women.
What I do know, for both males and females, our early sexual experiences really do matter, more than we want to believe. When a woman is having sex with a man, she is agreeing to pro-create with him, even at a very subconcious level. Why do you think so many young women need to get drunk to experience desire? They are lowering their inhibitions. Years later, they are unable to have sex with their partners, without drinking a glass or 2 of wine. That is a problem.
I could go on and on about this, but suffice it to say, I very much prefer to be with a man, who has only been physical with women in strong relationships, no 1-night stands, porn, prostitution, or series of short term relationships. It changes their relationship with women and sex and will ultimately affect me.
I’d still give some-one a chance, but I’ll be very careful about it.
@87
Goldie, this wasn’t a recent phenomenon for hugh. It’s what happens when sex has no “connection”. It’s a form of conditioning…a sort of sexual ADD.
I’ve read of more than just the Huge Heffners of the world going through this. Go look up porn addiction. Men as young as 18 are unable to orgasm with a woman, and the more they go down this path the harder it is for them to recondition themselves. Even studies have shown the change to the brain structure by over-exposure, so yeah…you can be “very conditioned” by sexual experiences.
It really just depends on what those experiences are.
@88
Yes the general mindset around sex is more important to me. If the mindset is there, there’s a good chance anything they may have done in their past, is well behind them. I’d still prefer a rather small number but if it was a “long time ago” and didn’t seem to hurt their sexuality too much it’s okay.
@90
“Anyway, I reject the idea that someone who is accustomed to casual sex is a good risk for marriage, since casual sex is not congruent with sexual loyalty. People who are constantly seeking novelty are more likely to consider marriage stale and boring. Past behavior predicts future behavior.”
Bingo 🙂 I do think people can change, but it’s very difficult to do and takes a lot of work. Better to just not get into that situation in the first place if you want a LTR. 🙂
Annie said: (#96)
“It was written about by ex-playboy mansion playmates, who made the claim. I suspect it might be true,”
So an ex-playmate wrote a tell-all book (which will sell much better if it includes juicy and shocking secrets about Hugh Hefner), and you treat it like an unimpeachable source.
Hugh Hefner is known for seeking certain traits in his girlfriends. I’m not aware that honesty is one of those traits.
Annie said: (#96)
“When a woman is having sex with a man, she is agreeing to pro-create with him, even at a very subconcious level.”
Really?
My fiancée had her tubes tied in her early thirties. I don’t think she’s “agreeing to procreate” with anyone. Your statement makes a nice sound-bite, but it seems to fly in the face of all the sex that occurs in conjunction with birth control.
I always love the chutzpah of people who claim to know the “subconscious” motivations of other people’s behavior. It’s really presumtuous to believe that you know what other people are thinking better than they do.
Annie said: (#96)
“Men as young as 18 are unable to orgasm with a woman,”
Are you familiar with the term “performance anxiety”?
It’s very similar to stage fright. Have you ever been speaking or singing in front of a group or audience, and you feel your throat tighten (it’s the vocal chords clamping shut). It makes it harder to speak or sing. For some people, it gets bad enough that they’re unable to produce noise, and they have trouble breathing.
In order to ejaculate, men have to relax a sphincter in our genitals. It’s the same sphincter that keeps us from peeing our pants, so it spends most of its time clamped shut. If a man is feeling anxiety (for example, about how well he’ll be able to perform in bed), then it becomes difficult to relax that sphincter. If he’s had difficulty ejaculating previously, then the anxiety is higher, and it becomes even harder to relax.
(As a side note, if you want to get a first-hand feeling of how difficult it is to relax under those circumstances, the next time you feel your throat clamp up due to stage fright, try to consciously relax your urinary tract enough to voluntarily pee your pants.)
In addition to performance anxiety, some other factors that interfere with ejaculation include: stress, dehydration, physical illness, exhaustion, intoxication (alcohol is not a performance-enhancing drug), condom use (it reduces physical sensation), the partner’s performance and sexual repression/inhibitions from childhood.
Any of those can affect 18 year olds.
At least ten different reasons that a boy/man might fail to ejaculate, and you’re stating that one of them is the cause.
Annie said: (#96)
“Why do you think so many young women need to get drunk to experience desire?”
According to my fiancée (and several other female friends), they werre raised to believe that it’s shameful for young women to engage in sexual activity. By drinking alcohol they suppressed brain activity in the areas that involve judgment and morality.
That’s what it means to “lower your inhibitions.”
Annie said: (#96)
“Years later, they are unable to have sex with their partners, without drinking a glass or 2 of wine.”
Are you speaking from personal experience?
My fiancée prefers sex (and appears to enjoy it the most) first thing in the morning. That’s usually before she’s even had a cup of coffee.
If you’re not speaking from personal experience, then provide a credible source for your information.
jack said: (#95)
“The supply of men interested in marriage is decreasing.”
How do you know this information? There are 29 million single men in the U.S. Have you spoken to all of them? Have you done a representative survey?
According to Helen Fisher (a researcher into human behavior) “Men are just as inclined to want to get married as women. In fact, 33% of men and 33% of women said they want to get married.”
jack, you may believe your opinions, but that doesn’t make them facts.
Karl:
It is obvious you are hostile to my views. Therefore, continuing a discourse with you is a waste of your time and mine.
I personally don’t care how wrong you think I am. My words and wisdom are for those who are interested enough to ponder and decide its value to them. I already know the truth. It does not profit me at all whether you believe me or not.
I can discern the difference between petulant defiance and reasoned debate. The former is not a legitimate substitute for the latter. Since it means so much to you, I cede to you the field of victory. You can start your victory dance at your convenience.
@97
If you are trying to make a point, then that’s fine. If you are willing to learn a little bit more from a female, that really does know herself and her gender, then we will continue.
I cannot quote like You but I’ll do my best.
Karl Said : “So an ex-playmate wrote a tell-all book (which will sell much better if it includes juicy and shocking secrets about Hugh Hefner), and you treat it like an unimpeachable source.”
It wasn’t from a book. It was from an article, about an ex-playmate that told her experiences. The reason I believe it, is partly because of her disbelief and humour and partly because it is in fact what many men are experiencing. They are unable to be aroused by a female of any dimension.
Go search on the internet. I won’t need to convince you 🙂
Karl Said :My fiancée had her tubes tied in her early thirties. I don’t think she’s “agreeing to procreate” with anyone. Your statement makes a nice sound-bite, but it seems to fly in the face of all the sex that occurs in conjunction with birth control.
For women at a subconcious level, every act of sex by a female, is the “acceptance’ of a male at his HIGHEST being..his ability to procreate with her. Women did not evolve with latex, the pill, or abortion ..nor steralization. Every act of sex, means we can get pregnant. It means we accept you completely as man. We accept you to the degree, that we are willing to pro-create. It goes beyond human “self-awarness”. It is rooted in our sexuality.
When you GET this..and accept it, you will have a question to ask, of the female you are with. Ask it. It is female sexuality.
Karl Said: Are you familiar with the term “performance anxiety”?
I ask you to please look-up Porn addiction/ effects.
With all due respect Karl you were not raised on a Diet of porn. Porn is causing anxiety in men, and it is hurting their relationships with women, as is sexual saturation, prostitution and everything else under the sun. Everything else under the sun…throughout human history has already been tried. Nothing we are doing now is new…
Karl:According to my fiancée (and several other female friends), they werre raised to believe that it’s shameful for young women to engage in sexual activity. By drinking alcohol they suppressed brain activity in the areas that involve judgment and morality.
Does it not cross your mind, that women in the past, repressed themselves?
I know one thing Karl, as a woman…ANY woman who has sex with you straight away, is not a woman to be trusted. Same for men.
[email protected] jack 98, i doubt very seriously that karl engages inpetulant defiance and he’s disagreed with me plentry of times. i’m not tryiong to engage in a fight with you jack, but when you refuse to meet people where they are and realize that none of us are perfect and we all grow and change at different rates then it becomes alot easier to deal with people, even those women who have had what you consider too many partners. i haven’t sex in years as that isn’t how my life played out but i know i have had poor impulse control in other areas like food. i’ve made a decision to exercise better im €pulse control there and in other areas. does that make me a bad person even though i’ve resolved to be discipline and grow as a person? does that mean i’d be a lousy partner? no, i don’t think so because i have the self-awareness to know what i need to change and the desire to have growth in those areas so that i can be a good partner. i agree your beliefs work for you because you have no desire to get married and they will ensure that you do not. but your “information” neither encourages or edifies women who are looking for love. it is not helpful. it is discouraging. evan is blunt but he helps facilitate personal growth.
Jack -get over yourself. You and Karl disagree. That’s it. He makes some good points as well, but you’re too proud of your own perspective to consider anything he’s saying.
Frankly, this is one thing about many men that pisses me off. We can’t seem to handle sustained conversations with lots of disagreement without someone either running off in a huff, or someone turning the whole thing into a name-calling contest. Conversations like this should be more about learning and considering different viewpoints than “winning,” but again, it seems like many men just want to win. We also are almost always the fools initiating wars, obnoxious corporate takeovers, and government stalemates, amongst other things – all in an effort to “win” something. As if being the winner proves our manhood or whatever.
In fact, I’d argue that a fair amount of the problems we have in relationships are all about this winning/losing framework. When everything is considered a bloody competition, no doubt you’ll have a lot of winners and losers.
The way I see it, when you drop this nonsense and view intimate relationships as much more than wins and losses, you’re a hell of a lot happier, regardless of how your current relationship is going. And the same goes for discussions about intimate relationships. Because no one has all the answers. No one know it all. And anyone who says they do is full of crap.
@ nathan 101, rock on brother! pride goeth before destruction and a haughty spirit goeth before a great fall. some evan’s advice is not always easy to digest because it’s challenging but what it does to is to shift from the “its all about me” mindset to how we can be good to and for the other person. its useless to be pugilistic toward the opposite sex. at some point somebody has to take the lead in being unselfish, open, accepting, etc. if we wait on the other person to do that we will prolly be waiting a long time. but if we step up, the other person might just be willing to follow our example.
@ Nathan
I think i love you.
But men *aren’t* exiting the dating world. Upwards of ninetysomething percent of men get married. The vast majority of men want kids, and that’s still the way that most people end up (intentionally) having them.
Nathan,
Standing up and clapping! 🙂 🙂 🙂
Annie said: (#99)
“Women did not evolve with latex, the pill, or abortion ..nor steralization. Every act of sex, means we can get pregnant.”
People didn’t evolve knowing that sex would make them pregnant. As best as anthropologists can tell, that’s only been known for a few millenia.
More importantly, I’m pretty damn sure that women can use their conscious minds to overrule their subconscious minds. I can, and I’m confident that the majority of women are similarily capable.
Annie said: (#99)
“We accept you to the degree, that we are willing to pro-create.”
It would be flattering to believe that every woman who had sex with me wanted to bear my children. Since they all wanted to use some form of birth control (as did I), their behavior seemed to indicate otherwise.
If a woman has sex with me, it means that she trusts me enough to put herself in a vulnerable position with me. Sometimes it means more than that.
Annie said: (#99)
“Does it not cross your mind, that women in the past, repressed themselves?”
Of course. I’m just not seeing how that ties in with your initial point (#96) about procreation. The repression seems to be connected to morality and/or societal expectations.
Annie said: (#99)
“I ask you to please look-up Porn addiction / effects.”
I’m aware that some men suffer from porn addiction. I think you’re treating it as the sole cause for these kind of problems. Since I’m aware of multiple causes (physical and psychological) which would prevent a man from ejaculating during intercourse, I disagree that it’s the cause behind these problems.
I couldn’t even hazard a guess as to what percentage of the time porn is to blame.
With all the hype about porn addiction, it seems to me that porn is being treated like a bogeyman. Kind of like how we were told that if we masturbated we’d get hairy palms, we’d go blind, and our penis would stop working.
And if you want to assume the best in men, then you shouldn’t assume that his performance issues are caused by excessive porn. (That’s assuming that you consider porn to be abhorrent and inexperience / social awkwardness to be acceptable.)
Annie said: (#99)
“Porn is causing anxiety in men,”
When I had significant issues with performance anxiety, I was young, socially awkward and inexperienced. At that point I’d maybe seen a dozen hours worth of porn.
If porn caused anxiety, I would expect to see a corresponding increase in anxiety as I watched more porn.
Instead, I’ve found that experience, confidence and the perspective that comes with age have led me to be a lot more relaxed during sex.
Annie said: (#99)
“With all due respect Karl you were not raised on a Diet of porn.”
What would you consider to be “a Diet of porn?”
Over the years I’ve probably seen several hundred hours of porn. (It adds up over the years.) I like to have visual stimulation when I masturbate.
When I’m in a long-term relationship, I’d much rather have sex my partner instead of masturbating / watching porn. When I’m between relationships, I find masturbating to be a lot more convenient and a lot less complicated than engaging in short-term sexual relationships.
I’m sure some people get addicted to porn. Some people get addicted to Farmville (which seems a lot less interesting than porn).
For other people, porn isn’t a big deal. I watch porn regularly when I’m between relationships. I started dating my fiancée almost two years ago, and I’ve only watched it once during that time. (She was away on a business trip.) And during sex, I have better things to think about than porn.
Annie said: (#96)
“I very much prefer to be with a man, who has only been physical with women in strong relationships, no 1-night stands, porn, prostitution, or series of short term relationships.”
That’s your choice, but you could potentially rule out a lot of men.
According to a study done by Brigham Young University, 87% of men had viewed some sort of porn in the previous year. (And I’m sure that you find it it less than reassuring that I’m currently in the other 13%.)
According to another study, more than half of men (and women) had a one-night stand. (This study was conducted in England, so the U.S. percentages may be different.)
My fiancée wouldn’t care if I continued to watch porn regularly, provided it didn’t interfere with our intimacy. But if I was in a relationship with someone who felt like you did, I’d be highly motivated to just keep my mouth shut about it. In my experience, girlfriends don’t ask me whether I’ve watched porn. (The worldly ones probably assume I have.)
Starthrower:
I understand that the view I expressed could be discouraging to women who are looking for a partner, but that is not – to me – sufficient reason to withhold that view. My goal is not to discourage, but to explain the thoughts of those who have decided to withdraw from the marriage market. As I said, I most expect the answer of “good riddance, we don’t need you anyway”. They may even be right. I’m most of the way out of the marriage market, unless the unexpected happens.
If others want to believe the trend I describe is not actually occurring, let them believe that. I still note the ceaseless parade of articles, blogs, and match.com ads that indicate that many people are alone. “Where are all the good men”? is a common statement.
The trend is clear for those who want to see it.
Side note on porn:
A common concern among women is that women in porn are excessively beautiful and therefore men will not want a real normal average looking woman. This is a misunderstanding of male motivation. Look at whatshisname married to Sandra Bullock and having a fling with a much less attractive woman. Why? Variety.
The danger in porn is that it feeds the male desire for variety. Porn is not a substitute for a wife. It is a substitute for a harem. Harems arise naturally in parts of the world where they are permitted. This should help explain to some women who are worried that their guy is more attracted to the porn star than he is to her. In many cases, probably not.
Whether or not porn is bad or causes damage is another debate.
@ 107, well jack, men don’t have the market cornered on this point of view. women are embracing it as well esecially now that science and medicine has made it possible to have children without partners. i don’t think we’re the better for it but as long as we’re more concerned about how the other person is going to make us happy instead of how we can be a good partner, this is where we’re at.
a word on porn: it is what it is. it’s for more purient interests and doesn really uplift or edify one’s spirit. that having been said, i’ve heard an increasing number of woemn are watching it and are even in the business as producers, execs, et al. i think, however, that most men treat it as karl does. my dad has been a consumer of porn ever since i can remember, but he’s been married to my mother for 35 years and i can promise you he’s never been nor will he ever be unfaithful to my mother. and if she’s bothered by it, she’s never expressed it. my opinion is that as long as it doesn’t involve children, what you do in your home or bedroom is nobody’s business but your own. viewing porn doesn’t mean you will treat a partner badly.
On balance I agree with Jack rather than Karl, and I do remember reading ‘studies’ that suggest number of sexual partners will influence likelihood of infidelity.
Karl commented that a woman starting in her teens could have 10 sexual partners by her late 20s. Karl, I think you are out of touch.
One young woman I knew quite well could get through that number in a week ! She ended up getting pregnant and having an abortion, as did a number of her best friends. There does appear to be a growing trend among young women to use abortion as a form of birth control. Her best friend when approached by a ‘suitor’ would open with the question “how much money do you make ?” She was not prepared to entertain men of limited income.
These are middle class women being very sexually aggressive and leveraging their youthful good looks to get the best men (plural) they can. They exert power because they know they have power. I cannot help but think that in any future relationship these women will find it more difficult to remain loyal.
I have a question, do you think that Single Men have a higher number of sexual partners than in the past? Are Single Promiscuous Men less trustworthy because they’ve dated a lot of women, but have vowed to change and settle down in marriage? Or is past promiscuity something that Women have to accept in the “most attractive” men?
I think that Marriage/Monogamy has become a commodity and rampant promiscuity is certainly hurting the women who want Marriage/Monogamy. I think that women have to mentally prepare to accept cheating men, promiscuity in society, and the probability of multiple marriages.
As for the Original Writer, she has to look for Men who want to be Good Husbands (not the most attractive). If a man is a commitmentphobe, then he is not Husband material. But while the woman is looking for the Ideal Husband, and if no one wants to marry her, then perhaps she is not seen as the Ideal Wife – perhaps she not attractive, not motherly, and not a reliable potential wife.
Marriage is a big financial commitment for a man, and he’s not going to marry the first woman he meets. There are a lot of women out there who are seen as “psychos”, annoying, overly dramatic, whining, complaining, scitzophrenic, unreliable, untrustworthy, or just plain dumb.
A man wants to marry a woman who is attractive, smart, but also just as important a good mother, and a caring wife. The woman has to be Wife Material.
@ Jason #112,
You said: I think that women have to mentally prepare to accept cheating men, promiscuity in society, and the probability of multiple marriages.
I must respectfully disagree with that assertion. In this day and age, women certainly are not required to put up with such things. Women are able to be educated, have a career that allows them to be financially independent, and science/medicine have made it possible to have children without a partner. If a woman has a strong support system through her family, friends, etc, then marriage can be a wonderful addition to her life, but its certainly not a requirement. While I believe we all want to find one special person to grow old with, I reject the notion that a woman is somehow incomplete if she is not married or has no significant other.
If you want to attract a woman of quality and not the psychos, drama queens, whiners, complainers, schitzophrenics, dummies, etc., then be a person of quality first. Being a promiscuous cheater certainly isn’t the way to do that.
It’s the Dr. Quinn Open Heart jewelery line…keep an open heart and love will find it’s way in. I also like a message from Under the Tuscan Sun: always maintain your childish innocence.
Oh my.I cried,I laughed then I cried again.You just told my entire autobiography and gave me the BEST advice I have ever read-in this post.Thank you.
Let me play the devils advocate Evan and tell you the amount of married men that have attempted to get with me in my life and still do, so I beg to differ just a bit that the marriage stats show men want commitment they don’t. They do show that some men do while others want stability while still being able to play around. Many think it’s what society expects of them and it will help their careers while others want kids but I can assure you it has nothing to do with monogamy or commitment. I am negative by nature and my job is to anticipate bad outcomes I can’t change that about myself I’ve tried. But I did meet a man who understood I had been burned and while it bothered him he knew what to do to reassure me and make me feel okay even when I was acting crazy even when my behavior would have scared other men away. That’s how I knew he was the one. See we all have baggage and scars and there is only so much we can do to hide it. I think a man who knows your past will make you feel safe. If not he’s not for you.
If what you’re doing is working and you’re in a successful relationship, feel free to ignore my advice. If you haven’t achieved your goals, you might want to look at why. “Negative by nature” might be a good place to start.