Why Men Should Court Women Again

love u podcast

Chivalry is not dead, but in some circles, it is on life support. While women lament the lack of effort men make in dating, most men are either clueless about chivalry or fighting against it. On this episode, I’m going to give you a compelling argument as to why courtship is good for men and what women can do to encourage better male behavior.

Watch: YouTube

Enjoy the podcast? Please leave a short review on iTunes by clicking “View in iTunes” and then “Ratings and Reviews.”

Join our conversation (332 Comments).
Click Here To Leave Your Comment Below.


  1. 1
    Karl S

    I think we need to split the difference between effort and chivalry. Effort is definitely good and while there is a lot of overlap, classic chivalry comes with some patriarchal baggage that we could probably do without.
    Guys should certainly chase, but that’s more of an economy of interest. If she’s a girl worth having, there will most likely be a few guys looking at her (now or in future) and you need to show that you’re worth her time.
    But I think there’s a new wave of gen Y women in their twenties/thirties who would definitely agree that having men pay for everything is outdated. Your own argument of “same action/different outcomes” kind of supports it – that paying for dinner because you’re following a script (it’s classic chivalry) won’t help you. It’s about how you’re being more than who is paying.
    There’s probably a middle ground where guys can pay for cheap dates in the beginning (when you don’t know each other) — coffee and chit-chat, a drink in a bar, free dates at galleries/in the park/etc, making it more about spending time together. He could pay for dinner once he’s sure he likes her and then see if she gradually mirrors by offering to cover the meal once in a while. My current partner and I now alternate between who pays all the time. I don’t think I’d want to be with someone who always expected me to pay.

    Same deal with making plans — it definitely helps if the guy does it in the beginning and my girlfriend has complimented me on my great date ideas, but if she never made plans once in a while I wouldn’t still be with her.  

    1. 1.1

      This is good insight, Karl.   There’s another blog that I “sort of” follow run by a female, and while it gives an interesting perspective, the sentiment running throughout, and supported by most of the commenters, is that men should pay nearly ALL of the time.   This runs counterpoint to my sense of fairness and has been a mental attitude I just can’t quite wrap my mind around.   My guy does insist on doing most of the paying, but he has started letting me cover costs more often here after a year of dating.   It still seems to bother him, but since I earn more than he does, he lets me.   He won’t, however, let me treat him to a high-dollar meal out, even though I would love to, so our dates are pretty low-dollar, or even free.   (I consider going fishing a nice date. 🙂 ) Since this relationship is at present on life-support and might be going terminal tonight (I’ll know after work), I will take your comments with me into my next relationship.   I just don’t feel RIGHT letting a guy pay all the time.

      And I’m pretty sure I’ll be able to listen to the podcast tonight as well, even though it’s “weekly dance night.”   I’m interested in Evan’s take on this courting issue, which I do agree with.   I still want a man to court me, even if the parameters of who pays when has changed.

      1. 1.1.1
        Karl S

        I also think there is a debate to be had  about what is inherently masculine/feminine behaviour vs what is merely a social norm. I’d wager that setting up dates and making an effort to woo girls is a genuinely masculine thing to do and women would respond positively to it across the board

        The question of who pays is probably a social norm and social norms shift over time. They also shift at variable rates within different communities, so you might be an oldschool gal who responds positively to a man who pays, but that’s not the community I move within nor the kind I want to date.

        1. Nissa

          Dear Karl, I would like your thought on a point Evan brought up in his discussion of what a good date looks like. I can certainly agree in spirit, and in much of the substance of Evan’s ideal date, there was one point that distressed me a bit. As a more mature lady with 2 jobs, who most days is leaving her house by 6:45am, I was unsettled by the idea of a date beginning at 9pm and not ending until 1am. In fact, my first thought was, “Oh, I’d cry on the inside if that happened’. However, I probably would still agree to do it, as I am aware that setting too many parameters for a first date will frame me as demanding or uncompromising, and I always want to be flexible when I can.  How demanding would it be to you, if a lady asked for the date to be moved up to say, 6pm instead of 9pm?

        2. Evan Marc Katz

          Schedule dates on Friday/Saturday nights so you don’t have to be up at 6:45am.

        3. Nissa

          I did hear that you specified Fri/Sat but that’s often my Sat/Sun am schedule :-). I know I’m an outlier by normally being in bed by 9pm, but my body always wins that argument with my brain, lol.

        4. Caroline

          @Nissa-I know you didn’t direct your question to me but I am/was in a similar scenario as you (I had a full time and a part time job for over 3 years to pay for my son’s medical bills. I’m actually on a medical leave right now from my second job per doctors order).   I also have a physically taxing job in the outdoors all year so I am gross and exhausted many days when I get home! I dated heavily while having two jobs. I personally found it pretty easy to just tell a new guy “oh I’m not able to meet at “x”; I can “y” or “z”. You definitely need to be accommodating as possible to keep some kind of momentum and prevent him from thinking you are too picky.

          Evan-not everyone works mon-fri. I worked 7 days a week and managed to find a guy. I dated a mechanical engineer (worked at a nuclear facility) who worked a rotating shift. Lots of divorced parents have custody on a rotating basis too; so whole weekends may be out. Of course it would be better if you were theoretically available more often but I believe it may be about finding someone who can relate to having juggle a changing schedule. My guy now travels a great deal and of course I am accommodating:)

        5. JB

          Nissa, I laughed when Evan said 9p too……LOL He’s too young to understand most folks in the 50 and up crowd don’t “do dinner” @ 9p. We do it @ 7ish. Never the less, the point he was making wasn’t really about the actual time.

      2. 1.1.2

        Oh SMC,


        Sorry to hear about your relationship. I remember from the 13 questions post you were debating letting it go because of his lack of communication, but I thought you said you were comfortable with your decision of staying with him?


        Either way,   best of luck.

        1. SMC

          Hi Adrian.

          It’s not over, but it’s in a holding pattern until we can talk about the issue at hand. Last week was a rough week, but I’m not bailing out until we have a calm, rational discussion about the ONE thing he does that drives me crazy and that I’ve asked him not to do.   We shall see.   We spent the weekend together, he thinking everything was fine, me knowing it wasn’t, but he has a temporary house guest (nephew) and there was never any private time in which to have that discussion. I’ve invited him down to my place this weekend during which time we’ll either agree to meet in the middle, or…not.   And it’s not about communication, either.   I’m just not ready to share the reason, yet.   Not here.   But thank you for the well wishes.   I’m in a much better, less emotional place than I was on Thursday.   I’ve been watching Evan’s podcasts like crazy.   🙂

      3. 1.1.3
        Gonul Larson

        Ä°   think ıts sensible.

    2. 1.2

      To offer a counterpoint, I would say that it is also possible to have a relationship where the man pays for almost everything, without that being a situation which takes advantage of the man.

      For example, I do side work  that tends to be either very low paid or very high paid if you become known, have a blog etc. As a result, I have seen relationships where it is an accepted part of the relationship that one spouse, usually the man, makes almost all the money and pays for most things in the relationship. This is because both partners have accepted that one person has a passion profession which may never afford a luxurious living. I think that it works because in those cases, the man is giving what he is comfortable giving, and he feels he is getting something high value in return – an easygoing, passionate wife who gives in non monetary ways. My own father was like this – he saw himself as inarticulate, not the most suave of men, but working and paying bills was something he understood. It was his area of expertise, where he felt good about giving. It was his love language. I would never have wanted to take away something that made him feel important and powerful. Just a perspective.

      1. 1.2.1
        Karl S

        Absolutely. If the man is comfortable and it’s true to his principles to pay for things then there’s no reason not to accept it and have a great relationship.

      2. 1.2.2
        Gonul Larson


  2. 2

    I was surprised by Evan saying that some of his clients have never been courted. I really didn’t realize it had become such an issue even though I’ve heard about the ‘Netflix and chill’ guys, I assumed they were in the minority.

    1. 2.1

      From my experience, the majority of guys are ‘Netflix and chill’. I had a guy once call me to set up a date and I nearly fell off my chair. A guy actually picked up the phone! I was very impressed. As Evan alludes to in this podcast, it really doesn’t take much to impress a girl. The majority of guys (again, from my experience) put in as minimal effort as they can: text, coffee, Netflix and chill. So a guy putting a bit more effort scores major points with me.

      1. 2.1.1

        Hahahaha. I laughed about this. I think if it was actually planned more than 30 minutes before he is ready to meet I would really fall over. 🙂

  3. 3

    I would fall in the not courted category. And I am in my 40s. It has just been the way it has been and presumably the type I attract. And some have been several year relationships. To be honest of all the things I think about in my dating issues, I guess this is just not one of them.

    1. 3.1


      What does being courted mean for you? In what areas did perspective suitors fall short?

      1. 3.1.1

        I think that is a great question and I should have a better idea of what it means to me. I do wish just once I got flowers…

        1. D_M


          My apologies for putting you on the spot, but do you see how not having a clear idea of “courting Lily” could be a little hit and miss for someone? With your current or perspective love interest, try saying “I think fresh cut flowers make a room more inviting and almost always puts me in a good mood”. Say it with a smile and add that little hair flick thing that women do for good measure. Any guy that is attentive, and make no mistake about it, that is essential what courting boils down to, level of attentiveness. A naturally courteous guy will give you flowers.

          I know, I know. “What about spontaneity D_M?, I don’t want to direct my own courtship!!!” Well, some of us have not had good examples of how to woo women, so we need a little help. Drop little hints, “I overheard this guy at work talking about ____________that he did for his girlfriend. I thought that was so sweet!!!” Fill in the blank with whatever courting means for you. It’s important to drop the hints with a smile, so that he can observer your mood genuinely changing. He should pick up of your facial sensory cues.

  4. 4

    I must admit that I am looking forward to listening to this podcast tonight.


    Chance threw out a challenge to Evan about all his post on courting stating how Evan mislabels them (some titles make you think benefits for men when really they are the benefits for women). This has caused me to go back and re-read all post Evan has on courting (over 5 including a few featuring Evan on other websites with google search).


    Personally I still say the issue of money and paying for dates is a red herring used by all the critics.


    As a side note: Thank to both of the Stacy’s claims about dating, social class, and money, I have also been studying a lot of peer reviewed  sociology academic text books (not internet searches writing by anyone claiming to be an expert).   I have even asked the professor at the university where I’m attending grad-school to let me sit in on a few lectures.

    1. 4.1

      I thought EMK put together a good podcast, but I have a question about a comment you made that I think is consistent with his overall point about men who are opposed to courtship:


      “Personally I still say the issue of money and paying for dates is a red herring used by all the critics.”


      I’m not sure what you specifically mean by this, but it appears that what you’re saying is consistent with EMK’s message in the podcast, which is that men who don’t want to court feel the way they do because they aren’t successful with women, and therefore, they don’t see the point in it because it doesn’t pay off.   This is not an accurate assessment, and I think it can be harmful because it feeds the typical reflexive “any guy who has a problem with anything women do/expect is just bitter that he can’t get laid” narrative.


      For me – and for many guys I know – the problem with courtship (despite, mind you, that I’ve always done it for the first few dates and I’ve gotten the results I wanted) is that it is another example in a long list of roles that men are expected to adhere to simply because they are men.      Meanwhile, I was raised in a world where I was repeatedly told from a very young age that there are no female-specific roles that women must adhere to in order to make a man’s life better, which is pretty much consistent with the train of thought I’ve always had anyways.   I don’t know if I know one single woman my age who thinks she has to do anything for a man just because she’s a woman.


      If you’re like me, and a lot of guys are, then you do not expect a woman to do anything for you just because she’s a woman.   Roughly 60 years ago, men and women had very specific gender roles that they were expected to abide by, which was wrong.   No one should be expected to fulfill a role or perform a certain task simply because of what is between his/her legs.   However, female gender roles have eroded since that time, and women are now free to do what they want.   On the contrary, male gender roles have essentially remained the same, and there are many things that men are expected to do simply because they are men.


      Apologies up front if I misinterpreted your comment.

      1. 4.1.1

        Chance said, “Meanwhile, I was raised in a world where I was repeatedly told from a very young age that there are no female-specific roles that women must adhere to in order to make a man’s life better, which is pretty much consistent with the train of thought I’ve always had anyways.   I don’t know if I know one single woman my age who thinks she has to do anything for a man just because she’s a woman”.

        So bearing and raising your husband’s children isn’t a “female specific role”?

        1. Chance

          No.   Bearing children is biological, and not a social expectation.    Both men and women are expected to raise their children – that’s not female-specific.

        2. KK

          Chance, you’ve repeatedly made misogynistic comments on these posts. You have stated that women past a certain age aren’t worth courting. You’ve said women you’re own age aren’t worth marrying. While you’re certainly entitled to your opinions, just own up to the fact that you are in fact woman bashing when you say these things.

        3. Chance

          Hi KK,


          Expressing frustration with, and criticizing the behavior of women does not mean one hates women (i.e., misogyny).   Women infantilize themselves when they try to equate this with misogyny because it serves to shut off any examination of their behavior similar to how a child would be treated.


          I didn’t say women past a certain age “aren’t worth” anything.   I said the logical case for courtship breaks down in situations where older women are involved because there is no need for a man to demonstrate that he can provide for, or protect, a woman who will stay at home and raise children.


          Finally, your claim that I’ve stated that women my own age aren’t worth marrying is patently false.   Stop misrepresenting what people say.   I accept your apology in advance.

      2. 4.1.2

        I suppose you can twist it that way to fit your narrative but bearing children is about as ‘female specific’ as you can get no matter how you slice it. Ask any woman who is responsible for the lion’s share of raising those children. And in the event of divorce, what percentage of women get custody?

        I’m sorry you were raised to think so poorly of women.

        “…  I was raised in a world where I was repeatedly told from a very young age that there are no female-specific roles that women must adhere to in order to make a man’s life better…”

        1. Chance

          KK, I’m not twisting anything to fit my narrative.   I, and pretty much any man I know, do not believe that a woman is supposed to take on the lion’s share of parenting responsibilities.   Also, I think a lot of divorced men out there would love to have a larger part in raising their children if they were allowed to do so.


          Again, as far as bearing children is concerned, that is a biological reality, and not a societal custom.   I’m not quite sure how anyone could sincerely interpret someone mentioning that as “twisting narrative.”

        2. KK

          “Again, as far as bearing children is concerned, that is a biological reality, and not a societal custom.   I’m not quite sure how anyone could sincerely interpret someone mentioning that as “twisting narrative.”

          That’s fine. Why does it matter if it’s simply biological if you’re arguing there are no female specific roles? Yes, it’s a biological fact that women bear the children, which simultaneously makes it a female specific role. Agreed?

          To your other point, it doesn’t really matter what you believe when in reality the majority of the day to day parenting responsibilities are handled most often by the mom. Most women are perfectly happy with that, but it’s also nice to be acknowledged for it instead of being told there are no female specific roles. Just like most household responsibilities are the woman’s. Your narrative is false. Have any married friends?? Ask who plans, prepares, and shops for birthday parties, vacations, family dinners, holidays??? I’m sure we could come up with quite a list of our female specific roles, especially within a family, so either acknowledge that or continue with your anti female sentiments.

        3. Chance

          Hi KK, I think I know where your confusion lies.   Remember, I’m talking about expectations that people have for others when it comes to fulfilling specific roles based on their gender.   I’m not taking about who typically does what.   Certainly, people tend to gravitate towards certain roles based on their gender, but when it’s expected or demanded by the opposite gender, that is when it becomes a problem.   I don’t think men expect/demand women do the things you mentioned generally speaking.

        4. Evan Marc Katz

          Sorry, Chance. Not with you on this one. Men expect women to monetarily contribute to the household AND do the vast majority of housework/childrearing – even today. Men do more than ever before, and it still pales in comparison to what women do. I’ll use myself as an example. My work day ends at 5:30. My wife not only prepares dinner for me and the kids most nights (at 6:30 and 8) but after we watch a few hours of TV, she does Mom stuff pretty much from 10pm-midnight each night (folding laundry, packing lunches, getting clothes out for the next day, responding to PTA emails).

          So I may make the money that floats this whole operation, but she works WAYYYY harder than I do.

        5. Chance

          Evan, you are entitled to your opinion, but a recent study shows that men do more to contribute to the household than women when you combine work, housework, and child-rearing.   I think you even cited the study on your blog.

        6. Chance

          Here’s the study:




          Oddly enough, many news outlets used this study to slam men for “still not carrying their weight around the house” despite the numbers showing that men spend more time on combined childcare, work, and household activities.   This is why one should always be careful when reading articles that cite studies.   Read the study, and forget the article.

        7. GoWiththeFlow


          I followed the link you posted and it was a list of bulletpoints, that nowhere stated the claim that “men do more to contribute to the household than women, when you combine work, housework, and child-rearing.”

          That was the conclusion you came to because you wanted to see your preferred narrative validated.

        8. Chance

          GWTF, go to ‘Table 1’.   The data is located there.   Multiply hours spent by percentage of people who perform work, housework, and child-rearing on a given day.

        9. GoWiththeFlow


          I had a feeling that’s what you did.   There’s a reason the BLS did NOT do the same calculations and include them in the report:   Because it’s not statisticalky valid.

          The BLS reported out te averages of hours spent by three different groups of men engaged inbthree different kids of labor;   job hours, housework hours, and childcare hours. They took one group of men and broke them down into three seperate groups.

          To be able to come up with a valid average of three different variables, a study would have to take a single group of men and find the averagr of all three variables ( job, housework, childcare) to be able to come up with a composite.   And that will inckude a zero value in one or two of the variables, and thus the concept of an average is blown.   That’s why BLS used inclusive criteria for the three different groups, i.e. of the men who do housework.

          In essence, just using two variables, the BLS   won’t average hours spent at work and hours spent on childcare between an employed dad who spend 14 hours a day at work and 0 hoirs in direct childcare and a stay at home dad who spends 0 hours at a job and 14 hours a day in direct childcare.   The average is 7 hours a day on each type of labor, but it does not reflect the truth

        10. SQ

          KK, Granted we may not represent the typical couple, but I can honestly say my husband and I are 50/50 in child raising responsibilities.

          Of course I’m one of those awful working moms you vilify, so this probably isn’t much of a consolation for you. And yes my son is happy, well adjusted, does well in school, has lots of friends, is polite, kind and sensitive, despite being in care day since he was 20 months old.

          Infer what you want from that.

          its ironic that on one hand you insist   stay at home mothers are the only acceptable way of raising children but then you complain the SAHM has to do all the child raising and hisuework. Can’t have it both ways. Sorry but I’m with the guys on this one.

          lastly I don’t believe Chance was saying that women should do everything nor was he downplaying the importance of what women do in the home and caring for the children. He is saying that when it comes to dating, women are granted the freedom to have it both ways without judgement, men are not. And that is true. (Chance if that’s not what you meant, I rescind).


        11. KK

          Well SQ, I’ve never vilified working moms, so I’m not sure where you got that. When the subject has come up, I’ve expressed my opinion that it’s in the best interest of the children to have a SAHM. I firmly believe that, yet I will readily acknowledged that it is not always a possibility for all families. I’m sure most SAHM’s believe that as well, otherwise they wouldn’t do it.

          To your other point, please quote where I ever complained about the responsibilities of being a SAHM. If you read my comment, I specifically stated that while most women are happy with the responsibilities they take on, it would be nice to be appreciated for those extra responsibilities instead of being told by someone like Chance, that women don’t have any gender specific roles. I’m happy you’re happy with the arrangement you and your husband have, but it certainly isn’t the norm.

        12. KK

          acknowledge not acknowledged.

        13. Chance

          GWTF said: “I had a feeling that’s what you did.”


          Really?   I thought you said that I was just looking for something to validate my narrative.   Truth be told, this study was referenced in a Time article that was basically saying that men need to pick up the slack around the home, while generally ignoring the data on hours at work.   I clicked on the study and went to the summary table (Table 1) to see the results.   What was shown there didn’t appear to jive with the focus of the article.   I wasn’t looking for anything to “validate my narrative”.


          As far as statistical validity is concerned, it looks like you’re either a lot smarter or much more familiar with the study than I am (or both).   Based on the technical notes, it appears that Table 1 includes the entire population so it would include unemployed people who would be assigned a “0” to hours worked per day.   From what I can tell, it appears to me that it is a fair representation of what the average person does on a daily basis (although I would find it more useful if the data was based on people over, say, the age of 25 as opposed to 15).   Again, from what I can tell, Table 1 appears to take into consideration the entire sample of the population, and not just a portion (e.g., employed, unemployed, etc.).   Admittedly, I don’t understand every detail of the study.


          I couldn’t really follow your post.   Could you please elaborate and explain why Table 1 does not include the entire sample?   Again, I took the average hours at work, household activities, and child care for men and women, and then multiplied them by the probability of them doing that particular activity on a given day.   Then, I added each of the activities up to get the total for men and women.   As far as I can tell, it is the entire sample and not three different subsets of the sample, which is what it appears you are saying it is.


          SQ said:   “lastly I don’t believe Chance was saying that women should do everything nor was he downplaying the importance of what women do in the home and caring for the children. He is saying that when it comes to dating, women are granted the freedom to have it both ways without judgement, men are not. And that is true.”


          Agreed.   Thank you for being the lone adult in the room.

        14. SQ

          KK please just stop. More than once you’ve made it very clear of your low opinions of mothers who work outside the home (in fact you just did it last week, implying that kids who get in trouble are more likely to be latchkey kids).

          Your back and forth with Chance certainly read like it contained some bitterness about women doing most of the housework and childcare — which I would think would be expected if she doesn’t have a job outside the home. Isnt that the point?

          as far as being appreciated, I’m sure the bread winning husbands of SAHMs might like to be appreciated for what they do too. Try polling a few at random to see how one way the cry for appreciation really is.

        15. KK


          Why is it people like you insist on telling others what they think? You are way off. I don’t have a low opinion of working moms. I have a low opinion of anyone that doesn’t prioritize their children. There are great moms in both groups and crappy moms in both groups. This should go without saying. Apparently what I said really pissed you off because you’re attempting to vilify me. I find it interesting you’re questioning me over Chance, considering the anti female stance he has continually taken on here.

        16. Chance

          KK, speaking up for fairness and expecting women to act like the intelligent adults that they are is not being “anti-female”.

        17. SQ

          KK, I didn’t see anything anti-female about what Chance said. He’s pointing out a double standard  that is unfair to men. That is not being anti-female. We have no problem pointing out double standards that are unfair to women, and we do it all the time here.  

          If a woman expects a man to take a more traditional role in dating and pay/call/pursue, she is supported by society in that. If a woman says, I’m independent and I want more equality in dating and I want to split the bill/call, etc. she is supported in that choice too. If a man says I want a more equality in dating and I want to split the bill/let her call me, etc., he is maligned as a cheapskate, misogynist and/or player only out for sex.  Regardless of one’s personal dating preferences, factually, this is  a double standard.  

          Chance’s exact words were: No one should be expected to fulfill a role or perform a certain task simply because of what is between his/her legs.  Your response was “taking care of children is a female role.” Really? Men are biologically incapable of caring for children?

        18. KK


          Either you’re manipulative or lack intelligence.   You cannot cherry pick a conversation without changing the meaning which is what you just did. There was more to the conversation than those two sentences. I will converse with anyone, but if you insist on manipulating my words and intentions, please do not engage me in the future.

        19. Chance

          KK, respectfully, you’re the one who seems to be manipulating here.

        20. Karmic Equation

          There’s 9-months of nausea and discomfort, and as much as 8-18 hours  — Exactly what equivalent does a man go through that is even close to this? Not much, when you consider that most men act like they’re at death’s door when they get the flu.

          I don’t exactly believe you’re misogynistic, Chance.

          But you certainly do minimize anything contributions from women that don’t fit your narrative. And they you try to make it sound as if women who disagree with you are “unintelligent” because you “believe better of them” yada yada yada.

          Very chauvinistic, patriarchal, and condescending, Chance.

          You used to be more centered/grounded/even-handed in your posts. Now, they seem very extreme and unlike the Chance whose posts sounded reasonable.

          How is your relationship going with your live-in gf?

        21. SQ

          The childbirth argument is non sequitur.  As if (some) women seek to  shut down any discussion of disadvantages men have or problems they face  by shouting  “but we carry the babies so we have it worse!” First, it’s not a contest. Second, it’s off topic. As Chance says, it  infantalizes  women and suggests that women are capable of neither  debating a point they don’t like nor empathy when it comes to men.

        22. Karmic Equation


          Acknowledging that there is something that women do that men cannot do, does NOT infantilize women. And childbearing has NO equivalent in men’s world. Perhaps prostate problems are the closest. And how do men react to that? Like they’ll die.

          However, trivializing what women do, that men cannot do, IS a disservice to women.

          Feminists have done more to disempower women than to empower them by disrepecting and trivializing women’s abilities. By falling into the feminist trap that tells women “she can do anything a man can do”, you lose sight of  the opposite:

          “Our generation is becoming so busy trying to prove that women can do what men can do that women are losing their uniqueness. Women weren’t created to do everything a man can do. Women were created to do everything a man can’t do.”


        23. Chance

          Karmic Equation:   You’re right, I can be condescending.   I’ll own it.   With that, I will   ignore your pot/kettle talk as it relates to your “condescending” charge.   Well, I can’t ignore it entirely because this is just too precious:


          “And they you try to make it sound as if women who disagree with you are “unintelligent” because you “believe better of them” yada yada yada.”


          I think I know the comment you’re referring to from a month or two ago when I said I thought better of you.   However, do you know who I got it from?   It was in response to you using the exact same language with me in another post.   I figured you would recognize it.   Since you, apparently, think I’m a liar as well (based on what you wrote in another post below), I extended you the courtesy of digging the exact comment up for you from the blog post on Rory Raye’s Circular Dating:


          “An “ad hominem” attack from you,  Chance  (271.2)? I thought better of you.”


          It wasn’t even an ad hominem attack, btw.   According to your rules of debate, wouldn’t that make you chauvinistic and matriarchal?   I’m going to say no because I don’t want to hide behind my gender when someone says something that I don’t like.   I don’t intend to minimize what women go through, but I don’t believe in maximizing it, either.   As a result, admittedly, many of my comments could certainly appear to downplay what women go through because I’m responding to what I perceive as them maximizing their plight in order to justify certain things.   This is similar to what I see across society where women’s issues increasingly receive an out-sized focus (e.g., constant discussion of violence against women instead of general anti-violence discussion, constant awareness of breast cancer to the point that one begins to believe it’s the most important disease on earth, etc.).   If you question it, you’re insensitive or a misogynist.   That infantalizes women.


          I love women who are smart, kind, accountable, and fair-minded, which is why I love my partner so I guess that answers your question (that you figured was loaded) about my relationship (even though I know you don’t really care).

        24. SQ




          “childbearing has NO equivalent in men’s world.”

          No one said it does. Which is why it made no sense for KK to bring it up in the context of a discussion about double standards in dating.

          Imagine if I posted here that I as a woman who is dating am frustrated over men’s double standard around sex. Men can do whatever they want with regard to sex and society says it’s OK. If a woman does whatever she wants with regard to sex, society judges her, men (generalizing here) judge her, even the ones she’s had sex with judge her.

          And let’s just say in response to that Chance jumps in and says, “Yeah but men die earlier because they work in more dangerous jobs, they go to war, and are more likely to commit suicide than women.”

          All of that is true. But none of that is at all relevant to the original point about sexual  double  standards, unless Chance’s goal is simply to deflect away from a legitimate conversation about a difficult issue women face by changing the subject and trying to prove  that “men have it worse  in life,  so there!”

          To your 2nd point:



          “Feminists have done more to disempower women than to empower them by disrepecting and trivializing women’s abilities. By falling into the feminist trap that tells women “she can do anything a man can do”, you lose sight of  the opposite.”

          I’m not sure I want to go down this slippery slope with you but, oh, what the hell…

          Are we talking about “abilities” that are biologically determined  (childbirth, muscle strength,  etc) or are we talking about “abilities” that  are not biologically determined (intelligence, talents, etc)?

          I don’t consider giving birth a special “ability” because it’s something I did that my husband cannot. It doesn’t make me better than him. It just means I was born a woman with a functioning uterus and set of ovaries.

          And  don’t consider raising my child to be something  that biology has determined I am automatically better at than my husband. I won’t attempt to debate this point because I know the vast majority of people  disagree and  believe  that  women are automatically better parents by virtue of their sex. This is one of the basic tenets of faith in our culture that you just don’t f-k with. I get it.

          But — and maybe this is just me — I gather most moderate individuals, when they say women can do anything men can do, they mean the latter (not biologically determined) vs the former (biologically determined). Would you agree with that?

        25. Karmic Equation



          You’ll have to link to that post. I remember it, but I don’t remember the thread. I want to refresh my memory on what we were debating.

          As for “condescending”, sometimes I am. However, both men and women don’t like women who speak or write unapologetically. To those people, a woman not prefacing disagreements  with “Sorry” is condescending. Another one of those wonderful little societal double-standards women live under that men are oblivious to and women have been brainwashed from being aware of.

          I agree that there are LAWS that need to be changed that should better protect men’s interests in a divorce. But legislature in all countries, bar none, are comprised of a male majority. Women did not write those laws. Women cannot unwrite those laws. Get angry and frustrated at the MEN in your legislature in your country for not changing the laws to match the times. Not the women who benefit from their existence.

          You’re writing on a board filled mostly with 40-something women, whose target dating demographics are 40-something men. Courting for “my” demographic (quotes because I’m still aghast that this is my demographic when I don’t feel “that old” lol) is not wasted effort.

          If we’re talking about millenial men courting millenial women? I’ll have to agree with you that it’s probably not necessary. And in most cases, it would go unappreciated, because most male millenials don’t practice it, so female millenials don’t know that it’s something to be appreciative of.

        26. Karmic Equation

          BTW, Chance, I’m glad you’re happy. I mean that with all sincerity and no snarkiness 🙂

          There’s usually a reason when a reasonable man (and your postings from when I first joined were definitely more balanced, even when you were on “your side” 🙂 ). But your recent posts had a much different tone/vibe.

          Not sure if you followed DeeGee’s postings. When he first joined his posts were fairly balanced, and even optimistic. But right before he left this board, they were very strident and bitter. He was not the same guy.

          Had to be a woman.

          And so I thought with you.

          I’m glad I’m wrong for your sake. For my sake, my argument would have been stronger if you and your gal were on the outs, so I’m not quite as happy for my sake.


        27. GoWiththeFlow


          By “I thought that’s what you did”I meant the mathmatecal calculations you did to try to add the averages of three distinct groups within the larger data pool.   I certainly could have been clearer and I apologize for offending you.

          As for the Bureau of Labor Statistics data, I had a year of statistics my senior year in college, and the professor used BLS (and other government) data to demonstrate accurate and inaccurate use of statistical data.   He also used BLS data to demonstrate weaknesses in data gathering.   I had a love hate relationship with the class since trying to achieve precision and accuracy in science is extremely challenging.   But, I appreciate that I now have a skill set to evaluate studies and whether they give an accurate picture of what is being studied.   (We had a section in medical school on critical evaluation of medical studies as well.)

          I think the best way to try demonstrate why it’s inaccurate to add people who don’t perform a task at all into a group where researchers are trying to measure the average of how much time is spent performing said task is to give some examples of the erroneous conclusions that are drawn when this is done.   (Numbers below I’m pulling out of the air!)

          For each set of statements below, which statement more precisely measures reality:

          1). Last year the average man spent 0.2 hours in jail or prison.   Last year 1% of men were incarcerated for an average of 500 hours.

          2).   The average 18 year old male has had 1.74 sexual partners.   58% of 18 year old men have had sex, with an average of 3 partners.

          3). The football team’s 11 offensive players averaged 0.545 touchdown passes.   The quarterback threw 6 touchdown passes.

          One more confounding factor about the BLS data is that there is a direct inverse relationship going on.   The more hours a person spends at a paid job,   the less hours they spend doing housework and direct childcare.   That is true for both men and women.

          Getting useful data that is a precise and accurate measure of complex human behavior largely depends upon a well constructed study group.   When you want to see how much time men spend on the combination of paid employment, housework, and childcare, and then compare it to how much time women spend on those tasks, then the study group that will give the most precise snapshot of reality is married fathers of young children, who are employed, and do both housework and direct childcare.

          Using a ven diagram model, a blank sheet of paper is all men.   Then there are three intersecting circles that represent married dads who do paid work, married dads who do housework, and married dads who do direct childcare.   The funny looking concave-sided triangle in the middle where all three circles overlap is the study group that will provide the best estimation of the average workload for your average married dad who spends time on all three tasks.   The appropriate comparison pool would be these men’s wives who engage in all three types of work.


          Now that brings me to how the media (and consumers of media) inaccurately report the appropriate conclusions of studies and fail to discuss the studies limitations.   One caveat here, stud methods and conclusions deal with numbers, percentages, suggested correlation, correlations, and causation.   Those parameters have no inherent value judgement attached to them.

          Chance, you referenced a Time article that cited the BLS data then stated that men needed to do more housework and childcare.   What you read was an opinion piece, not a critical assessment of the study.   A counter opinion piece could have stated that men are spending more time than ever caring for their kids and homes.

          The Time piece points out what happens when neutral study data is used to support an opinion:   The limited truth of the study is lost in the debate that ensues.   At least government data has the power of huge numbers of study participants.   A lot of the studies that get widely circulated in the media and wind up as being seen as fact or common knowledge that have so few numbers of participants that the data cannot be extrapolated to the potential affected population at large.

          For example, in the comments section on a recent blog post here, a study that suggested vaginal semen exposure in women was correlated to lower levels of depression and greater happiness levels in exposed women was accepted as “Ladies:   Semen Makes You Happy!”   Uh, big problem here, the study only had 293 participants.   That is way to small of a number to prove a correlation (much less a causation) that can be extrapolated to affect the 3.5 billion plus females on this planet!    The study did also not control for confounding factors, i.e. did some of the women who always used condoms (the no vaginal semen exposure group) engage in oral sex where semen, ahem!, entered their body through thei mouths?

          The valid conclusion that could be drawn from the study is that there is a possible correlation between vaginal semen exposure and improved subjective mental health well being in women.   Further study is indicated.   I’m sure though that more than one man who saw a blurb on the study joked to his wife, “Look honey, my semen is good for you!   If you gave me more blowjobs, you will be even happier!”   While that statement is not scientifically proven, it is largely harmless.   It’s not likely to incite huge flame wars in academia or the public at large.

          If you look at the three sets of statements I used as examples above, imagine if a media story that used the first statement in each set got widely circulated.   99% of men would be saying WTF? I’m not a damn criminal.   18 year old male virgins are wondering where their 1.74 sex partners are.   The quarterback who threw 6 TD passes in a game is miffed that his awesome performance isn’t being acknowledged.

          The take home message is that most studies reported in the media are rarely as good/bad or universal as they are are reported to be.   The huge majority only suggest that a correlation is possible, but further study is needed.   Look carefully at the size of the study, study inclusion criteria, and what the numbers actually show before trying to make generalized assertions.   Lastly numbers are numbers and opinion is opinion:   Don’t confuse the two.

        28. Chance

          KE, no worries.   Hope all is well with you.


          GWTF, I think we’re largely in agreement.   Especially as it relates to the opinion piece… your points were the points I was trying to make.   The Time piece largely ignored the one thing from the study that was a true game-changer, which was the amount of time spent at work.   That is where men spend more time than women, according to the study.   So, my idea is that if you add housework, childcare, and work together, then one can begin to understand a person’s “contribution to the household”.   Of course, there are many aspects of that study that would represent weaknesses for utilizing it in this way.


          I do think, however, it can be appropriate to include people who don’t perform all three tasks we mentioned when trying to determine how much they contribute to the household.   It is understood that many people don’t work or don’t do housework.   For instance, the man who works for eight hours (and does no housework) contributes the same to the household as a women who performs four hours of housework and four hours of child-care (but does not work) in terms of hours contributed.

        29. GoWiththeFlow


          When I was writing the last post, I started thinking how I would really like to see such a study done when there is a direct head to head comparison between married women and married men with young kids who do all three types of work.   I wonder if another research team was able to take the raw BLS data and run numbers on it.

          When I get my laptop back (we had an unfortunate Sprite accident) I’m going to do a search to see if I can find anything.   Right now I’m stuck peckin away on either my phone or an ancient android tablet that doesn’t allow me to backtrack and make correction.   Sorry to everyone for the resultant typos and I corrected grammar.

        30. Chance

          GWTF, I would like to see something like that, too.   It would be much more helpful.   However, please keep in mind that if you only consider people who perform all three activities, it won’t give you a clear picture married folks’ contribution to the household because you are excluding women who don’t work, which is a material portion of the married population.

        31. GoWiththeFlow


          You are correct that there are more wives that don’t’ work vs. husbands who don’t work outside of the home.   That’s where the inverse relationship between amount of time spent on paid work outside the home and amount of time spent on housework and direct childcare:   The husbands of stay at home wives/moms do way less of the   housework and direct childcare than their wives do.   And women are more likely to be unemployed outside of the home during the years before children enter school when housework and childcare loads are the heaviest.   This is where Evan’s family example comes into play:   his wife puts in more total hours than he does.

          So while you are focusing on the greater number of hours working dads spend at a job, than their wives, what’s not being addressed is that there is a compensatory rise in the number of hours a wife spends on childcare and housework.    When a couple has a baby and mom stays home, she is dropping 8 hours of paid outside work while picking up 8 plus hours of childcare and housework, in addition to the childcare and housework she engages in evenings, nights, and weekends.   In essence it’s a labor exchange (or the old division of labor) where she drops paid labor while taking on the labor of the household, in return the husband assumes the paid labor while dropping household labor.

          Since a lot of the gender flame wars center around the question of men not “picking up the slack” when wives work too, and there are many, many more household where moms work outside of the home than stay at home full time, a study that shows hours spent on housework and childcare per hours spent at outside employment would be interesting.   For instance for every hour spent working outside of the home wives spend x hours on childcare and y hours on housework, while husbands spend a hours on childcare and b hours on housework.

        32. Chance

          “Since a lot of the gender flame wars center around the question of men not “picking up the slack” when wives work too, and there are many, many more household where moms work outside of the home than stay at home full time, a study that shows hours spent on housework and childcare per hours spent at outside employment would be interesting.   For instance for every hour spent working outside of the home wives spend x hours on childcare and y hours on housework, while husbands spend a hours on childcare and b hours on housework.”


          I don’t know if your suggested study would provide a clear picture because many, many, many more wives work part-time than husbands.   Your suggested study would actually give these women credit for working less (since hours spent on paid work is the denominator).   Maybe this is not your intent, but based on what you’re saying in your post, that is what would happen.


          If someone wants to get a clear picture of the total average hourly contribution to the household that men and women provide, I cannot really think of a more useful study than to survey couples (separated by couples with children and childless couples), and then determine the amount of hours per week that the husband/bf and the wife/gf spend on paid work, housework, and childcare (if applicable).   The total hours would equal the contribution since each activity is of equal importance.


  5. 5

    Great podcast, Evan! ItÅ› one of those strategies that seem blatantly obvious, until you realize that people are often more interested in their own motives than opening themselves up to a new person.

    I understand why a man who has been hurt feels that he should start to give less. I remember having my heart shattered by a man I once thought was perfect, and clamming up throughout the rest of my twenties. It can feel so freeing and independent to say ‘no man will ever get the chance to treat me like that again.’ Only in the past year have I started to realize that closing myself off and being hyper critical, while seemingly great defence mechanisms, also ensured that I was shutting out the nice guys! It’s the same for the men. It’s easier to netflix and chill and keep everyone at arms length, but your life experiences are going to be poorer for it.

  6. 6

    In general I agree with Evan’s opinions on this podcast. What I would encourage women to do is that if a guy is nervous on the first date, do not interpret his nervousness as weakness. Give him at least 3 dates if he isn’t doing totally off the wall stuff. It takes a lot of guts to approach a woman and ask her out. Then there is the planning part and he has to remember while he’s gazing into your beautiful eyes to not dominate the conversation. Evan’s right on the money when he says to applaud a man’s efforts. That goes a long way. It rarely happens. If a woman actually says she is having a good time or she likes my shirt I’m floored. In a man’s day to day life he is not appreciated by women. Men are seen as war-mongering stalkers by our society. If you show even a little gratitude, if he is a good guy, he will want to be a better man for you.

    1. 6.1
      Emily, the original


      “Give him at least 3 dates if he isn’t doing totally off the wall stuff.”

      There was some debate on this site in previous posts about how many dates a woman should agree to go on with a man if she is not sure how she feels about him. How many dates does it take for her to “give him a chance”? Some guys felt (if I remember correctly) even accepting one date if she felt “meh” about him was wasting his time and leading him on. But then there’s always the argument that women supposedly want instant magic and therefore immediately dismiss a lot of guys. It’s impossible, obviously, to have it both ways.

  7. 7
    Just Saying

    supply and demand……supply and demand.

    If a woman is really worth having and there are many guys after her, a man WILL make a big effort, and put on his best behaviour.

    The question should not be : Why won’t men court me, but rather, why they they want to ?   This is precisely the question men ask themselves when they are faced with the question of what to do with a woman. Do I want her badly enough to do this ?

    Our job was women is to be the kind of women men want to court, not sit around thinking we are   God’s gift and then wonder wny men won’t court us.

  8. 8

    I had an experience where I met a woman and neither of us were attracted to each other initially. Over the course of getting to know each other, we both started to feel attraction. It was quite mysterious. I honestly did not like her at all at first. If men are saying they don’t want to waste their time with women who don’t feel much for them in the beginning, they are trying to control the outcome.   I think the key is to be patient and wait a couple of dates and see if something shows up as far as the feeling or if there’s some kind of connection. This whole idea of “I don’t have the time to sit here with this woman or man   to see if there something there”is a jaded attitude and it’s not going to bring you the wonderful mysteries of life. My best dating experiences came when I was not trying to get results.

    1. 8.1
      Emily, the original


      But here’s a question: You mentioned this woman who you dated who you weren’t initially interested in. Is that common? I mean, for men to ask women out they feel “meh” about? I always assumed (and maybe wrongly) that a man had at least some interest in a woman if he asked her out. Shouldn’t women also be able to feel a marginal level of interest/attraction before they say yes to a date? It just seems like an uneven proposition if he is interested and she is not even lukewarm.

      1. 8.1.1

        I didn’t say I was interested in her and she was lukewarm. Look at my previous post again. We both felt nothing and I did not even like her. We were working together and as things heated up, we started to date. I would have never have guessed that I would end up being attracted to her months down the road, because I did not like her initially. The point that’s difficult to grasp is that when your in interview mode or thinking that you have to have an agenda, you can miss great people. It takes time. I think it is a great philosophy to just go out on dates and get to know each other. I’ve dated women I was extremely attracted to find out we had conflicting values. I’ve been on dates where the women asked me out, but I wasn’t that into it. I ended up hitting it off with her because I gave her a chance to show me who she was. Best thing is to go out with people on dates and be unattached to the outcome. You may be surprised. We are ALL biased and we make petty judgments that keep us limited.

        1. Emily, the original


          “Best thing is to go out with people on dates and be unattached to the outcome. You may be surprised. We are ALL biased and we make petty judgments that keep us limited.”

          Yes, intellectually, I agree with you, but the rest of me hasn’t caught up with that philosophy yet. It’s something I struggle with in dating — even wanting to bother with and expend the energy to go on a date if I felt nothing at the onset.

        2. Adrian

          Hi Emily,


          How is the job search going? Because I like you so much, I will let you in on a secret job that is available; fisherman. Disney and Pixar lost another fish and they need help “finding” it. (^_^)

          …         …         …


          I could be wrong, but I believe that most people feel the way you do about dating someone they feel no attraction for.


          I am curious John, what would you do if you had 3 different dates but one of the women you weren’t attracted to; would you keep going out with her to see if something develops?


          Be honest, if the only difference between the 3 was your lack of initial attraction, would you still be willing to invest 3 dates on the woman you aren’t attracted to?


          Excuse me for sounding… well I don’t know how it sounds, but I’m sure it’s not good.


          But to me, only   people without options even entertain the idea of going on 3 dates with someone they have “no” attraction for.

        3. Emily, the original


          The job search is … going. But thanks for asking. And remembering! You have a great memory.

          I have a question for you: Why do men beat a dead horse when it comes to making their interest known? I had to interact with a new copy repair technician last week and discuss the problems with the machine. In the course of 30 minutes, he asked me FOUR times if there was a “Mr. Emily” and was if I married. I appreciate the bluntness (because I am tired of flaccid flirtation), but I wanted to say, “DUDE, I got it the first time you asked. MESSAGE RECEIVED. The fact that I am not throwing the ball back and you and picking up the cue should tell you everything you need to know.” I don’t mind a man throwing it out there, but … then he needs to leave it alone. It got to the point where, the next time I have to call in a service request, I am going to ask that the company not send him.

          This goes back to an earlier point of mine: Men either come at you like a freight train or they do the   dating hokey pokey. I read this somewhere: Aggressive attention is not flattering because it is not personalized. It comes off as unbridled lust and the other person sees through it.

          Your thoughts, as always, are appreciated.   🙂

        4. Adrian



          The short answer is that the printer guy just didn’t have good social awareness,

          the long answer is that most men are taught that women like to play hard to get. If he asked that many times,

          I am guess that you were probably being friendly and social, which he mistook for flirtation from you and openness to the possibility of dating him.

          I’m sure you know this, with some people you have to be blunt.

        5. Emily, the original


          Hi, Youngster!

          “The long answer is that most men are taught that women like to play hard to get.”

          Women don’t play hard to get if we want to be gotten. I don’t know how other women handle a similar situation, but if I say no or don’t pick up on his initial cues, I’m not going to change my mind if he makes more attempts. No means no. It’s not a contest you win if you keep trying.

          “I am guessing that you were probably being friendly and social, which he mistook for flirtation from you and openness to the possibility of dating him.”

          I thought about it some more, and I probably was a bit flirtatious. I don’t mean to sound   bitter — which means I will invariably sound bitter–but men flirt with me all the time and mean nothing by it. I don’t think anything of those kinds of interactions anymore.


    2. 8.2

      John- YES! It’s happened to me too! There are so many wonderous qualities about people that are only discovered after some time. In fact, in an epic relationship you will continue to discover more of these qualities as time passes. â¤ï¸

  9. 9

    I’m not tooting my own horn in the least, but I have always been courted. I’ve always met my dates (with the exception of one) organically, and they’ve always planned and done “the right thing” (by today’s dating standards).   And I have always, ALWAYS, shown appreciation to the nth degree and been fully engaged with my date.   I just thought this was all normal dating behavior on both sides, and now I’m finding that this is NOT the norm anymore.   Netflix and chill.   That’s not going to sit right with me.   Surely it’s a generational thing -guys closer to my age do things the old-fashioned thing, i.e. courting.   I’m glad.   I’m old fashioned.   (Except I’m happy to carry some of the financial weight of dating, as I stated above.)

    And I wouldn’t dream of checking my cell phone while on a date as I’ve read women tend to do.   That’s just RUDE.

    1. 9.1



      I too have typically been courted.   I’m both floored and saddened when I hear stories like Lily’s.   Netflix & chill happened after I was a partner in an established relationship.   No wonder my son always had a gitlfriend.   He was taught to initiate and plan dates and be respectful.   If his competition was a guy texting last minute for Netflix and chill, he was blowing them away by asking girls out a week in advance to go to a free community concert and providing some snacks brought from home.

  10. 10

    The only girl I dated showed me pics and wasn’t offended when I showed mine! It isn’t something I do or ever had since but guess she lied about the yummy remark. Most females lie.. Most get offended by practically anything for excuses to escape or flee bored or uninteresting moment which come on in an instant. Guys feel that girls   can or might just like seeing authentic possibilities or proof of who they are texting.

  11. 11

    sure i’ll court her, but she has to pay for the dates. compromise is a sign of healthy relationship material, right evan?

    1. 11.1
      Evan Marc Katz

      Part of courtship is you calling/planning/paying until it’s clear you’re serious about her as potential girlfriend, not just a chance to get laid. While you’re courting, she should be appreciative and enthusiastic about your efforts. Once you’ve established that you’re ready to be a boyfriend, then “courtship” ends and you land in a more reciprocal relationship based on the ability to pay, rather than gender.

      I know you were just trying to be a sarcastic dick, but I figured I would help teach you a lesson on how to be a better man, too.

      1. 11.1.1
        Karl S

        See,   a lot of women I know would feel awkward about being taken out to dinner and paid for on a first date because it feels like the expectation of reciprocation (having sex) is being placed on them.   I’d argue that spliiting the bill or staying cheap early on makes you appear less like you’re out to get laid.

        1. Evan Marc Katz

          a. The expectation is yours – as if you’re paying her for sex. You’re not. You’re taking her out to dinner (and, in the back of your mind, hoping to get action). It’s not an exchange. Sex isn’t a given.

          b. Splitting the bill and staying cheap doesn’t make you look like you’re not out to get laid. It just makes you look cheap and lessens your chance of actually getting laid.

        2. Henriette

          Interesting theory, @Karl S, and one that might be true for some women.   In my (admittedly anecdotal) experience, however, the guys who split the bill are more likely to try to get into my pants quickly; they tend to be of the, “I don’t believe in doing anything the old-fashioned way” ilk, and they seem to feel that waiting to know someone before having sex is terribly antiquated.

      2. 11.1.2

        I didn’t know being a better man meant being snide when someone challenged your opinions.

        You know why men won’t court women, and you know that they’re right in doing so.

        Look I’m as old school as the next guy, Id love to properly court a woman, but the truth is women aren’t interested in it unless it comes from the right man. Once she establishes that she’s not wasting my time, I’ll happily be my romantic self for her. And the shitty thing is there’s a lot of guys like myself who’ve had the woman go deep and tell him how much she loves you and the whole nine yards, only to run to some other man, who then dumps her because he just wanted a piece of ass for a few weeks. That’s a lot of time money and emotions wasted on the wrong person.


        I appreciate and respect you trying to focus on the positive side of things and optimism, but any man with life experience knows better. But hey, if it makes you feel better, when I find that awesome princess of my dreams who makes me believe, you bet your ass there’ll be some serious courting. Until then I’m just going to enjoy my life and not bankrupt myself spending 300 dollars a week taking strangers out and paying for them to eat and be entertained.


        Cheers brother, keep fighting the good fight.

        1. Stacy2

            Once she establishes that she’s not wasting my time, I’ll happily be my romantic self for her

          What does a woman have to do to establish that she’s not wasting your time?

        2. Joe

          If you’re spending 3 bills on dates every week, you’re doing something wrong.

        3. Evan Marc Katz

          You’re right. I was snide. But, then, so were you in your initial response to me. I was fighting fire with fire. I should be above that.

          I’m not angry with you. I mostly feel bad for you – and men like you, who truly believe the worst in women, the worst in love, and think that women are exclusively about getting hot, rich men who treat them poorly.

          Seems to me like you still have your order wrong: you’ll start being a good guy again when a “princess makes you believe”. I would suggest that you stand a much better chance of meeting such a woman by being a warm, generous, caring, consistent, optimistic, chivalrous guy. I haven’t seen any evidence that men who treat women like shit end up in healthy relationships with feminine, confident, optimistic, understanding, self-aware women. More likely, they’ll get women with low self-esteem and poor boundaries, who are the only ones willing to put up with bad treatment. Sounds like a lose/lose. My advice is a win/win.

        4. GoWiththeFlow


          I was thinking the same thing.   The vast majority of women don’t expect a man to drop a ton of money on dates.   We have budgets and know men do too.   Well planned out and something that she likes are the important points.

          For example, if you know she enjoys hikes, plan a hike where there is a scenic overlook and watch the   sunset.   Bring a small blanket, a couple of bottles of water, maybe an inexpensive bottle of wine and some snacks snd you’re good to go.

        5. GoWiththeFlow


          I’m guessing that establishing “that she’s not wasting my time” equals her having sex with him.   But then he probably thinks she’s not worth his time because obviously, women who have sex with men so easily are sluts!


      3. 11.1.3

        Hi Evan,


        If you ever do another post or podcast on courting, would you consider speaking/teaching on one of Karmic Equations hypothesis:


        “Many men who are adamantly against courting, have most likely never made it to the stage of the relationship where they saw the benefits and reciprocation of their efforts; or they dated women who didn’t know how to reciprocate and show appreciation.”


        I was paraphrasing what she said, but I think rawr’s comment is an example of what she is speaking about.


        If someone spent all their time sweating in the sun, getting a sore back planting rose seeds in dozens of different gardens, but never being around long enough to see any of them blossom; don’t you think he would consider planting seeds not being worth the effort?

        1. Evan Marc Katz

          a) Please fix your spacing. Your posts take up twice as much space as necessary.
          b) I absolutely understand why men who have failed would quit. I will simply remind them that it’s not their courtship behaviors that are failing; it’s THEM. Their confidence. Their humor. Their personalities. Their self-awareness. You could “follow a script” but that doesn’t make you a good actor.

  12. 12

    I think I’ve been lucky in the past. I had guys that have “courted” and made me feel special. I recently tried dating a guy who wasn’t my typical type but, he was a friend of a friend and I gave him a chance. He picked me up and I asked where we were headed and he said “I haven’t thought about it. Where should we go” at dinner I offered to split and he accepted although his meal and drinks was triple the cost of mine. I gave him one more chance and it was more of the same. Third time he suggested hanging out and watching a movie. This guy is 32. When I decided not to continue he was really clueless and kept saying how great he was and how much effort he was putting in. This should not be the norm.

  13. 13

    there’s an easy solution to a problem of not being courted: don’t get involved with such men at all. Have expectations, standards and be attuned to what’s happening.

    I was recently at a bar being a wing woman for   a girlfriend of mine and a couple of guys started chatting with us. Fifteen minutes into the conversation they were still sitting and we were still standing (there were no other seats available) They did not offer to buy us a drink. I told her that they are not interested and we should move on, but she insisted on staying. She wasted her time on one of those guys. If you allow to treat yourself like that and accept it under the false belief that “chivalry is dead”, you will never be “courted”. Know your value and walk away from those who don’t recognize it. That’s all there is to it.

    1. 13.1

      The issue is when your estimation of your value and the man’s estimation of your value aren’t close.

      1. 13.1.1

        That is kind of stating the obvious, no?

        When we like someone, and this is universal for men and women, we’re trying to make a good first impression and continue to impress them. Lack of such behavior should be everyone’s first clue that the other person doesn’t care that much and move on.

        Why would a woman agree to a “Netflix and chill” date?? I don’t even get it, at all. I would much rather Netflix and chill by myself in my own bed than with a stranger who wants  sex with no emotional investment from me (especially considering that the majority of men are very average in bed anyway – sorry guys, the likelihood of a random guy being the best lover of my life is close to zero). It is very hard to understand women who go for it.

        1. Christine

          This reminds me of that Chris Rock joke where he said that when you’re on a first date, you’re not really meeting them, you’re meeting their representative!   LOL!   I think there’s an element of truth to that.   Most men I dated tried to make a good first impression (and for the few who didn’t, well…I made sure that was also their last impression by moving on)


      2. 13.1.2

        Hello Joe,


        I completely agree with your statement. But from what Stacy2 has told us about herself, she is very attractive, very rich, and very smart.


        So using that as my bases, I would like to throw in another point of view; these guys either undervalued their “own” worth, or they just struck out so many times with hot women like Stacy2, that they were being cautious.


        I am not a night club or bar guy, so most of my information is from third party listening, but many guys are rejected so much or are so bitter from the attention that women get, that they feel that doing too much is “STUPID!”


        For example, giving up their sits in a crowded bar or club to women whom may reject them and then they would have nowhere to sit.


        Spending their hard earned money buying drinks for women who probably had guys buying them free drinks all night, or who are probably going to reject them afterwards.


        Again, since I am a stranger to those types of atmospheres, I could be wrong, but from her story it seems as if the guys were just unwilling to take a risk on Stacy2 and her friend.


        They underestimated their own value and game.

        1. Emily, the original


          I could be wrong but from her story it seems as if the guys were just unwilling to take a risk on Stacy2 and her friend.

          Maybe they were just there to have a good time. Maybe they have girlfriends or wives at home. Maybe they enjoyed the flirtation/interaction but had no intention of moving anything forward. Maybe one had his eye on the tall brunette at the end of the bar. I am guessing, of course. These are just possible explanations.

        2. Christine

          Or maybe the guys were gay…that’s happened with me more than once! I have a gay friend who often gets women interested in him.   His friendliness often gets mistaken by women as flirtation.

          The fact is, you can’t know for sure.   When the signs of interest aren’t there, then I say move on, to open yourself up to someone else who is interested.


        3. Emily, the original


          I hadn’t even thought of that. Maybe the guys were gay.

          I think Stacy2 said they talked to her and her friend for about 15 minutes before Stacy2 told her friend they needed to move on. Fifteen minutes isn’t much time if the guys are really flirty and chatty. It’s sometimes hard to judge peoples’ intentions.

    2. 13.2

      Those guys probably don’t know what kind of bullet they dodged.

      I hope all the lurkers out there are reading this.

      Don’t give an inch for these entitled monsters, boys. If enough of us do it, they will eventually be forced to change their ways.

      1. 13.2.1

        McLovin, Just out of curiosity…    If you crossed paths with a beautiful woman that seemed interested in you, would you initiate a conversation with her? And if you did, and she seemed to possess all the qualities you find attractive, would you attempt to court her or would you try to get laid (knowing it’s probably not going to happen because she is so wonderful she’s going to want a commitment and not casual sex)?

        1. McLovin

          Yes, I would initiate a conversation.


          To your second question, I reject the premise. There are a whole lot of shades of grey between courting m’lady and suggesting a 15-minute romp in the men’s room.

          I have a number of different scripts I run, depending on the woman, the setting and what I want from her. I can tell you this, though, none of them are traditional.

          But no, I would not court her. I do not “court” women. Ever. Period. Any woman who seems like she might want that is immediately off my radar.

        2. KK

          Well, McLovin, at least you’re honest.

          I think you’re non-courting and the reasons behind it, just reinforced Evan’s point and the female commenters who believe that if a man isn’t willing to court you, he isn’t worth your time, given that the end goal is a relationship.

        3. McLovin

          Even if I did want an LTR, I still would not court a woman, so I’m not sure I agree that this is some sort of reliable marker for intentions.

          Listen, there is one and only one type of man that courting works for: the good looking and the genetically gifted. So, basically the type of man for whom ANY strategy would work.

          That’s why I think Evan’s perspective on this is skewed. Because he is one of those men. Tall, dark and handsome. Meeeow.

        4. Evan Marc Katz

          I’m 5’9″, and the jury’s out on how handsome I am. Put it this way: I’ve never walked into a room thinking I’d be the best looking guy. I’ve always compensated with wit, curiosity, kindness, confidence and being interesting. And that’s largely what I teach. You already know, you don’t have to be attractive to be a pick up artist – you need confidence. So why not turn that confidence into getting women and then treating them well? Beats the shit out of me, but I have little use to have a dialogue with someone who thinks so little of women and treats them accordingly. I let you stay here in the name of freedom of speech, but honestly, why not go elsewhere instead of trolling here?

        5. McLovin

          Wow, color me shocked. I had you pegged at 6’+

        6. Stacy2

          What this goes to show is that  requiring courting/effort is a fool-proof way for a woman to weed-out guys like McLovin here. I think he makes the case for it better than Evan does 🙂

      2. 13.2.2

        The most eligible bachelors where I’m at aren’t lurking, reading this. They are calling, planning the next date as soon as today’s date is over, you know courting. Your like-minded blokes are fired in a heartbeat listening to crickets chirp; only to come back, groveling.

        There are good, warm, nurturing, kind, independent, loyal, with healthy dose of confidence, fit, hot quality women out there. Nice men know one, when they see one. N.

        1. McLovin


          Let me assure you that you’re wrong. There are many eligible men who lurk here, for the same reason I do: to see the other team’s playbook.

          This is such an interesting blog, because it has a unique intersection of modern, empowered gogrrrrls and classic “put-me-on-a-pedestal” entitlement.

          I mean, you’d think that since these women have largely broken the bonds of gender roles in the career world, maybe they’d be more egalitarian in their approach to hetero relationships? Awwww, hell no they’re not. They still want their female privilege. Take this entry on insisting on “courting” as a prime example.

          The existence of this blog proves that feminism is a complete farce, a societal-level “shit test” that society failed…badly.

          Women insisted that men give up their “privilege,” but have absolutely no intention of giving up their own.

          I was thinking about Evan’s “Call, plan, pay” paradigm in regard to this post, and I had a good laugh to myself. One of my main FWB’s right now, I have never spoken to her on the phone. Not once hahaha.

        2. Evan Marc Katz

          “One of my main FWB’s right now, I have never spoken to her on the phone. Not once hahaha.”

          She sounds like a very lucky woman, I think we can all agree.

          I also think it’s obvious that if she read my blog, she would dump you in a heartbeat – unless her goal is simply to have sex with a man who doesn’t care about her, in which case, “Mission Accomplished!”

        3. McLovin


          We meet about half as often as she would like to.


        4. Karmic Equation


          That’s because she’s still trying to use sex to get you into a relationship. Doh.

          Tell her straight up,  “Babe, I only want sex with you. I’m not looking for a relationship with you. I’ll meet as often as you like to have sex, though.” Verbatim. No double-talk. Nothing that she can possibly misconstrue.

          If she’s a quality woman looking for a relationship, she’ll dump you.

          If she’s looking only for sex with you, she’ll accept what you said and take you up on the offer.

          That’s the only way to prove she only wants you for sex and not trying to maneuver you into a relationship with frequent sex.

        5. Karmic Equation

          Oh yes, for extreme clarity, add “I am dating other women, you know. Feel free to do the same. I just wanted to be clear, I’m not looking for a relationship with you.”

          The repeated “not looking for a relationship with you” phrase is necessary to ensure she’s not  suffering from “Acute Not Listening Syndrome” 🙂

        6. McLovin


          I want to reiterate here: I do not lie about my intentions. I never have, that’s for amateurs and awkward PUA’s.

          So, the conversation you suggest  has already been had.

        7. Karmic Equation

          What did you say, McLovin?

          Verbatim please.

          And how many dates ago did you say it?

          Women suffer from “Acute Non Listening Syndrome”, particularly after she’s slept with a guy.

          And most men take advantage of this.

          Please answer the  questions, and let’s debate from there.


        8. Christine

          I know what you mean Karmic.   Look at how popular Fifty Shades of Grey and Sex and the City were, among women.   They perpetuate this myth that a woman can change a man’s mind into giving her a commitment–although he didn’t want one initially.

          Unfortunately, I’ve seen a lot of women hold out this hope in real life too, thinking that even if the man doesn’t want a relationship now, he will later if she just loves him enough.   I’ve personally learned (the hard way) that no, that doesn’t happen in real life often enough to bank on it…that Hollywood loves these miraculous turn-arounds precisely because  they’re so improbable!

          I don’t know this lady and don’t know for sure, but hope she doesn’t harbor any delusions like this.

        9. Stacy2

          Gyus, who cares why that woman is sleeping with him? The story McLovin is telling is completely believable. I personally know/heard of  women like that – with  very low self-esteem and no sense of self-worth, willing to accept men who treat them as disposables and invariably ending up with sociopaths who treat them badly. These two types are a perfect match for each other. This has nothing to do with relationships or dating, or marriage. Simply two broken individuals feeding off of each other.

  14. 14

    I’m a bit conflicted on this one. In theory I agree that there are aspects of courting that are probably better and should be brought back. But I think that’s just me holding on to  something I grew up with. In this hyper connected, instant gratification and more transparent age I just don’t see that  happening.


    I’m not dating now. But when I am, I usually average about 2-3 dates a week. Are men suppose to try and impress and court multiple women from the get go? I can’t imagine putting in a lot of effort that early in the relationship.


    I think what is happening today is natural progression. The older generation just hasn’t been able to adapt. People date casually. Don’t put in a lot of effort. And when things ‘click’ with someone it becomes something more serious.(And more thought/time starts going into the relationship from both sides.) I don’t see why that is any worse than putting in x hours trying to court(someone you barely know) from the beginning.

    1. 14.1

      And even better than that, Morris, what if SHE’S going on 2-3 dates a week, dating around? There’s nothing wrong with that at all, but am I going to pull out all the stops and plan a nice date for Mzzzz. Haveitall when I’m really just in a 3-way horse race for her affections?

      I think you know the answer to that question.

      And in this day and age, it’s pretty safe to assume that most single women are dating several dudes at a time, probably with an FWB (or two) on the side.

      Evan still rigidly claims that if you’re interested, those women should be courted. It’s very similar to what Chance was alluding to above….men have very specific rules and roles to follow, while women have none.

      Courting is an absolute, 100% sucker’s bet. Even when you win, you lose.


      1. 14.1.1

        am I going to pull out all the stops and plan a nice date for Mzzzz. Haveitall when I’m really just in a 3-way horse race for her affections?

        So, is dating the only area of life where you shy away from competition? Would you apply for a job that is highly sought after   and competitive, or put an offer on a house knowing that there’re other bidders? Or is any competition too much for your fragile ego to handle?

        1. McLovin

          Did you hear that, Stacy2? It was the point sailing right over your head. Again, not surprising at all. You lack even the most basic empathy for men.

          Refusing to play a game where I have to follow all the rules, while the other team has to follow none, is not shying away from competition. It’s refusing to play a BS game where I’m set up to fail.

          Thankfully, I’ve got myself in a situation where I don’t have to play it anymore, and now I am the one who gets to filter, nitpick and reject.

          But you boys out there just keep courtin’ away, the Stacy2’s of the world obviously feel they’re worth it.

          I mean, you don’t automatically give up your barstool for the likes of m’lady Stacy2? NEXT!

        2. Stacy2


          “It’s refusing to play a BS game where I’m set up to fail.”

          It would behoove you to listen to Evan’s point in this podcast. You fail because of who you’re, and not because of the game. A 5’4” guy will not do well in the NBA – but not because the game is rigged, but because he doesn’t have required qualities to play it. Unlike one’s height, dating and relationships are social skills and can be learned/improved.

          I’ve got myself in a situation where I don’t have to play it anymore, and now I am the one who gets to filter, nitpick and reject.

          In other words, you prefer to play a submissive, feminine role in the relationship (of sorting and rejecting) rather than an aggressive, male role of pursuing what he wants? If that is your preference and a natural tendency, it clearly explains your aversion to traditional courting (as it represents behavior and the role you’re uncomfortable with)

          I mean, you don’t automatically give up your barstool for the likes of m’lady Stacy2? NEXT!

          Actually, yes, of course. A guy who doesn’t bother to make a good first impression? Next. Or do i owe him something? Didn’t think so.



        3. McLovin

          Aaaaand there it is. Stacy2 has resorted to calling me feminine and unmanly in an attempt to shame me back into line.

          Thanks for your (feigned) concern, sweetheart.

          Believe me, I’m getting exactly what I want, while bypassing all the BS.

          How’s your approach working out as a self-described cold and un-nurturing woman? Bet the high-earning guys that you are holding out for are lining up to court a woman like that hahaha.

      2. 14.1.2
        Evan Marc Katz

        The winners don’t complain on websites about how unfair dating is. We just enjoy our relationships with our wives.

        1. McLovin

          The winners scrap the unfair game and start a new one where they have a chance to win.

          It’s all perspective, I suppose. What you call “winning,” I call “prison.”

          While Adrian seems really satisfied with his own virtue signalling and celibacy, I’m following none of the rules and turning down guaranteed lays because they’re a little too chubby.

          To each his own.

        2. GoWiththeFlow


          I listened to the podcast, then came to the comments with a smile on my face. . . and there it it:    All of the usual suspects have their boxer briefs in a wad!

          Sent a link of the podcast to my son and nieces.   Thank you for ehat you do.

        3. Callie

          Has it occurred to you that you’ve stumbled onto a site that is playing Monopoly and you are doing everything you can to convince them to use the rules of Scrabble  instead?

          Like I don’t get you man, if you are content and have no need for marriage or commitment, why are you here? The men and women who come here are seeking a more traditional romance leading to a long lasting relationship kind of advice. You aren’t interested in that, indeed you were stunned a few weeks ago that Evan was happy to be married, that he actually WANTED to be married. So why do you come here trying to tell the people here that their rules suck, when they are trying to play a different game than you? What’s your goal here exactly?

        4. Caroline

          I thought the very same thing GWTF-I have two sons who I forwarded it to also:). Both are happy young men who plan dates within their means. I have both of my sons bringing girls to a BBQ at my house this holiday weekend and one is taking her to the pool and the other is taking his girl (on a friend’s boat) for fun on the sandbar. Geez-if a 27 and 18yo can figure this out…

        5. JB

          Ummm…… GoWiththeFlow I’m one of those “usual suspects” and my boxer briefs aren’t in a wad. I’ve been courting women for 35 yrs. It’s just some women I court differently than others and some very little depending on many factors. The number 1 being how into them I actually am. Men in different age groups will react differently to this topic. Like Evan said in his p0dcast.  2 men can do or say  the exact same things to a woman and depending on the value she places on each of them they’ll likely get very different outcomes. Tall, educated, attractive etc….. is more likely than not to have to put in much smaller effort than short average looking creepy guy with no options.

        6. GoWiththeFlow


          LOL!    Actually, you are not one of the usual suspects.   And your undies are not all in a wad 😉

          You’re a middle-ground kinda guy who makes totally reasonable decisions navigating the gray areas of dating.    The wadded up indie guys are the one’s where everything in binary black or white and women are always on the wrong or bad side of the divide.

        7. Adrian



          Ummm… Thanks for the shout out… I guess (O_o)


          Though I have never spoken to you or mentioned you ever once!

          …    …    …

          Some people are into one night stands and casual sex some are not. I don’t judge those who are, why   judge us who are not?


          Also, I don’t want to put anyone through the pain of developing feelings for me when I feel nothing for them, or only see them as someone to give me an orgasm.


          McLovin, it’s not always about what you can get from the opposite sex, sometimes it’s what you can give. I give women the freedom not to waste time on a guy (me) who will never be serious about them.

        8. Caroline

          @O-you’re absolutely right. You definitely don’t know my sons.

        9. McLovin



          I am not getting down on you because you don’t have casual sex. I’m calling you out because you are pursuing a strategy that is clearly not working for you, because…well I don’t really know why. It seems from most of your posts that you consider it the “right” or “moral” thing to do.

          Once a long time ago I asked you a question, and Evan deleted the comment, so I’ll try again:


          Has “courting” ever led you to a successful, sexual relationship?

        10. Adrian


          Yes courting is working for me,

          thanks for asking (^_^)

      3. 14.1.3

        I wouldn’t go as far as saying courting is 100% a suckers bet. It might not be an effective strategy  in online dating but I’m guessing if you have the time and money it could increase your odds. I mean who wouldn’t want to be courted? Given two equal potential partners. Wouldn’t the one courting have an advantage? It all depends on the individual. I’ve been there and done that. Online it works out much better for me if I keep it casual. Like you said. The women are going out with multiple people as well. Plus I’m dealing with a profile of a person I’ve never met. It just seems odd that I’d expend time/energy on a person I have no connection with.


        But offline is a different matter. There is something romantic/magical about approaching someone and asking them out. It stings a bit when you get rejected. But the highs you get from getting a number or a name is wonderful. There is an instant connection because of that. Courting seems natural to me in that environment.

        1. Caroline

          I agree with you JB. I learned quickly that “first dates” from online were really introductions/meets. I always regretted accepting a dinner date first. Inevitably one of us wouldn’t either want to be there or feel used for making too big of an investment first time out. Drinks and chatting seemed to work better for me and I always had the proper size bill to lay down to split the cost.

          And as for meeting organically; it is probably one of the biggest compliments you can pay anyone by approaching them first. And if after you chat a bit and exchange numbers; it’s such a relief to have passed a guy’s “sniff test”-lol. And of course, he passed yours! First meets from online were at times quite destructive to my self worth. But only because I let them:)

        2. Christine

          That was my experience as well Caroline.   I didn’t mind casual coffee meetups for first online dates because we didn’t really know each other yet.   I can see why a guy wouldn’t want to make a huge investment up front in those situations.

          But then, if the guy really liked me after that, then he’d start making more formal dates after that first meeting. For instance, sometimes after that coffee, then he’d treat me to lunch afterwards (if he liked me enough to want to spend more time with me).   Online dating doesn’t somehow preclude courting, if the guy likes the girl enough after getting to know her.

          I met my boyfriend online and had a casual coffee meeting at first–but then, he courted me after that with more formal dinner and activity dates.   Our relationship otherwise looks pretty much the same as other ones I’ve seen where the people met organically.

          In fact, I think “online dating” is almost a misnomer–maybe they should call it an introduction service, because that’s what it truly is (just introducing you and exposing you to people you wouldn’t otherwise meet in your “real” life.   But then, whether those introductions lead to dates is up to you).

        3. Caroline

          Oh goodness-I meant I agree with you Morris:)

          @Christine-you’re right! Online “dating” is merely a vehicle to meet people you might not otherwise come across in your everyday comings and goings:)

        4. Emily, the original


          I mean who wouldn’t want to be courted? Given two equal potential partners. Wouldn’t the one courting have an advantage?

          No, the one you have the most interest in has the advantage.


        5. Ren

          “Also, I don’t want to put anyone through the pain of developing feelings for me when I feel nothing for them, or only see them as someone to give me an orgasm.”

          Thank you for bringing light to this. It’s nice to see biology and bonding hormones acknowledged. Sure you can tell someone you’re not available while you act like a full-tilt partner in a relationship, but at the end of the day it’s just unkind. The body and mind do not always act in concert and when the body gets all the relationship cues, you can’t blame a person for feeling misled, even though the mind may have been told another thing. This goes for men and women.

          I don’t see what’s so complicated or difficult about acknowledging and taking care around human tendencies and weaknesses instead of exploiting them.

      4. 14.1.4

        While Adrian seems really satisfied with his own virtue signalling and celibacy, I’m following none of the rules and turning down guaranteed lays because they’re a little too chubby.

        I don’t agree with McLovin’s general worldview, but I must admit I laughed out loud when I read that. Sorry Adrian.

        1. Adrian

          No Shaukat (^_^)

        2. Adrian

          I meant “No problem” Shaukat. (^_^)

    2. 14.2

      I usually average about 2-3 dates a week.  

      You mean 2-3 auditions per week? How’s that working out? The best thing we all can do IMO is to refuse to date casually. What is the point of meeting 2-3 strangers who you’re lukewarm about on a weekly basis? This is such a waste of both money and time.

      I would never accept a casual date (“I only drink coffee in my own kitchen at 5am in the morning” is my line of choice). And its not because I want them to buy me an expensive meal. It’s because I don’t care to spend two hours with a stranger who is wishy washy about me. Better read a book, spend quality time with family or friends or go to the gym. Like literally, telling my life story to a disinterested stranger is the last thing I want to do.

      1. 14.2.1

        While not surprising, your comment belies a complete, total and really laughable ignorance of what it is to date as a man.

        Men don’t have the luxury of turning down opportunities.

        The solipsism is really strong with you, Stacy2.

        1. Stacy2

          Sure they do. It depends on what they’re looking for. But even if all they’re looking for is to get laid, for men who don’t have any game a “coffee date” is no more likely to result into an encounter than a booty call to 100 strange women on Tinder. In fact he may be more likely to get laid using the latter strategy because chances are one of those women will be insecure, low self esteem, horny enough at the same time to accept it, and he has fewer chances of ruining it for himself by talking. And he doesn’t even have to pay for coffee.

        2. Henriette

          Wait….   “Men don’t have the luxury of turning down opportunities?”   But, I thought you were busy rejecting guaranteed lays because they’re a little bit chubby?   Which is it, McLovin’?

        3. Karmic Equation

          Men have the luxury  of CREATING and CULTIVATING opportunities that women don’t, McLovin.

          A woman who creates and cultivates in the same way a man does is considered a whore by most men. Only good for a bang, but not as a bride.

        4. Chance

          Not true, KE.   Some men may be that way, but many won’t judge.   Kudos to women who have the courage to create and cultivate.   Nothing wrong with that at all.   I also think men have the luxury of turning down opportunities.

        5. Karmic Equation

          You say that, Chance. Many men say that, when they’re trying to project that they’re egalitarian.

          If they find that the woman’s “number” is greater than his own, you and I know that he’ll sing a different tune.

          Men don’t go about asking for that number the same way women will. But if that number comes out. And the number surprises the man, that man does perceive his girl differently.

          Be honest, Chance. If your number was 50 and your girl’s was 100, you’d perceive her differently. You’d have to somehow come to terms with that new perception or dump her if you couldn’t.

          That said, most younger men, e.g., millenials, don’t seem to care about the numbers, usually because both the guy and the girl’s numbers are usually too high to count. And most younger men don’t mind. But I do believe that the men that are the targets of Evan’s demographic of women clients, those men are not millenials. They do and will judge a woman who “creates and cultivates.”

          When I was single, I had a date with a recently divorced man who had married his high school sweetheart. He was about 50 and divorced about a year, I was about 47. And he said  to me, “There are no such things as FWBs!” I was not going to disabuse him of that notion by saying otherwise…even though  I knew differently.

          You can bet if I even hinted at how I knew it was a real thing, he’d not have wanted a 2nd date. Ultimately we never went on another one as he left it up to me to call him for date 2, which I never ended up doing.

        6. Tom10

          @ Karmic Equation
          “That said, most younger men, e.g., millenials, don’t seem to care about the numbers, usually because both the guy and the girl’s numbers are usually too high to count. And most younger men don’t mind.”
          Lol, too funny. I just automatically assume now that all women nowadays have huge numbers. Indeed, whenever women tell me their number (upon their own initiation) as being relatively low I’m not sure if I really believe them!

        7. Karmic Equation


          Yeah, millenial men and women today don’t believe sex to be the sacred act of our forbears.

          It’s just a fact of life.

          I think, sexually, it’s better for women that way. I don’t think young women have sexual hangups the way older women do.

          The only con is that they probably don’t understand that a healthy relationship is based on more than  just great sex.


        8. Chance

          KE, I thought they were talking about asking people out for dates, but if you want to change the subject, I’ll play along.   Though, I’ll admit, I’m struggling to play along because it appears you have it all figured out.   I mean, I’m obviously lying.   Open-and-shut case there.   Nothing else to really discuss.




          Let’s imagine that I’m telling the truth (I mean, let’s just imagine).   Why would I care if a woman’s number is higher than mine?   I’ve dated women before who had much higher numbers, and it didn’t bother me.   I’m also a millennial btw.   I could see how middle-aged or older men could be bothered by this type of thing, though.

        9. Karmic Equation


          Even when you agree with me, you have to say it in a way that sounds like you don’t.

          You’re a millenial. I’ve acknowledged that millenials don’t care about partners and numbers. You’ve also acknowledged that you can understand that older folk could have a problem with this.

          We  agree. Cool.


          Now back to dating. You don’t believe men should “court” because that is a traditional role that men have been “forced” into that do not benefit them.

          I believe I’ve made the point that it does benefit him if he’s attracted to her and he doesn’t know her stance on paying/not paying for dates. His odds of getting a next date is higher if he pays. Because if she is “old school” and expects him to pay and he doesn’t, she’ll reject the next date.

          As for the planning the date part, that solution is easy. Call and ask for the date, then say “How about you plan whatever you want to for our date on Saturday night. I’ll be game.” You make the call to schedule, she plans the activity.

          It’s the proactive calling that’s taboo, not the planning part.

          It’s great that you are such an awesome guy that you would not judge a woman for proactively courting you. Would that most men, and society, who look with such favor on proactive women.

        10. McLovin

          ”  “Men don’t have the luxury of turning down opportunities?”   But, I thought you were busy rejecting guaranteed lays because they’re a little bit chubby?   Which is it, McLovin’?”


          Sorry, Henriette, I should have specified “average” men don’t have that luxury. Thankfully for me, I’m not average.


          You’ll have to peddle that tripe about women not being able to cultivate their own opportunities (i.e. approach) because “boo hoo society and men will judge me” to someone else.

          Women do not approach because they don’t want to.

        11. Emily, the original


          Women do not approach because they don’t want to.

          They do if they’re really interested.

        12. Henriette


          “Sorry, Henriette, I should have specified “average” men don’t have that luxury. Thankfully for me, I’m not average.”

          Thanks for clarifying, and for being relatively polite in your response to me.   For what it’s worth, I ~ and, I suspect many thoughtful, bright women ~ agree with many of your fundamental premises but you lose me when you start being mean or making sweeping negative generalizations about women.   Yes, there are many entitled princess types in the dating world, but why not just avoid them and instead enjoy the kind, warm, self-supporting ones?   There are plenty of us “out there,” too!

      2. 14.2.2

        Stacy2 – I guess I should have been clear. I’m not dating right now because I’ve been in a relationship for a while now. I can tell you the new way of dating is much more effective if not romantic. I think the older generation, including myself, are hung up on that. But times are changing.


        I can tell you what seems to work for people in the older demographic.(Maybe even younger, although the pool would be smaller I think.) Meeting and dating offline. The truth is online is a casual way of dating. Unless you’re using something like eHarmony one shouldn’t expect some exclusive courting behavior of the past. I mean you can, but I don’t think that’s the direction things are going.


        1. Stacy2

          That makes sense. I think it would be tough to strike the right balance with online dating (and i agree that offline is much better for both young and old). Its hard to treat a first date from online as an actual date rather than a “meet and greet and see if this is worth pursuing”. To that end, Evan’s advice to communicate for a week or so before an actual date makes sense (if you got the time).

      3. 14.2.3
        Karl S

        Stacy2 said:

        I would never accept a casual date (“I only drink coffee in my own kitchen at 5am in the morning” is my line of choice). And its not because I want them to buy me an expensive meal. It’s because I don’t care to spend two hours with a stranger who is wishy washy about me.

        I’m confused by this.   You’d never go for coffee with someone because they don’t know if they like you yet? That sounds really limiting.   Rules out internet dating,   speed dating,   blind dates and pretty much any stranger you met only briefly who wanted to spend time in your company, but in a low stakes way because they don’t even know you.   

        1. Stacy2

          Probably not. But I don’t online date either. It just doesn’t sound like something I would enjoy and life is too short to be wasting time on unenjoyable activities with strangers so that they could cheaply figure out whether they like me or not, don’t you think? (on the other hand I would not hesitate to split a check if I thought our financial position was similar).

          A platonic friend of mine once told me he takes all his dates to expensive restaurants, but it’s not because of those girls but it’s that he likes fine dining and enjoys company of attractive women. That is more my speed (and my experience).

        2. Stacy2

          Oh, and I should add that “rules” are what we make them to be. It is not written in the constitution what the rules of online dating are. Everybody should set their own boundaries, I think.

      4. 14.2.4

        Well when you refuse a guys invitation for a coffee first date, he’s got to make a snap decision:

        (a) does she want to get to know me? In which case she will consider my finances when ordering.

        (b) does she want to order the most expensive items on the menu and use me as a free meal, and has no interest in a second date? This puts guys in an awkward situation. Confident guys would just refuse to pay, many guys though would just grit their teeth and pay anyhow.

        Unfortunately if you are a stranger he has no way of knowing which category you fall into… I suppose this strategy works to filter out cheap and/or unconfident guys, but still you risk filtering out some decent guys.

      5. 14.2.5

        Hi Stacy2,


        I am curious, what would be your opinion of a fun first date?


        I always like going to fairs and carnivals as first dates, because you can walk and talk for hours about all the things around you. You can stop at booths to play games or grab a snacks. There are rides, plus the atmosphere of everyone and thing around you is fun and playful.


        I guess I like those type of first dates verse coffee or a restaurant dates because even if we decide that there will not be a second date, we both can still say we had fun.


        Would something like this be too cheap for you or too childish for you?

        1. Stacy2

          Personally I think being creative with the first date has no upside whatsoever, unless you know that the other person enjoyes this particular activity. For example, I personally can’t stand carnivals and street fairs. I don’t like crowds and when in the middle of a crowd I get panic attacks (like really ant breathe etc). But you wouldn’t know this fact about me at the time of asking me out, so if you suggested a street fair it would make me uncomfortable. I don’t like being difficult and shut down a guy’s idea, after all he did all the planning. On the other hand, this is not something I would enjoy. My advise is to play it safe. A wine bar is perfect. A glass of wine is cheap and it has optionality- if you like the person you can proceed to dinner, if you don’t you don’t. And few people would hate wine bars, may be recovering alcoholics (but that would be helpful to learn right away, so win win)

        2. Stacy2

          Am I should add that “creative” dates are perfect for the “follow up” dates, second, third, etc. I always like spending time with a guy during the day when no food or alcohol is involved, it’s good to get to know a person that way, more opportunities to have meaningful conversations. I wouldn’t even think about a date like that in terms of “cheap” or “childish”. This is perfect, once you know you both enjoy it.

        3. CaliforniaGirl

          It’s a really bad idea, I actually had a second date at a street fair. First, I paid $20 for parking, I don’t eat fair food as it’s usually not healthy or clean. I don’t particular enjoy porter potties when I need to go the bathroom. All those kids running and screaming around.. Really? I left after half an hour and didn’t want to see the guy again..

        4. Caroline

          Adrian-when I was dating online (match) I had a huge response when I would fill out the part where you could describe a great date. Most folks said dinner, candlelight, picnic/bottle of wine. The date ideas which got the best response were an open air market which is held every month where they have local restaurants having cooking demonstrations, food trucks, wine bar, local craft beer vendors, organic produce for sale, etc.   The other was bocce ball at this cool pub.   Gallery showings are great too (free wine and finger food), ac/heat, you can talk about the paintings/art so you don’t feel pressured to tell your life story, and she can dress pretty to make a good first impression:)

  15. 15

    American men are really bad at courting, after dating men from other cultures, dating American men is very different. I think they are just confused and don’t know what to do. Some really good guys lost all their attractiveness because they were never taught how to behave.
    taughtwhat is the effective behavior with women. Guys should listen to Evan here because he is right about what is effective.
    I don’t even agree to a dinner on a first date, I prefer happy hour drinks or something similar but some guys still accepted $10 from me on my $4 beer and I never got the change 🙂 Americans only, not even one European, Russian, Middle eastern guy accepted money from me on a few first dates.

    I had a first date with a guy recently and we agreed to meet after work. He told me that he doesn’t want to spend money on dinner before he knows that we like each other. After he said that, my desire to see him dropped dramatically, not because he was wrong but because what he said doesn’t make a woman feel good. I didn’t even offer a dinner, but he was quick to dismiss this possibility. I came after work and I was hungry, I ordered a beer first (it was a bar with food) and after half an hour I told him that I am hungry and I am going to order food and pay for it, so he shouldn’t worry. He already liked me at this point and wanted to pay but I insisted on paying and told him that what he did was not effective and my mood was not in his favor from the beginning.


    1. 15.1

      Not only was it ineffective, but plain stupid. When you meet after work you are near guaranteed to be hungry and when you are hungry it’s hard to be enjoy a date. He should have picked a different time if he was so afraid of paying.

    2. 15.2

      So it wasn’t his policy that put you out, it was just knowing that that was his policy.   I see.

      1. 15.2.1

        I don’t judge him having a policy not paying for dinner on a first blind date. I can understand that it can be expensive. I didn’t even  suggested anything related to dinner but he was quick to tell me that he is not paying for it. How is it attractive? He could just suggest another activity and see if I agree, why to start with a negative comment at all? It was a complete turn off, if I want to feel like a man is willing to spend money on me doesn’t mean that I expect him to actually spend it on me. Generous guys get more women, maybe it’s wrong but it is what it is and either you play by the rules or you just go home alone and complain.

      2. 15.2.2

        I know from my guy friends that a lot of girls suggest a fancy restaurant for the first date and order expensive meals. It exists and is very sad. But let’s try and be our best selves and not assume right away that I am trying to get a free meal and maybe I might be hungry after day at work and willing to pay for myself.

    3. 15.3

      California Girl,

      “American men are really bad at courting”.

      I posted a similar comment on another thread. It’s not just about who pays for the first few dates(  although that alone is very telling), but it’s also about who does the asking out, calling, planning the dates…etc.

      American men in general really really dislike doing all of these things and that is their right.    It wasn’t until recently that I realized how different my cultural values  are ( dating/relationship-wise especially). The way I see it, instead of expecting someone to change their values/behaviors to suit mine, I’d much rather channel my energy into meeting  men I have more in common with.


    4. 15.4

      CaliforniaGirl, what you said is so true.   I’d didn’t even realize how confused American men were until I stopped dating them and dated European men.   I had spent heaven knows how much money on coaching when I dated Anerican guys to try to figure out their behavior, why did some pay, why did some expect you to pay and then get offended if you actually went through with it and paid, why did they get upset at being expected to plan the date but then get upset if you then plan the date, the exclusivity talk, Netflix and chill, upset at being expected to call but being turned off if you call, blah blah blah.   It’s like they couldn’t decide if they were men or women, looked for clues from you on how to act but when you provide those clues, are resentful for it.   When I met my husband (who is French) he knew exactly what to do, how to court, how to be a man.   The whole weight of figuring out how to do the right thing was taken off my shoulders and we could actually focus on the important part of building the relationship. We had the exclusivity talk only because I insisted – he never had to have one because he only dated one person at a time. And the other refreshing thing is that he loved women, appreciated them and didn’t have this bitter anger and hatred towards them that the American guys have.   I don’t know exactly who to blame regarding the ineptitude and confusion of the American dating culture but thank god I didn’t have to deal with it any longer!

      1. 15.4.1


        I seriously doubt that every American man you dated displayed that type of inconsistent and schizophrenic behavior at once. Rather, I’m pretty sure what you mean is that you dated American men and they weren’t homogenous in their courting styles. Also, some of the men who distant and sending mixed signals were probably just not really into you.

        At aby rate, replace ‘American men’ with ‘American women’ and this post could have been written by a bitter red pill type.

        1. Marie

          Haha Shaukat, sometimes the same guy was behaving weirdly, running hot and cold, disappearing, reappearing, like a magician. I had no use for these people, it was like dating a bunch of immature high schoolers pretending to be men. As to your comment about bitter American women, I   wouldn’t know. I dated 42 men in 6 months before finding my husband and I’m pretty happy with my choice. With Evans coaching I dated a wide variety of people, had a lot of great experiences and no regrets.   I’m not saying that these people are bad people, just that they could go a long way in achieving better dates by just learning manners (like listen to this podcast for example).

      2. 15.4.2

        @Marie: I have many friends who wed Frenchmen.   Almost all now regret their choice, finding that these men were gifted woo-ers but less-talented husbands.   Glad that you’re currently happy with your choice; I truly hope that you remain so.

        1. Marie

          Yes, we are very happy thank you!   We are celebrating our 4th anniversary in 2 weeks! Regarding your comments, I was really only referring to CaliforniaGirls post about the initial phase of courtship.   Of course that is only the first layer, all the deeper layers have to apply – kindness, consistency, character!nif you are blinded by someone’s initial behavior and fail to take this into account of course you are going to be unhappy.   On the whole, through working with Evan I had dated many men who were good at courting – and by courting I do not mean extravagant behaviors that would be a red flag, just normal common sense gentlemanly behavior like calling when you say you would call, following up, actually showing up on time or not canceling at the last minute – you know, respectful behavior a decent person would show anyone.   You’d be amazed at how many people have no idea how to act.   Anyhow, out of these gentleman you then select for character, consistency and compatibility.   My point is, it makes it an easier starting point when people already have manners to begin in my opinion than to have to teach them as you date them.   I am in no way saying Europeans are better in character etc.   but the American dating culture I think is a bit wacko.   That’s why dating coaches are such a cottage industry here!

      3. 15.4.3

        Hi Marie,

        I wasn’t saying American women are bitter. I was simply pointing out that you’re making a generalization about American men which isn’t helpful. A man dating American women would likely have many similar stories, and he shouldn’t be generalizing either.

        Glad all that dating paid off in the end:)

        1. Marie

          @Shaukat – Oh ok well I see your point. I don’t know how women come off I guess since I don’t date them.   I do think our culture in general keeps getting more and more vague in terms of what is considered acceptable dating behavior. The standards are just lower and lower until nowadays apparently the kids don’t seem to even know what dating is. They just text and hook up. I don’t follow Evans blog much anymore but I do read occasionally because his opinion is interesting plus it reminds me not to take my marriage for granted.   It sounds pretty miserable out there!

  16. 16
    Karl S


    In answer to your question for me above , I’d say date when your time permits. Don’t murder yourself or sacrifice sleep. I work in hospitality, which means I’m on shift Friday/Saturday nights and sometimes Sundays. You know, when most normal adults have their free time. I imagine this contributed to a number of failed relationships in the past, but luckily my current partner makes a lot of time for me in the week after she finishes work. The more constrained your hours, the harder you’ll find dating, but as long as you (or your partner) don’t fill your free time with too many extra curricular activities you should have a window to date at some point in the week.

    1. 16.1

      Karl S, thank you for your response. I agree that this seems  sensible. I’m just a bit sore because a few times I’ve specified when I’m available for a first date only to get dead silence. For example, “yes, I’d like to meet, but since it’s hard to find time after work,  Sat afternoon is better because then I can give you my full attention :-)” .It’s my intention to show interest by saying yes and when I am available, but somehow it’s not translating. I’d prefer the date to be at a time when I’m genuinely more able to focus on my date, instead of a clock.

      My compromise has been to agree to whatever he suggests the first time and to make counteroffers to subsequent dates.   However, this has often resulted in the men wanting to extend the evening, instead of making a second date. I hate to say no, because then they are hesitant to ask for a second date. I’m assuming that this may be a function of my dating men for whom I don’t feel tons of chemistry, but I do feel might be solid individuals, so I’m stretching to allow for feelings to develop.

      A friend of mine suggested that perhaps men are A) saving ‘weekend’ dates for girls they’ve already met during the week and who have ‘passed the initial sniff test’;   that B) men think that afternoon dates are not ‘serious’ dates; or C) men think I’m not really interested (in which case, why would I be saying yes? Wouldn’t a woman just not date that person?) One assumes people would just say what they mean and mean what they say, but tt appears my magic 8 ball is broken on this topic.

  17. 17


    I was referring to what you said about what you were raised to believe and the comment you made about women over a certain age not being worthy of courtship along with other little tidbits you slip in from time to time about women your age being terrible marriage prospects, etc.

    1. 17.1

      I know what you’re referring to.   You’re just misrepresenting it (how much of it is willful, I don’t know).   Read carefully instead of jumping to conclusions about where someone is coming from when he/she says something you don’t like to hear.

  18. 18
    Karmic Equation

    Personally, I don’t look more favorably upon a guy who pays the full tab on the first few dates and I don’t look less favorably at a guy who wants to split the check on those same dates.
    But here is how it nets out:

    Woman who doesn’t pay or offer to pay, will choose not to date this check-splitting guy again, if guy-not-paying is a dealbreaker for her.

    Man who doesn’t pay or insists on splitting, gets half his bill taken care of, but may be rejected for a second date.

    As long as neither party is attracted to the other party, then NBD.

    However, if the guy is attracted and didn’t pay, and gets rejected for another date because him not paying is a dealbreaker for her, he has only himself to blame for lowering his chances for another date. He shouldn’t get mad at her. Her rejection of him for not paying is her prerogative.

    And if the woman is attracted, and the guy doesn’t call her for another date based on the fact she didn’t offer to pay, then she doesn’t get another date either. She shouldn’t get mad at him or herself. His rejection based on that one data point is also HIS prerogative.

    Who pays only matters if there’s attraction on one side, and the behavior of paying or not paying is some sort of deal breaker for the object of the attraction.

    And since GUYS are the ones who get the choice of whether to call or not call for another date, then doesn’t it make sense that if he’s attracted to her and doesn’t know her stance on paying or not paying, that he pays the tab, no questions asked, to INCREASE his chances of getting another date?

    So I disagree with men who say they “don’t have a choice” when they date. Men have the most power in dating and relationships until there are children. Once there are children, yes, women have more power.

    When a MAN is attracted to a woman, he has the choice to call and ask for another date, whether or not there’s exclusivity.

    Women don’t have this choice before exclusivity. If she’s attracted, she has to wait until he decides whether he’s attracted enough to ask her on another date. And she has to continually be in this waiting mode after every date until exclusivity. Men, think about this. How empowered would you feel if whether you can PICK UP THE PHONE and SCHEDULE another date with a woman you are attracted to is based on her decision first?

    I know, “There’s nothing that stops a woman from calling a man to schedule a date. We want women to call us.” But there is. That lovely double standard/perception that many men have that women are desperate if they chase him.

    And here we have it, Chance.

    Men are expected to pay for dates. Yes. Traditional male role and expectation. A man doing otherwise can be judged as not serious about a relationship or simply cheap.

    Women are expected to wait for men to ask them for another date. Yes. Traditional female role and expectation. Because a woman who does the opposite, and initiates contact, can be judged as desperate. And she also risks a man taking her up on her offer simply because he’s interested in sex, not an actual relationship with her.

    The only risks men take in dating is rejection: a “no” to another date. Women have the most of the risk in dating. She has restrictions on how proactive she can be before exclusivity. If she’s attracted to the guy but he isn’t to her, she often has to live the disappointment, with no closure when he disappears on her. She has to be careful vetting the intentions of the man she’s dating lest she gets dumped after sex.

    If a man is confident and is not afraid of rejection, the dating world is his oyster. He gets to choose whom to date, when to date. If a woman is confident and is not afraid of rejection, the dating world is still NOT her oyster. She has restrictions, based on society’s double standards, that she has to be careful of: can’t call a guy or she’s considered desperate. She can’t have sex with a guy she doesn’t love just because she’s attracted to him because then she’s a whore.

    Ultimately, I concur with Evan, courting (if we mean paying for dates) is an effective strategy for men getting another date with the same woman, simply because you don’t know on the first few dates if you’re dating a woman where “paying for dates” is a deal breaker for her or not. Courting hedges your bets of getting another date, as long as she’s attracted to you. Think of the opposite. A woman who pays or splits the tab on the first date? She doesn’t increase her chances of getting a second date if YOU are not attracted to her.

    1. 18.2

      Great points and conclusion. So glad you said it KE.

    2. 18.3

      I always find it interesting when I read comments from the men here, wanting women to take a more proactive approach.   For better or for worse, though, I’ve never actually seen that work in the real world. I have to agree with Karmic that the woman proactively pursuing a man (i.e. calling him, planning dates) in the initial stages gets judged as desperate.

      There’s an argument to be made that that’s not the way it should be.   But at least from what I’ve seen, that’s the way it is.     I had more success when I followed Evan’s “do nothing” model, than when I tried to be more proactive.   I finally got into a relationship by following “do nothing” and letting my guy contact me after the first date, plan and pay for subsequent dates, initiate contact with me in between dates, etc.   We now have a more egalitarian relationship with splitting household costs, me texting him when I feel like it, etc.–but at the beginning it was all him.

      With the men who were into me (like my guy), I didn’t have to do anything, because they made efforts themselves.   With the men who weren’t into me, being proactive didn’t make them more attracted or lead to subsequent dates.



    3. 18.4

      “If a man is confident and is not afraid of rejection, the dating world is his oyster. He gets to choose whom to date, when to date. If a woman is confident and is not afraid of rejection, the dating world is still NOT her oyster. She has restrictions, based on society’s double standards, that she has to be careful of: can’t call a guy or she’s considered desperate. She can’t have sex with a guy she doesn’t love just because she’s attracted to him because then she’s a whore.”

      You forgot to elaborate on the non-confident man and non-confident woman.   The latter, according to your evaluation, is no different from the confident woman.   The former is still at the mercy of both types of woman.

      1. 18.4.1
        Karmic Equation

        I’m not sure I get your point, but I’ll try.

        A non-confident man is at his own mercy. His lack of dates is self-inflicted. He either needs to become confident, or fake confidence. And ask a woman out. And he has to learn to deal with rejection. The same way women have to learn to deal with the aftermath of the “hit it and quit it” guys.

        When it comes to dating, other than saying “no” (to another date, to sex), a woman’s power is limited during dating. She can’t “make” a guy call her to plan a date for next Saturday night; but a guy can is free to call anyone he wants to to fill up his Saturday night. Granted his first or second choices may say no, but if he is confident, he will have cultivated a few options and someone on his list should be available. There is zero guarantee, even for the woman who is dating 5 different guys, that she one of those guys will call to schedule a date with her on the Saturday night she wants to go out.

        Let’s just say this another way. A confident man has had first dates with 4 different women. The odds of him getting a date on a Saturday night with one of those women is quite high. If his choice #1 has plans, he can call choice #2. If choice #2, can’t make it, he can call choice #3. If choice #3 can’t make it, he can call choice #4. He has at least 4 chances to fill his Saturday night. He just has to make a call.

        Let’s take a confident woman’s scenario. She’s had 4 first dates with men she finds attractive. None of them call her to schedule a date for Saturday night.  She’s at those men’s mercy. She could be dating 20 men. She still isn’t guaranteed a date for Saturday night if they don’t call her.

        Yes, she could call them all. But you know, even just writing this makes this hypothetical woman sound desperate.

        Flip the script again. A guy who is dating 20 women. What do you think are the odds of his getting a date for Saturday night if he gets on the phone?

        Yes, women get to “choose” whom to date. What men forget is that if men  don’t ask her out, she has nothing to choose from.

        No, men don’t get to “choose”. But  if a man wants a date, he just has to put in the effort (assuming he tries to date in his league, not out of it).

    4. 18.5

      Hi Karmic,

      I agree with a lot of your points, but couldn’t let this go unchallenged:

      The only risks men take in dating is rejection: a “no” to another date. Women have the most of the risk in dating. She has restrictions on how proactive she can be before exclusivity. If she’s attracted to the guy but he isn’t to her, she often has to live the disappointment, with no closure when he disappears on her. She has to be careful vetting the intentions of the man she’s dating lest she gets dumped after sex.

      It’s simply not the case that men don’t experience these type of disappearing acts, even after sex. I’ve had at least two women with whom I was interested in pursuing an LTR disappear after spending the night; one of them sent a text msg the day after staying over on our fourth date ending it. Not saying I’ve never done it myself, but it’s no longer just male territory.    Among millennials and in the context of modern dating, I don’t think this is unusual. Have you ever seen ‘500 Days of Summer?’ That attractive, emotionally distant, and sexually liberated woman wasn’t just the creation of some writers’ imagination, she actually does exist.


      1. 18.5.1
        Karmic Equation

        I’ll agree that rules about dating and sex that us “old people” have do not apply to millenials. Millenial dating seems  like how rabbits would date if rabbits were humans. Its more about hooking up than developing a bond. Kind of sad.


        I’ve never seen 500 days of Summer. I’ll see if I can get that on Amazon Prime.

        1. Stacy2

          I am going to disagree on this. May be college kids “date like rabbits” but millennials are a whole generation of 24-34 yo people. I am at the upper end of it and certainly we do not date like rabbits nor do self-respecting girls sleep around. Unattractive, insecure girls do. I even heard a term “go ugly early” – meaning. Approach an ugly girl early in the night to guarantee sex as a strategy.

        2. Shaukat

          “Insecure, unattractive girls do.”

          Wrong, Stacy2. Women who have sex with men simply because they feel that’s absolutely all they have to offer might be insecure or unattractive, but women who have NSA sex because they enjoy it are the epitome of confidence. In the end it doesn’t really matter how you judge such women, because as one poster (Tom10?) once astutely pointed out, in the final analysis you don’t decide your quality when it comes to dating; men decide it for you. And if what you’re getting is men who sit on the couch and the then take you for all you’re worth in a divorce settlement, then you ought to take a cold hard look at how the market judges you:)

        3. Shaukat

          It’s not at all true that women who enjoy sex for its own sake are “ugly and insecure,” and in the end it doesn’t matter if other judgmental women view them this way. All that matters is whether the men they want enjoy their company.

    5. 18.6

      “Men are expected to pay for dates. Yes. Traditional male role and expectation. A man doing otherwise can be judged as not serious about a relationship or simply cheap.”




      “Women are expected to wait for men to ask them for another date. Yes. Traditional female role and expectation. Because a woman who does the opposite, and initiates contact, can be judged as desperate.”


      Not correct (among millennials).   Women are generally free to ask men for another date.   Most of us guys don’t care.   I would say there are quite a bit more young millennial women who would be turned off by a guy who doesn’t initiate than there are guys who would be turned off by a woman who initiates.


    6. 18.7

      I go to all these first dates and I do have fun, I changed my attitude, I don’t know, but I do enjoy it. But I have absolutely no power over second date, so I get ready, I drive there, I sit and talk about same things about myself over and over again, I smile and laugh at his jokes and he invites me to an event in two days on Saturday night. After the date he texts me and says that he had a great time and the invitation to the event is on and he would love to go together. I agree and he never calls or texts again. And I try not to get upset and repeat Evan’s mantra that no man is real until he is your boyfriend, but you know, it’s hard not to think about why he even bothered to invite me and what kind how uninterested he was in me even to forget to cancel the date? It happens all the time and to all of my single girlfriends and it’s really sad. I just stopped believing anything a man says to me until he actually does it. If I have a date and he didn’t confirm the day before or the latest same day morning, I make another plans.

    7. 18.8

      Hi Karmic Equation,

      Two quick questions -I know my tab is getting long… do you accept plastic? I am sure I can get a few I.O.U’s laminated.- (^_^)


      By the way I don’t disagree with you, I’m just curious about your opinion.


      1). The Okcupid study was based on pictures of men (I thought) not their profiles; So how are you getting women value relationships to explain why most women don’t find most men attractive?


      2). If Megan fox, Jessica Alba, or Kate Upton pursued a none celebrity guy, are you saying that the guy would think she is desperate or consider her a whore? He would not date her or lose interest?


      Since according to the OKcupid study, the majority of men found the majority of women attractive, why would a guy turn down a woman he found attractive just because she asked for his number?


      1. 18.8.1

        2). If Megan fox, Jessica Alba, or Kate Upton pursued a none celebrity guy, are you saying that the guy would think she is desperate or consider her a whore? He would not date her or lose interest?
          The above women don`t have to pursue anybody.

        Since according to the OKcupid study, the majority of men found the majority of women attractive, why would a guy turn down a woman he found attractive just because she asked for his number?

        They would not necessarily turn her down, Probably not.   He just will not see her anything but temporary.

      2. 18.8.2
        Karmic Equation

        Hi Adrian,

        I think you asked similar questions in another thread. And I answered those questions in detail.

        But to summarize:

        1) 8-9-10 women don’t have to approach, they’re being approached and you can bet that 8-9-10 men are approaching them online or out and about. I’d say I’m a 7 and I get approached enough that I don’t have to approach. So if that is reality for most 7s, then the one’s approaching IRL may most likely be 6 and below. And do you think those 6-and-below women are approaching 6-and-below men? Didn’t think so. So they’re approaching hte 8-9-10s, who are either going to take advantage of them or say no, because they’re not attracted enough in the first place.

        2) SMV is really a male scale (a scale MEN rate women by) and RMV is the scale that women rate men by. Men have an RMV scale as well. While most men in that OKC study were fair in their ratings, they only wrote to the hottest women. Let’s assume   for the sake of argument that’s the top 20%.  And the women, while they only found 20% of the men hot, wrote to more men outside that 20% range. And if we assume that both groups wrote to the people they most wanted to have a relationship with (people they deemed to have the highest RMV), then that number is 20% for both genders.

        In other words, men would be willing to have sex with 60% of the women (all the women they found attractive), but only have relationships with the top 20% (the ones they wrote to). And women only found 20% of the men physically attractive (from evaluating looks alone), but were willing to write to men outside that range (the ones they thought they could have relationships with).

        1. Karmic Equation

          Oops. I re-read what I wrote. Not logical.

          I should have concluded as follows:

          When women rate on the SMV scale, she does rate the guy she finds “most handsome/doable” 🙂 – That is 20% of men.

          However, she’s willing to date men who are not the MOST handsome/doable, because she wants a relationship and not just sex.

      3. 18.8.3

        Karmic Equation and Sandra,

        Neither of you answered the question.

        But since I am just playing devils advocate and not really invested in the answer, I’ll just say what I meant instead of a long back and forth.

        1). If women a Megan Fox asked a average guy out, he would not lose interest or tell her no.

        My point… Women’s reasons for not asking guys out or planning dates is B.S. If a man thinks a women is attractive he will love any attention she gives him.


        2). If according to the Okcupid study 90% of the men found 90-95% of women attractive (not saying how hot she is compared to other women, just that he thought she was attractive), then that means that almost all women could ask a guy out and have a chance of it working.

        1. Karmic Equation

          Hi Adrian,

          I didn’t mean to not answer. I did. Megan Fox wouldn’t have to approach anyone. As she’s purportedly bisexual, both men and women would be approaching her.

          That said, I think your real question is that if the men (or women) who were approaching Megan were not to her liking, but there was a man (or woman) across the room who was, how would she get that person’s attention?

          I’m going to guess that she would surreptitiously follow the object of her interest out of the corner of her eye and wait then wait for the moment of eye contact. If the guy’girl is at all interested, their eyes will meet. She just holds eye contact for a little longer than necessary, smile lookaway. Go back to chatting with whoever, and continue to do this until the guy/girl approaches.

          That’s how I’d do it. If the guy never looks my way then it’s pretty clear he’s not at all interested. But if a man is interested, eventually eye contact, and a lot of non-verbal communication would take place and the man should approach with the confidence that she’s interested, at least in talking to him.

          Now, I’m a voice guy. I like men with soft husky voices or deep voices or “normal” voices. Too nasally or too squeaky, I lose interest. So let’s say the guy approaches (and I were Megan, don’t I wish!!) and his voice is not to my liking, I may be polite to him but then be very polite, though not warm. Some things, like the timbre of a man’s voice, you cannot tell from across the room. In that case (with me), it would just mean I *was* interested but his voice (I know, I know, very superficial) may have turned me off of him. So I wasn’t being a tease or trying to use my “powers” to get another man into my flock. The interest was sincere, but up close, he was not what I was looking for.

          As to the 90% attractiveness rating. Online, most women, get contacted, so if men are finding 90% of those women attractive, and various percentages men are writing to those women, again, those women won’t need to approach, she just needs to respond to the ones who message her that she finds attractive…or she would message the ones she’s  interested in. And if the woman is reasonably attractive, her out-reach to those guys online will probably result in some conversation and possibly dates.

          Now IRL, it’s not usually thin women who approach, because men tend to approach thin/slender women IRL, so she’ll usually have a selection to choose from. So Megan Fox-lookalikes are not the ones approaching men (and if they do, they’d be approaching other men in the same league. 10 women only approach 7 and belows in teenage movies, not IRL).

          This means that women who’ll initiate contact with men tend to more like Amy Schumer. But will she be approaching the men in her league? The men in her weight class? The man with the double chin and balding head? No, she’ll probably approach the good looking guy. If he’s a good guy and not interested, he’ll let her down easy. If he’s attracted, good for them. But  assume that he’s not a good guy, and not attracted, but he’s got nothing else going on. “A bird in hand is worth two in the bush”. So she initiates. He takes her up on it. So  he charms her by saying all the right things and flirting with her. Meanwhile she thinks she’s hit the jackpot. “Hey, a guy I like likes me! Woo hoo!” When he later tries to get lucky, he just might and then he doesn’t call her again. Or maybe he will. But he has no intention of having a relationship with her. But if she’s offering easy sex when he’s got nothing else in the fire, why not take her up on it?

          I think this latter scenario happens to a lot of women whom guys are UNwilling to approach (not attractive enough to be worthy of their effort to approach or, more likely, not attractive enough to risk rejection) — but who are not UN-attractive enough to not bang if it were offered.

          So, again, that 90% attractiveness rating men rate women, is based on whether she’s f*ckable (pardon the language) — not based on whether he’s willing to commit to her (a la Megan Fox).

          You could say that the 20% of men whom women rate as “above average” are the ones SHE finds f*ckable at face value, literally, and whom she WISHES to have a relationship with.

          But men write only to the hottest women (top 20% of the 90% they rate as attractive). He writes only to the women he’d be willing to commit to, at face value, as well as to have sex with, of course.

          I’m struggling to explain, but hopefully, I’m clearer this time?

        2. Emily, the original

          Karmic Equation,

            “Megan Fox wouldn’t have to approach anyone. As she’s purportedly bisexual, both men and women would be approaching her.”

          Maybe. Or only the creepers approach her because they have no self-awareness, don’t pick up on a woman’s disinterest and approach almost every woman. She also may be surrounded by so many admirers, a man she likes can’t get to her. Then she can approach him. I don’t see what difference it makes if the man or woman approaches. You don’t introduce yourself and say, “I am hitting on you. Just so you know.” You just have a brief conversation and see where it goes. Even if the woman approaches first, she’ll be able to tell if a man is genuinely interested by what he does to move things forward over time. And for the record, I’m sure there are a lot of men who like Amy Schumer. She’s an attractive woman (though not a size 2), and she’s very successful. That bumps her up into another class of men. Just like men who are famous but not traditionally handsome. They can get women out of their appearance league.


          “Now, I’m a voice guy. I like men with soft husky voices or deep voices or “normal” voices. Too nasally or too squeaky, I lose interest. “

          ME, TOO! That’s why I can’t figure out why Ryan Gosling is considered so hot. A good actor, yes, and certainly not bad looking, but his voice ….       And then there’s Adam Levine from Maroon 5. Both have nasally, slightly high-pitched voices. However, Richard Burton could have talked me out of my drawers in seconds ….     🙂

        3. Christine

          Actually, doesn’t Amy Schumer have a good-looking younger boyfriend?   He seems like a great catch, good for them!

          You would think that the more conventionally beautiful women would get approached more often–but who knows.   I was very surprised to once read Jennifer Lawrence complaining about a lack of dates (and I would have thought men would want to approach and ask out a beautiful, rich young woman like that).

          I was reading some magazines the other day while getting my hair done–now I’m caught up on celebrity gossip LOL

        4. Karmic Equation

          Hi Emily,

          I’m sure she gets approached by creepos of both genders 🙂 However, in any given venue, I’d doubt she’d ONLY be approached by creepos, unless she was at a creepo convention lol. But I did account for the fact that she might not like whoever has approached her. In that case, I’d be willing to bet she’d make sustained eye contact with the guy across the room who does meet her fancy, and then only approach if the guy reciprocates the prolonged eye contact, but can’t get to her, so she has to make her way to him. That’s a pretty specific scenario, though 🙂

          Yeah, I was disappointed when I heard Adam speak for the first time. And believe it or not, I don’t think I’ve ever watched ANY Ryan Gosling movie. Ryan Reynolds is more my type. And voice wise, I love accents. Sean Connery and Chris Hemsworth…omg…


        5. Karmic Equation

          @ Christine,

          I couldn’t think of any “overweight but not fat and not ugly  women” except Amy.

          All the other ones I thought about, Rosie and Kirstie alley, are on the obese side. Not sure that obese women do any approaching.

          I read somewhere Jennifer Lawrence had a habit of eating smelly foods before love scenes with Liam in the Hunger Games movies. Maybe she turned off other guys because of that?

        6. Emily, the original


          I was very surprised to once read Jennifer Lawrence complaining about a lack of dates (and I would have thought men would want to approach and ask out a beautiful, rich young woman like that).

          I read that, too, but I wasn’t surprised. She has achieved a level of success in acting that very, very few people do. Unless a man is equally as successful, he may feel intimidated.

        7. Emily, the original

          Karmic Equation,

          I’m not necessarily opposed to trying to the “lure-him-over-with-prolonged-eye-contact” technique, but I also think that men don’t pick up on subtlety and nuance. Sometimes you have to talk to them yourself or plant yourself in an area about 2 inches away! I also don’t like to hand all the control over to them. I have a male friend who was dating online. He said he would be excited when he got messaged until he looked at the profiles of the women who had contacted him. They were at least 10 years older and biker chicks! He’s a science guy. A bit nerdy. He couldn’t figure out why they liked him. Anyway, after he told me about this unwanted attention, I said, “Now you know what it is to be a woman!” As in: a lot of the attention you get you won’t want.

          “Ryan Reynolds is more my type. And voice wise, I love accents. Sean Connery and Chris Hemsworth…omg… ”

          Hmmm … Ryan Reynolds is a bit vanilla. Sean Connery, yes, has a great voice. So does Frank Langella


        8. Adrian

          Karmic Equation,   Emily,   and Christine


          The real question is if women like overweight -and obnoxious- Amy Schumer, or 60 year old Madonna weren’t famous, would they have hot, young boyfriends? For all the scream men do about how hot Taylor Swift is “now”, she sang a lot about how she was constantly overlook in high school-when she wasn’t famous.


          I doubt she was overlooked because she wasn’t pretty, or overlooked by guys a league or two under her. She was most likely overlooked by guys in her own league or above for girls like the Megan foxes in high school.


          Now I’m not talking about women like Pierce Brosnan’s wife Keely Shaye Smith who gained weight after marriage, starting off hot but gaining weight in the relationship is okay.


          Contrary to all the commenters on this blog both male and female who brag about having a myriad of the 8s and above of the opposite sex chasing after them, most studies confirm that the majority of people marry within their own league. So a man or woman going bald or gaining weight after they have been together for years doesn’t count.


          I see overweight women, short men, and both unattractive men and women with attractive partners all the time. The difference is that it is usually a trade off. The short guy is successful and the woman is either in his league or slightly below in looks and career-wise. The overweight woman is usually with an overweight man in her league or she is the successful career woman with a bachelors dating a guy built like the Rock, but he is working a low-end job, barely able to pay his bills, with only a high school diploma.

          …    …    …

          I have to completely agree with Karmic Equation; famous or not the Megan Fox’s of the world would never approach and I personally know many guys who would happily f*ck Amy Schumer but wouldn’t be caught dead with her in public. In other words women can be overweight or unattractive and still have lots of guys hitting on them, but few of those guys will be what “she” considers quality candidates looks or stability wise.

    8. 18.9

      *slow claps*


      I couldn’t have said it better even if I tried. Love this post.

  19. 19
    Evan Marc Katz

    Since you haven’t read all my articles and still doubt my evenhandedness, try this one. It’s the exact same thing I would say to men. Logic is cold and it’s pretty much the source of all of my advice – regardless of gender. Problem is when I criticize men, they get upset and when I criticize women, they get upset. But I am certainly not protecting anyone’s feelings, nor trying to drum up business.

    Here’s another post that comes to mind that should help to illustrate that I’m an equal opportunity truth-teller. I’m sure there are more, but it would be a pretty boring blog if my answer to every woman was “you’re not hot enough,” don’t you think?

  20. 20
    Karmic Equation


    Men and women value different outcomes in dating.

    Men want sex. Women want relationships. On this, I think  we can agree.

    So, women date men based on  his  RMV – Relationship Market  Value, while men date women based on her SMV – Sexual Market Value.

    So, using the same barometer (SMV) to measure both genders’ value to the other is like comparing apples to oranges.

    In other words, I believe that if MEN were forced to rate women on the RMV scale, meaning which women the men would be willing to MARRY, the results would be equivalent to the OKC  SMV study. Men would only find 20% of the women “marryable”.

    So, if you’re looking for a gf, not a lay, and to your credit, it seems that you are a relationship-oriented guy, then you should court women you believe are “worth a relationship”. Don’t court women who’re not. No one is telling you to do that.

    However, a man  shouldn’t court a woman who is way out of his  league, any more than a woman should “have sex” with a man way out of her league. Both are going to end up with bad results. The woman will feel like she got used for sex; and the guy will feel like he got used for his resources.

    So, to answer your question logically, Obsidian, yes, if YOU are a 5, courting a 5-7 is more to your benefit than courting that 8-10. You may not deem her SMV “worth” your trouble. But your RMV “courting behavior” is going to  reap more benefits with a woman who wants a relationship (and therefore sex) with you. Your “job” is to find that woman 5-7 that you’re attracted to enough to be worthy of your courting effort. If you “save” your courting effort only for the 8-10s, then you’ll continually be disappointed, because 8-10s get to date 8-10s.  They don’t need a 5 to court them for relationships.


    1. 20.1

      Hi Obsidian,


      Why does everything have to be about race with you?


      Why does everything have to be so polarized with you regarding women; only negative or only positive, completely good or completely evil, all or nothing- no middle ground?


      Regardless of race, men and women are all still human; white’s struggle just as blacks struggle.


      In my opinion, their is more of a class divide, than a race divide here in America; extremely wealthy whites look down on poor whites as well as blacks. Actually, they may show another wealthy black more respect than a poor white.


      It just seems that when you aren’t demonizing “all women”, you start demonizing “all African American women”, and when you aren’t demonizing them, you then start demonizing “all lower income African American women”.

      …    …    …

      Alright KK, I am ready!


      It is time for you to come and kick me; to wake me up. I know that I should know better than to try to reason with Obsidian.

    2. 20.2

      @ Obsidian #19.2.1
      “Beauty and sexual attraction mean a lot to me, and I am not willing to bend on it at all…I want to spend my time among big legged, big backsided, pretty faced Black women, who like sex and like good times. It’s not a crime to want this, nor is it a crime to insist upon it.”
      So how’s that working out for you?
      Just a general comment on all your comments Obsidian and I don’t mean this comment as having a go at you, rather just as an observation from a genuinely nonpartisan reader. Whenever anyone poses a dilemma, asks for advice or makes a complaint, my first thought is always: “what is your desired outcome/goal? Have you achieved this goal, and if not, what can you do differently in order to attain this goal?”
      Complaining about your perceived injustices achieves nothing. Trust me, for every sob story you have I could write one to match. As could anyone But what does that achieve? Exactly.
      So whenever I read your comments I always wonder what your ultimate point or goal is? Now if your goal is to actually spend your “time among big legged, big backsided, pretty faced Black women” are you achieving that? If yes, great, then why the need to complain about them? If no, okay, so what can you differently in order to achieve it?
      Now, if your *actual* goal is simply to raise your profile and earn a living from blogging then that’s okay; just own it and be honest.
      However, if your primary goal is actually to date the types of women you desire, how willing are you to take on the opinions of others in order to increase your chances of achieving this goal? And if you are unwilling to consider the opinions of others is there any point in blogging on dating sites at all?
      So Obsidian, what’s your ultimate goal, are you achieving this goal, and are you willing to make any changes suggested by others in order to help you reach your goal?
      Thanks in advance should you choose to answer my questions.

Leave a Reply

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