I hate to sound cynical and MRA-ish here, but most women are going to have a tough time keeping a guy around while doing this. By waiting, they’re taking their biggest asset out of the bargain – at least temporarily
And that’s one big reason why they don’t do it. Unless you live in an isolated group were arranged marrriages are the norm and there’s no three date rule, women who hold out are afraid of losing out. It takes more confidence than most women have.
I’m researching a post and I was reading The Evolution of Human Sexuality by Donald Symons. An oldie but goodie, 1979. Anyway, he says in there that waiting is an aphrodisiac to males. Few get the opportunity to take it that far today, but I saw one shrink advise guys to wait, and then when the woman is willing, wait a few more dates. It’s also a good strategy for women because during that waiting period men are actually more predisposed to fall in love.
We’re so into instant gratification that we wind up with blips instead of earthquakes in the sack.
Let me guess, men are genetically hardwired to consciously deceive, and any woman who falls for it is a bimbo : |
There’s a new study out that shows men being more “morally flexible” in negotiations than women, including outright deception. It was done with several hundred business students. It’s very relevant to what we’ve been discussing, but I’m not sure I want to deal with the firestorm that will erupt if I write about it.
“A guy who loves a girl will wait a long time to have sex with her. He’ll wait even longer if the girl doesn’t have a history of casual sex/ONS. He’ll wait longer still if the girl is a virgin.”
Agreed. And yet the conventional wisdom, expressed by many (other) men here @HUS and elsewhere I’m sure, is that a) guys who show love or affection before sex are chumps; and b) guys who wait longer than 3 dates for sex are chumps. It’s almost like intentionally bad advice.
+1
Damned if you do, damned if you don’t!
How one chooses to navigate the SMP is their own choice. No advice is one size fits all. We all have to do what works best for us.
Myself, I’d rather remain single then have to have sex on the third date just to be “considered” as a relationship prospect. I would be filtered out by any guy who had that rule, but I see it as the lesser of two evils. I’d rather not put myself in the vulnerable position of not knowing where I stand with a guy afterward, because I know it’s something that emotionally I wouldn’t recover from easily.
I’m the type of person if you say, “Yuck, this soda doesn’t taste right. Here, try it!” I would respond, “No thanks!”
@Mega-Dog-Varanus-MikeC-Lookland-Herb
Just a great exchange between posts #271-281. Clip these and print-out in pamphlets for women. Answers to many of the (apparent) mysteries of men, including where all of the “good” men have gone – are going…
@Lookland #281
“Women need to learn and internalize that men are people just like them with wants and needs ”
-I agree, but unfortunately the feminist editors, morphed it into this:
“Men need to learn and internalize that Women are [superior] people with wants and needs [that men should strive to meet]”
My first instinct is to think that the pendulum has just swung too far and will someday find equilibrium, but the problem is that the pendulum, and modern feminism is zero-sum. Feminism has manifested in ways that have increased opportunity and “equality” by limiting/taking from men, all while upholding the “traditional” expectations pressed onto men. I.e. the expectation that men should subordinate their needs-wants-desires in favor of this “equality” as well as the (ever-changing-expanding) needs of the family, present and future. As a man, to provide is an obligation. For a woman it is a prerogative. The increased competition, structurally reduced options, and superiority brainwashing that men have endured are not counterbalanced with an equitable exchange into alternative roles or opportunities – at least not without great pain, significant risk, and a voluntary write-down of his status.
While initially men were reluctant to absorb the added competition in school and the marketplace, I think that at this point most men are not in favor of a clawback – a return to 1950, but would actually be quite content with real equality, one in which opportunity, expectations, obligations, and prerogatives are truly pulled from the same bucket by both genders.
The challenge is that mens status in the eyes of women, call it SMV/MMV/social proof whatever, is still tied to the traditional expectations, roles, and obligations. And *most* of the gains for women, which seem to have been at the expense of men, have similarly garnered them very little, if any, bump in status-smv-mmv in the eyes of men.
So while I totally get that statements about wants and needs can be easily flipped, the difference is in how those needs/wants are structured into the system and at what cost, that is, are those wants/needs coming from the heart or are they constructs of an out-of-control system of superiority and entitlement? And of course, who is paying for them and with what capital?
The lies of feminism are based on the propagation of artificial wants/needs of women coupled with the continued subordination and devaluing of mens wants/needs. So I would argue that men are not asking for anything more than what they have always wanted/needed, while women are (often unknowingly) asking for wants and needs they have been told they want/need in addition to those that they have always wanted/needed. Men are responding accordingly.
In fact the growing response for both men and women seems to trapeze between a fractured set of needs/wants: sex, emotional intimacy, relationships, self-indulgence, self-sacrifice etc. What was once a sit-down meal (marriage) is now a Vegas buffet. What was once viewed as work+risk=rewards is now, work+risk+risk>rewards, a la “get mine while I can”…
Anyhow, enough of that. I just wanted to be one more (male) voice that says if I am willing-ready-wanting of a relationship, I will not be pressing for sex in the first three dates, or any other timeline. IOI’s: yes; Escalating physically: yes, (but perhaps slower than she might expect these days); expecting-pushing for sex: no. Women who give it up under these expectations or who claim to have needs (want sex) and put that need/want above the need/want of a relationship/marriage are eating from the buffet while expecting the candle lit table for two. Same goes for men really, but with so much more risk in the system and very little in terms of access to the rewards (other than sex of course), it is hardly a surprise the “get mine” wins out.
J – “Yeah, that’s cute and funny and all, but with the average age of menarch at 12 and dropping and with the average age of marriage at 25 or 26, do you really expect that women are going to keep it zipped for 14 years?”
There is no reason a young woman cannot make it to marriage with 4 or less sexual partners. In 14 years, assuming she started having sex as soon as her period kicked in, that is a new guy about every 3.5 years. To me 4 relationships that lasted 3+ years that included physical relations is no big deal and completely normal. And I would not disqualify any women based on that number and situation. In fact, I would see her history as a good sign that she has some knowledge and skill being in a relationship.
I have no sympathy for women (or men) that don’t want a relationship but still want to “scratch the itch”. I see no reason why anyone would put off being serious simply because it might not be convenient at the moment. It isn’t convenient for me to have to work 8am to 4:30pm every day, but I get my ass up and go anyway.
That she is as insightful and aware at her age as she is AND is able to portray the pitfalls of the current SMP in such an effective and non-preachy manner is amazing.
The Guardian had a live chat with Amanda Marcotte and Amanda Hess about the show. I checked out the transcript and it was unbelievable. Marcotte says she loves the show, and that Dunham is exposing what lengths women are forced to go to in order to please men. She accuses Charlie of objectifying Marnie by putting her on a pedestal.
My first instinct is to think that the pendulum has just swung too far and will someday find equilibrium, but the problem is that the pendulum, and modern feminism is zero-sum. Feminism has manifested in ways that have increased opportunity and “equality” by limiting/taking from men, all while upholding the “traditional” expectations pressed onto men. I.e. the expectation that men should subordinate their needs-wants-desires in favor of this “equality” as well as the (ever-changing-expanding) needs of the family, present and future. As a man, to provide is an obligation. For a woman it is a prerogative.
At the risk of creating a shit storm, the iconic feminist issues are the perfect illustration: abortion and child support.
As it stands in the US now it is an infringement on her rights to require a married woman to inform her husband she’s getting an abortion. That’s how absolute we’ve determined the right to abort a child is.
However, under no condition can a man select to not provide support for a child of his genetic linage (and in some cases, not of his genetic linage).
So, we can build a matrix of pregnancy effects:
Neither wants a child: child is aborted and everyone is happy.
Both want child: child is born and everyone is happy.
Man wants child, woman doesn’t: child is aborted and woman is happy.
Woman wants child, man doesn’t: child is born, woman is happy, and man pays for the woman’s choice.
At every point the man’s desires are subordinate to the woman and in one, the woman gets not only to act without respect to his desires but charge him for the privilege .
And trust me, when men want equalize by allowing for male abortion (ie, denial of paternity responsibilities) the first one manning the barricades to stop it are Feminists. Their argument is that it is unfair to women and, in the grandest of ironies, that men should think about it before they have sex.
When I used to like to bait feminists I pointed out that the fact a man could consider the risk of a woman getting pregnant in determining to have sex but the woman who would get pregnant apparently couldn’t and needed available abortion proved men were superior.
I have no sympathy for women (or men) that don’t want a relationship but still want to “scratch the itch”. I see no reason why anyone would put off being serious simply because it might not be convenient at the moment. It isn’t convenient for me to have to work 8am to 4:30pm every day, but I get my ass up and go anyway.
There is a post (at the Spearhead I believe) about how men learn to “shovel the effing gravel”. It seems to be a fundamental difference between men and women in the west, the ability to see what needs to be done and just do it.
@Susan Walsh
Marcotte says she loves the show, and that Dunham is exposing what lengths women are forced to go to in order to please men. She accuses Charlie of objectifying Marnie by putting her on a pedestal.
And this surprises you?
Marcotte essentially thinks men are evil at best even if she doesn’t say it outright and she’s pretty mainstream, not feminist mainstream but culturally mainstream.
Any man who fails to provide exactly what a woman wants, when she wants it, regardless of how well she communicates her desires and regardless of his wants and needs is wrong and objectifying women and a tool of the patriarchy.
I’ve had that discussion, more or less, too many times to count. When asked if I knew a woman in another town where I worked and who I shared interests I joked, “no, but do you have her number?”. I then got a lecture about women not existing just for men’s benefit and was kicked out of a yoga studio where I was the most dedicated member.
The Guardian had a live chat with Amanda Marcotte and Amanda Hess about the show. I checked out the transcript and it was unbelievable. Marcotte says she loves the show, and that Dunham is exposing what lengths women are forced to go to in order to please men.
I guess in art people will interpret what they see to conform to their existing worldview. Of course, the absurdities are plentiful in this statement they make. Are not women empowered? They have the agency to simply WALK AWAY from any situation they deem unacceptable. The problem with an Amanda Marcotte type is she can’t analyze things through the perspective of market dynamics, and absolutely cannot look in the mirror and realize what *some* female behavior says about the intrinsic motivations of women as a gender. It is much easier and more convenient to once again reframe everything as women being victimized by men even when they apparently do so without any force or compulsion but totally of their own free will.
She accuses Charlie of objectifying Marnie by putting her on a pedestal.
Haha….this is almost stupidly surreal. I’m convinced feminists have about 3-5 words they just love. And they whip them out at every turn, even when the make absolutely no sense in the context or situation being described. Objectification is one of those words. Every single thing a guy does that is “wrong” from her view is somehow an “objectification”.
As it stands in the US now it is an infringement on her rights to require a married woman to inform her husband she’s getting an abortion. That’s how absolute we’ve determined the right to abort a child is.
I was completely surprised when during my first visit to the doctor for the pregnancy where my beloved was with me I was asked if I wanted him on the same room or not. I imagined that this was for single mothers that came with a friend, or something like it. I know I’m naive, I did some research and then found out about this. Is amazing in my culture you have to beg a man to get involved with the pregnancy and the kids in here it looks like they do a great effort to try to kick them out, so weird.
“As it stands in the US now it is an infringement on her rights to require a married woman to inform her husband she’s getting an abortion.”
.
But according to Marcotte, women +somehow+ are getting this signal that their bodies belong to their husbands.
.
“The way female sexuality is policed in a way male sexuality isn’t, sending the signal that women’s very bodies are the property of eventual spouses”
.
– Amanda Marcotte
There is no reason a young woman cannot make it to marriage with 4 or less sexual partners. In 14 years, assuming she started having sex as soon as her period kicked in, that is a new guy about every 3.5 years.
That’s not unreasonable, Ted. In fact, it’s about the number of partners that the average American woman has had.
Waiting for someone to add, “Multiply any number a woman gives you by three.”
The Guardian had a live chat with Amanda Marcotte and Amanda Hess about the show.
Link?
Marcotte says she loves the show, and that Dunham is exposing what lengths women are forced to go to in order to please men.
I can see that reading in that Hannah is a people pleaser with low self-esteem, as was Aura in Tiny Furniture. Jessa is pretty much a slut though, and I don’t throw that term around lightly.
She accuses Charlie of objectifying Marnie by putting her on a pedestal.
LOL. That’s a way harder sell. I think Hannah’s comments are more relevant when she says he “has a vagina,” but is also wistful about what it must be liked to be “loved so much.”
Charlie is a male Hannah, a people pleaser punching above his weight class
A guy who loves a girl will wait a long time to have sex with her. He’ll wait even longer if the girl doesn’t have a history of casual sex/ONS. He’ll wait longer still if the girl is a virgin.
and this:
Women are going to have to bite the bullet and make guys wait in order to reduce risk. In doing so they’ll filter out most guys, especially those who aren’t in love yet, but might be down the road. Still, the only sensible strategy today is one of risk avoidance.
Agreed. And yet the conventional wisdom, expressed by many (other) men here @HUS and elsewhere I’m sure, is that a) guys who show love or affection before sex are chumps; and b) guys who wait longer than 3 dates for sex are chumps. It’s almost like intentionally bad advice.
It’s conventional because by and large, most girls in their sexual prime lose respect and attraction for a guy who expresses emotional intimacy before things have become physical.
The girls rejecting them are the ones viewing them as chumps, not the guys giving the advice.
Susan:
“Alias
That eharmony article was fascinating – I was surprised how clearly meeting in a bar stood out as a poor strategy. High loss of attraction, highest divorce rate. This must say something about personality traits of people who frequent bars, even the ones who are looking to meet someone there.”
————-
Yeah, I don’t know what’s happened to the other articles with those stats?
weird.
The personality trait is–
poor strategy + my soul-mate will fall right onto my lap after I down a few shots.
J – “That’s not unreasonable, Ted. In fact, it’s about the number of partners that the average American woman has had.”
Be careful. If you start accusing me of being reasonable, you’ll ruin my reputation as an unreasonable old grouch.
A couple of things I’d like to throw out:
Although we both seem to believe this is reasonable, I have seen here and other places many times how unreasonable this is. (I mean, we can’t possibly have college kids forming relationships. What happens after graduation when they have to split? /sarcasm off.) Why is this a big deal? If you are graduating, you can go any damn where in the world you want to get a job. How about you both look, and the first one to land something good takes the other along for the ride to a new city? Why is that so difficult to comprehend?
Perhaps it is because of where I live and/or socioeconomic status, but most of the young girls I know in HS or just out are already at or around the 4 partner number. A few of my daughters friends hit that before they graduated from HS. I’ve seen the stats, but I can tell you that although it may play out that women on average end up at around 4-5 partners, there are pockets where that is so uncommon that you might have a better shot at finding a virgin. Seems for whatever reason, the Pittsburgh Metro area is such a pocket.
I can completely agree that it is unreasonable to expect people to wait 14 years to have sex. But, I disagree that it is unreasonable to expect them to get into and stay in LTRs during those 14 years. The fact that they don’t, and that many intentionally avoid relationships for those years is troubling to me. Why is it that LTRs are “too much work” while in college? Did the curriculum get much more difficult in the last 10 years? Do people have less hours in the day? It is exactly this attitude that perpetuates the “wait until I’m 30 to think about marriage” train of thought, which seems to be a losing proposition for many.
Is it not possible to pursue education/career goals WHILE maintaining a LTR? They don’t seem to be related, and I find it hard to believe there isn’t enough time. Although, I’m sure it is difficult when someone spends all their free time drinking/partying/”having fun”. Yeah, responsibility is no fun, but it’s life. Isn’t college supposed to be preparation for the real world?
I can go you one better. When I was in the ER rolling around in pain last month, one of the nurses interrupted the backrub my husband was giving me to ask if I felt “safe at home.”
Last year in the same ER, a doctor asked my kid if I gave him his concussion (atheletic accident). My son replied that I never hit him, I just burn him with cigarettes. I laughed and said that I don’t smoke, but the doctor made my son roll up his sleeves to check for burns. He reprimanded my kid for messing with him and said, “This isn’t funny.” I replied, “No, it’s ridiculous. I know that you’re a mandatory reporter, but sometimes this stuff goes too far.”
J:
“Lack of responsibility. My parents, who were pretty strict with me, were so much cooler with my kids–becasue they weren’t responsible for them.”
———-
Yeah, you may have a point when it comes to their grandchildren or other people’s kids, but some do this with their younger children. Perhaps they’re just worn out.
Do you think the difference in your parents is also because you have boys?
I was completely surprised when during my first visit to the doctor for the pregnancy where my beloved was with me I was asked if I wanted him on the same room or not. I imagined that this was for single mothers that came with a friend, or something like it. I know I’m naive, I did some research and then found out about this. Is amazing in my culture you have to beg a man to get involved with the pregnancy and the kids in here it looks like they do a great effort to try to kick them out, so weird.
I can beat that in a way that goes to your convo with Ozy about the 40 yo man/14 yo girl.
If a 40 yo woman has sex with a 14 yo boy and gets pregnant, even though she committed statutory rape, she can sue for child support from her victim. We even have case law upholding this in at least one state.
In pursuit of female autonomy and male responsibility when it comes to reproduction we’ve gotten plain fucked up.
Ted, I think your post is spot on That’s why I think serial monogamy is preferable to random sexual activity.
As to kids–male or female– having sex in high school, I am absolutely against it. I’m sure there are some male commenters who will castigatee me for not wanting my son’s to be players in high school, but boys lack the emotional and financial wherewithal to deal with the long-range consequences of fatherhood or with the pain of having a child aborted or adopted away.
Dogsquat:
“but most women are going to have a tough time keeping a guy around while doing this. By waiting, they’re taking their biggest asset out of the bargain – at least temporarily”
————-
The waiting period is supposed to bide time for getting to know his character/intentions/whether he’s relationship-minded and also to demonstrate that you have other qualities you can offer besides sex, that you’re compatible, etc..
It’s no different than a guy waiting to establish something serious before he invests large sums of his money.
There can be demonstrations of physical affection without sex, it’s not like you’ll be meeting behind a glass divider or anything.
You’re simply holding off on making a big investment until you know the return will be worthwhile.
Iggles:
“Myself, I’d rather remain single then have to have sex on the third date just to be “considered” as a relationship prospect. I would be filtered out by any guy who had that rule, but I see it as the lesser of two evils. ”
——–
You can always counter by requesting he place a down payment on a car for you by the 3rd date. lol
Seriously, if you don’t sleep around and he’s expecting you to, you’re not compatible- period. In a perfect world- people would be upfront about their intentions and not waste each other’s time. sigh
You can always counter by requesting he place a down payment on a car for you by the 3rd date. lol
I like it, but I’d change it to “prove you have three months salary for the engagement ring” (while I think that standard is asinine, this is a perfect use for it).
Herb:
“It is? I could swear for a lot of women it’s a display of higher value if the man is the one behind the glass.”
——
That’s another red flag right there.
I hope you know to steer away from these women.
Just keep on driving, unless, God forbid, you’re ever in the position where they let you make that ONE phone call- only then, sir, only then.
Herb:
“I like it, but I’d change it to “prove you have three months salary for the engagement ring” (while I think that standard is asinine, this is a perfect use for it).”
——
Re Marcotte’s accusing Charlie (he’s described as being *too* great a boyfriend) of objectification, it reminds me of her disdain for Nice Guys. She accuses them of being spoiled and entitled, believing that they should get to have sex with anyone they want, which is the only reason they resent the Friend Zone. She strikes me as being at a sociopathic level of lacking empathy.
What’s brilliant about the show is its incisive portrayal of SMP dynamics, including Game. I assure you Roissy would endorse it wholeheartedly (or he should). In one corner, we have Charlie, cute, sweet, an ideal boyfriend, but too pussy whipped. His gf Marnie of 4 years is literally begging him to “be a man and tell her to fuck off.” It’s clear that she’s going to dump him soon.
In the other corner we have Adam, a total dick. He never answers Hannah’s texts, so she dresses up and goes over to his apartment, calling from the sidewalk below. They have the kind of sex in which he tells her to be quiet, and in the most recent episode, turns away and smushes her face during sex so he doesn’t have to look at her. After sex, he squeezes her belly and back fat like it’s Playdoh. It’s strictly no-strings, and no fun for her, but she describes him as her boyfriend to others.
Enter Boothe Jonathan, a pretentious NYC artist of advanced years and small stature. He’s got Game – after Marnie tingles visibly in his presence he says to her, “The first time I fuck you I might scare you a little, because I’m a man, and I know how to do things.” Dunham says a guy actually used that line on her, then confessed he had learned it from his friend at Vice Magazine. In any case, it get’s Marnie so hot she rushes to the ladies room to masturbate.
Re Marcotte’s accusing Charlie (he’s described as being *too* great a boyfriend) of objectification, it reminds me of her disdain for Nice Guys. She accuses them of being spoiled and entitled, believing that they should get to have sex with anyone they want, which is the only reason they resent the Friend Zone. She strikes me as being at a sociopathic level of lacking empathy.
Well there ARE so-called nice guys who feel entitled to sex, but Charlie’s not one of them.
In the other corner we have Adam, a total dick. … It’s strictly no-strings, and no fun for her, but she describes him as her boyfriend to others.
Hannah’s best line to Adam: “I almost came.” So telling, so decriptive of the SMP…all that bullshit to be with someone who doesn’t make you come.
In any case, it get’s Marnie so hot she rushes to the ladies room to masturbate.
Susan and J, well, to be honest, the show sounds more and more awful the more I hear about it. I’m cringing just reading the dialogue.
Maybe because I am way closer in age to these girls, and I am not far enough removed from it? I just can’t use my empathy to identify with those girls, because to do so would make me feel even worse.
Plus, if that’s an accurate portrayal of what other girls my age actually tingle for, no wonder things are so messed up! Ugh. /sadface
“Although after their evening encounter, Marnie quickly escorts herself to the nearest ladies’ room to relieve all of her sexual frustrations. Ironically, this is the first seemingly “enjoyable” sexual experience in the entire series so far.”
“In Girls, women’s bodies do not have to be strictly funny or strictly sexy, which may be this new show’s boldest stroke. Instead, they are emotionally complicated: one more source, in the uncertain landscape of post-college life, of anxieties and self-doubt.”
“But Girls is less an extension of Sex and the City than it is a response to it – a tacit and even subversive acknowledgement that the sex lives of young post-feminist women are bleak. In Hannah’s relationship, we see how the hook-up culture degrades girls. In Marnie’s, we see how it degrades guys.”
It’s an indictment of the SMP, not an endorsement. It’s not a post-college SATC; it’s about what happens when the SATC dream doesn’t come true. It’s sad but it would only reinforce your values.
I do not think you would like it. I’m cheering it on because it confirms my own world view, and she’s the first writer to tell it like it is, instead of all those FWB movies that have the alpha guy begging the girl to be in a relationship with him. I used to want to throw things at the TV when I watched Sex and the City. I feel more sympathetic with this show.
Re Marcotte’s accusing Charlie (he’s described as being *too* great a boyfriend) of objectification, it reminds me of her disdain for Nice Guys. She accuses them of being spoiled and entitled, believing that they should get to have sex with anyone they want, which is the only reason they resent the Friend Zone.
As opposed to the PUAs who treat women like shit because they feel entitled to have sex with whoever they want and have learned that treating women like shit is fairly good at achieving that end.
Ah, Gatorade, the beverage of love….I’ve gotta start keeping a bottle on the nightstand.
Adam drinks Gatorade because he works out a lot, because he’s a former fat boy and sort of a male “butterface,” which qualifies him to make fun of Hannah’s weight. He’s both sadly damaged AND prickish, like a little baby Roissy.
J, I guess it’s not my thing. There is NEVER a portrayal of a happy, healthy and good relationship between young people in the mainstream media. It always has to be “interesting” to be entertaining, ironic to be hip, and totally dysfunctional to get critics to love it.
I grew up watching this kind of horrible junk and thought it was “normal.” As stupid as that is, that is what a new generation of girls must be thinking. It might seem like an indictment, but it’s still very subtle brainwashing. I never had good rolemodels in my personal life, so I didn’t have a fully healthy relationship until I met my husband.
There is NEVER a portrayal of a happy, healthy and good relationship between young people in the mainstream media. It always has to be “interesting” to be entertaining, ironic to be hip, and totally dysfunctional to get critics to love it.
That is true, we don’t see a lot of normal relationships portrayed in the media, and it would help people to see more of that. OTOH, DH and I recently got season tickets to the opera. We’ve seen one about a courtesan (Manon), one about a cad tricking a woman into sex, getting her pregnant and abadoning her (Faust), and one in which a tyrant attempts to steal a loyal wife from her husband (Rosalinda). Happy families aren’t dramatic.
I grew up watching this kind of horrible junk and thought it was “normal.” …
I understand. I’ll rescind my endorsement for you, but I’d still force my hypothetical daughter watch it with me as I said repeatedly, “See, this is what happens when you’re stupid.”
Adam drinks Gatorade because he works out a lot, because he’s a former fat boy
and sort of a male “butterface,” which qualifies him to make fun of Hannah’s
weight. He’s both sadly damaged AND prickish, like a little baby Roissy.
————————————-
He’s way more than prick ISH…ewww Everyone should stay far far away from him.
More ranting on this subject. In early high school I was watching Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Felicity, and Gilmore Girls. Shows like these aren’t new. The trajectory is always the same: at first there’s “The One” love interest, then soon it turns into another guy, and another guy, and another guy… always situations involving tears. Felicity was hooking up in college with a bunch of guys even though she turned down Ivy League to go to NYU for her “The One.” Anyway, eventually I lost track, stopped caring and quit watching. I don’t know how any of those shows actually ended.
In college I stayed with one guy in a dysfunctional relationship through all four years, and continued to be with the same guy for three years after graduation. Finally I met some women in real life who had good, healthy relationships, and I realized just how brainwashed I was by the idea that all relationships always had to be full of drama, upset, fighting and tears. The relationship I had was not “normal.” I didn’t have a mother or father who told me any of these things. And all of my female friends were doing stupid stuff, too.
Since these are TV shows, and stories are all fictional anyway, they could totally put in characters who are happy, good and living the ideal romance. But they never do. Never. In Girls, where is the young couple that is happily in love with each other, showing the young folks watching how it’s really supposed to be done and providing a contrast to these other awful people? Nowhere to be seen. I bet such a couple never materializes on the show, because that wouldn’t be “authentic.” The typical drama on TV just makes me sick these days.
I understand. I’ll rescind my endorsement for you, but I’d still force my
hypothetical daughter watch it with me as I said repeatedly, “See, this is what
happens when you’re stupid.”
————————————————————
@Hope There is NEVER a portrayal of a happy, healthy and good relationship between young people in the mainstream media.
Going by people’s comments, I think that the redeeming aspect of Girls is that it is not afraid to call dysfunctional relationships dysfunctional. It’s certainly not presenting them as normal, happy, healthy or good.
In terms of viewing material, happy/stable relationships ARE kind of “boring”. I’m very happy with my relationship with my bf, but it would make for a pretty awful show. (…does anybody want to watch two people cuddling and watching South Park? ) It’s usually the conflict that drives a story. I’m just glad that this show portrays the shittier side of hookup culture.
I do wonder if Hannah would be more appreciative of a bf like Charlie. The only thing is that her “Charlie” (her natural assortative mating counterpart) would have a lower SMV than Adam.
I haven’t seen enough of Shoshanna’s character to make a judgement about her (her heart seems to be in the right place, but with her intelligence, I’m curious to see what sort of choices she makes).
Jessa is a slut. Hannah is simply pathetic. Marnie is the most likable character of the three. It’s unfortunate that there isn’t anyone there to show Charlie how to respect himself without being an asshole, and that there isn’t anyone to point out to Marnie how much better off she is with Charlie than with some PUA. I get the feeling she’s going to get P&D’d by that artist guy.
It’s odd though to see this quote in the Guardian article:
Two weeks into the new HBO series Girls, one character has emerged as the most divisive: Marnie, the gorgeous, uptight roommate of the show’s heroine, Hannah … Marnie is not TV’s first beautiful control freak: She fits squarely into a character type formed by Mad Men’s Betty and Sex and the City’s Charlotte, two stunning women with deep neuroses. Marnie, Betty, and Charlotte highlight a strange trend in highbrow television: With beauty comes a desire for control – which the character ultimately must lose in humiliating fashion.
I see a lot of control freak girls on television (and sometimes in real life too), but I never saw Marnie as one of those. If anything, I see her as attempting to give her friends the advice and guidance that they should have gotten from their parents (but didn’t).
Bellita, that’s clear to an older, wiser audience, but to an impressionable teenager, the “dark” stuff seems so cool! When a young girl from a broken family ONLY sees dysfunction on TV, that normalizes it for her. Monkey see, monkey do. I was that young impressionable teenage girl writing diary entries. I thought that sort of thing “spoke to me” and “validated my experiences.”
Girls is basically telling young people, “this is cool, and if your life is like this, it’s like you’re on TV, too!” It doesn’t matter if older people say “this is dysfunctional.” Young dysfunctional people flock to dysfunction like flies to poop.
More ranting on this subject. In early high school I was watching Buffy the Vampire Slayer
Hey now, lay off the Scooby Gang. I remember going to Buffy season premiere parties.
Although I will give you disfunctional…also, don’t have sex in the Whedonverse. You will wind up dead or royally screwed over.
To this day the one thing I’ll never forgive Joss is killing Tara. All season I’d been waiting for them to get back together and when she came in and gave that long speech about rebuilding and all they needed to work through and ended with ” It’s a long and important process, and can we just skip it? C-Can you just be kissing me now? ” my heart melted.
Then the bastard killed her.
Since I’m being maudlin anyway, I was thinking yesterday about what emotional commitment from guys looks like and if anyone had distilled it in a movie. I think the best bet is when Rob proposes to Laura late in High Fidelity. It’s not anything romcon and it doesn’t get the girl (see the whole movie…actually, for Hollywood it’s not a bad view into how men think about women IMHO):
Rob: I’m tired of the fantasy, because it doesn’t really exist. And there are never really any surprises, and it never really…
Laura: Delivers?
Rob: Delivers. And I’m tired of it. And I’m tired of everything else for that matter. But I don’t ever seem to get tired of you
That last sentence is why challenging will never win a man and why the idea of having to game your wife every day repulses so many of us.
When a man looks at you and realizes you’re the one thing in his life he never gets tired of, you’ve got him if you’re smart enough to keep him.
Sue: “44% of guys in bars said they would lie about wanting a relationship to get sex”
How many women lie to get *out* of sex? Give out fake numbers? “I have a boyfriend?” If at least 44% of women in bars, then perhaps they’re a good match for the 44% of men in bars.
Either lying and deception are part of the game, or not.
Alright, I’m off to get the car’s oil change and then I’ll be back for one last check before I head off to SJW (Submissive Journey Weekend) and classes on ironing, sewing, and such (The gf is requiring me to go the Self-Image/Self-Esteem session).
I’ll make one last check after I get back with the car and then it’ll be until Monday.
Ted; “Keep in mind, for me that is only about 10 to 20 people max my entire life.”
The reason I ask is that Ana and J and Sue seem to know everyone, and have numerous personal of examples for every behavior possible. Way over 20, if I take the sum total of their posts.
This must be what life as an extrovert is like – it’s a bit alien to me.
Emily, just because two people are happy in a relationship and treat each other well doesn’t mean there can’t be a good story. There are lots of good stories that feature non-dysfunctional couples, although they’re not “chick crack” stuff.
The Dune series for example has the Jessica and the Duke as a great, loving couple, Captain/First Officer style. Her relationship with her son is quite interesting, and her son, who eventually becomes the story’s early protagonist, has a wonderful love story. The main conflict revolves around other things.
Though I can’t think of too many other examples besides Dune. I love the series because it presents a “light” way first and foremost, and I had a great spiritual awakening from reading the books.
Taking a big picture perspective of “Girls”, I have to say that it is further evidence of how the media is so focused on the problems that women face. If they care about the effect of society on men, it’s only because of how it affects women. We’d never see a show about how the modern sexual marketplace, educational situation, and job market affects young men.
@Hope
I should probably drop it now because neither of us have seen Girls and you don’t really want to, but I think it’s unfair to criticize a show that targets that “older, wiser audience” for potentially leading young people astray. It’s not trying to draw the age group that flocked to Buffy, Felicity or Gilmore Girls and it’s not giving anyone the same message that these shows do. From what I gather, Girls is probably the best cautionary tale out there for what happens when you do go astray. And I don’t see how the show could do this without being as clear-eyed about the dysfunction as possible. So while protesting dysfunction in a drama is legitimate, protesting it in a satire seems to miss the point.
INTJ, that is partially because young men have stopped watching most TV shows, turned to video games en masse, and only watch well-developed shows with good plots like Game of Thrones (and even then guys like my husband still prefer the Internet).
It’s about the advertising dollars. Shows that are “chick crack” bring in good revenue while being relatively inexpensive to make. Men will still watch sports, but syndicated shows aren’t doing all that well among the prime purchasing power male demographics.
J: “As to kids–male or female– having sex in high school, I am absolutely against it. I’m sure there are some male commenters who will castigatee me for not wanting my son’s to be players in high school, but boys lack the emotional and financial wherewithal to deal with the long-range consequences of fatherhood or with the pain of having a child aborted or adopted away.”
No, I won’t take the strawman bait.
While true on paper, for a boy, waiting until you leave high school to losing virginity is a bit like starting a marathon 3 hours after everyone else does. You’ll never catch up. There’s a huge difference between losing the V at a reasonable enough time to not be a loser, and being a player.
@Hope
I just reread my comment @361 and realize it may sound dismissive of your opinion. That was not my intent.
I share your disgust at dysfunction in mainstream programming. There are dozens of TV shows I stopped watching because they got so much of their mileage from celebrating it. But I’m looking forward to Girls and betting that it’s not one of them.
Someone would have to be blind not to see how unhappy the characters in Girls are. I definitely don’t think girls are going to start acting like the characters after watching the show. In fact, quite the opposite, I think it serves as an excellent warning to everybody.
@OffTheCuff While true on paper, for a boy, waiting until you leave high school to losing virginity is a bit like starting a marathon 3 hours after everyone else does. You’ll never catch up.
Why do you need to catch up as long as you eventually finish?
>> “While true on paper, for a boy, waiting until you leave high school to losing virginity is a bit like starting a marathon 3 hours after everyone else does. You’ll never catch up. There’s a huge difference between losing the V at a reasonable enough time to not be a loser, and being a player.”
I think the real solution would be to get rid of this idea that virgin = loser.
The reason I ask is that Ana and J and Sue seem to know everyone, and have numerous personal of examples for every behavior possible. Way over 20, if I take the sum total of their posts.
This must be what life as an extrovert is like – it’s a bit alien to me.
LOL. Actually, I’m an MBTI introvert, but for some reason, people love to tell me their stories, probably because I’m a also a perceiver, not a judger. I’m also a woman and older than most people on the blog, so I’ve been in more environments where people share stories, for a longer time.
@MikeC
“If a guy has minimal experience with women, and than just lucked out with getting a successful LTR with minimal dating experience prior to that then by definition his thoughts come from a very narrow perspective.”
I won’t discount the benefit of coincidence for inexperienced guys WRT meeting their SO, but the same could be said for the mighty, experienced male. But a successful relationship isn’t maintained for years by accident. So replace “narrow” with pragmatic and “luck” with patience, perseverance, and hard work, and then you’re closer to the truth for every inexperienced guy I’ve known who’s successfully landed a relationship.
If the goal is a lifelong commitment with one particular woman, I’d say experience with (X number of) other women is overrated at best and counterproductive at worst.
Bel: “Why do you need to catch up as long as you eventually finish?”
Define finish. The marathon doesn’t end, and everyone else keeps on running no matter what you personally do. Marriage is not an end point, it is just the beginning.
Bellita and INTJ, the thing about acclimation and validation is that they’re very subtle. As I mentioned, the girls on the shows I had watched were also miserable, maybe even more so. There were lots of tears, angst, obsession, and dysfunction. Those portrayals still normalize the unhappiness. It sends out the message, “Well, this is what’s going on out there. There ain’t nothin better.”
I’ve kept quiet until now, but after reading the plot summary and various developments, I have not seen any alternatives. It’s either “hook up with this scumbag” or “have a boyfriend who’s a girl.” It’s either “tingles by the game-wielding jerk who doesn’t give a crap about her” or “totally turned off by the devoted nice guy.” What kind of message is that sending? Choose the lesser of two evils?
While true on paper, for a boy, waiting until you leave high school to losing virginity is a bit like starting a marathon 3 hours after everyone else does. You’ll never catch up. There’s a huge difference between losing the V at a reasonable enough time to not be a loser, and being a player.
But if he drops out of high school to support a baby, or cracks up because a girl aborts or gives up a baby he wanted her keep, he’ll be fine? No lost time or effort there? I guess I could get my sons a box of condoms, but frankly I can’t trust them to change socks on a daily basis, hold on to a new Ipod without breaking it, or turn in their ACT fees to the school office on time. I’m sure they’ll do fine with handling sex responsibly. No worries.
I get your point on paper, and I don’t want my sons to feel rejected or like losers. But I’m not pushing them to find girls to screw either. So far things have been light and in a religious youth groups setting. That’s good for now.
Girls is basically telling young people, “this is cool, and if your life is like this, it’s like you’re on TV, too!”
I don’t think so. I’ve watched it with a group of young women, and they were laughing but also groaning. They all liked it because while it is well-written and funny, it doesn’t glamorize the dysfunction. The show is saying, the SMP is majorly effed up. I also watched it with my son and his gf, and they were interested to discuss it afterwards. It’s definitely got people talking.
@ Oxy
Tom: You got a study or something to back up “divorce is always men’s fault”? That’s an extraordinary claim that requires extraordinary evidence.
_____________
I have never said nor do I believe it is always the mans fault. Lack of communication is usually the biggest problem in most marriages. Someone gets hurt, or pissed, or disrespected, and they dont know how to talk about it, so they just stay mad and resentment sets in.
Most couples even have problems talking about sex, what they want, need, fantacies they`d like to try etc. If I were a betting man, I would say the treatment of women by men is a big factor in a lot of marriages that go south. But by no means is it always the mans fault. She with holds sex, he gets pissed, he doesnt talk about it, he treats her like shit, she gets pissed, and with holds more sex, etc, etc, etc…..lol…Pretty soon they are both looking for someones shoulder to cry on instead of talking about it.
How many women lie to get *out* of sex? Give out fake numbers? “I have a boyfriend?” If at least 44% of women in bars, then perhaps they’re a good match for the 44% of men in bars.
Either lying and deception are part of the game, or not.
Wow, that’s some interesting moral equivalency. You’re saying that lying to enter a woman’s vagina is on the same level as a woman softpedaling a rejection by saying she has a BF? Would you prefer she use the nuclear version, “I don’t find you at all attractive. No thank you.” Come on.
Seriously, who pays a higher price in your analogy?
The reason I ask is that Ana and J and Sue seem to know everyone, and have numerous personal of examples for every behavior possible. Way over 20, if I take the sum total of their posts.
This must be what life as an extrovert is like – it’s a bit alien to me.
Don’t forget I have 24 women in focus groups, get emails, have friends with kids, etc. I’ve probably reported on about 50-100 women here over time.
That eharmony article was fascinating – I was surprised how clearly meeting in a bar stood out as a poor strategy. High loss of attraction, highest divorce rate.
++++++++++++++
Imagine a dating service slamming a free dating custom.. No hidden interest there..lol
We’d never see a show about how the modern sexual marketplace, educational situation, and job market affects young men.
But I think Girls is doing that! We’re going to see Charlie kicked to the curb for getting too beta. We’re seeing the old horndog artist get Marnie tingling with a line he probably picked up from Roissy (seriously, it wouldn’t surprise me) and we’re seeing the arrogant jerk having crappy, uncaring sex with a girl who’s happy to tell her GYN she has a sexual partner. We’ve even got the college student who is deeply ashamed of her virginity.
While true on paper, for a boy, waiting until you leave high school to losing virginity is a bit like starting a marathon 3 hours after everyone else does.
You have a very selective memory
43% of male college students are virgins. 34% when you include oral. 24% of seniors. That’s from three different data sources.
It’s either “tingles by the game-wielding jerk who doesn’t give a crap about her” or “totally turned off by the devoted nice guy.” What kind of message is that sending? Choose the lesser of two evils?
This is the message. “Be careful what you wish for. You ushered in the Sexual Revolution, and now romance is dead, sex pretty much sucks for everyone, and we can’t tell who’s male and who’s female any more. Mind games are the only thing that get people stimulated, and they feel disgusted afterwards. Is there no better way?”
Susan, no I didn’t watch Everwood, although I did watch Full House (I watched the reruns). I didn’t understand enough English to know everything that was going on when I watched it, but I could tell that it was portraying an overall loving family. The twins were also cute as babies.
Anyway, I’m not seeing a “better way” in Girls. Maybe that will come later, but I’m not holding my breath either. These girls are not portrayed as self-aware or self-reflective. I’m not fond of schadenfreude as a form of entertainment.
I would change my mind if Girls did portray a happy couple though. I remember being so surprised and grateful to meet my husband, because he was a red pill guy who was the perfect Goldilocks combination, and he was not afraid to get married and have kids in his 20s! I think there are lots of good men who get overlooked, and the mainstream isn’t spotlighting them.
>> “You think so? I find him sort of physically repulsive. I love how he’s a player anyway, though.”
Yeah, I wouldn’t describe him as “hot”. J’s description of him as a “butterface” was pretty spot-on. That being said, Lena Dunham isn’t very pretty herself. I still think that he has a slightly higher SMV value than she does, which IMO is one of the main reasons why she tolerates his douchey behaviour.
Sue: “Wow, that’s some interesting moral equivalency. You’re saying that lying to enter a woman’s vagina is on the same level as a woman softpedaling a rejection by saying she has a BF? Would you prefer she use the nuclear version, “I don’t find you at all attractive. No thank you.” Come on. Seriously, who pays a higher price in your analogy?”
I’m not say it’s equivalent. I am saying that if deception is part of your relationship toolbox, then you are opening yourself more to it being used back on you. Nothing about morals, just practicality, remember? Just like, as if a man uses deception, then he can expect to get it back some day.
Second, that is not a nuclear rejection, that’s honest and succinct. A nuke is cruel, way out of proportion to the proposition, and perhaps announcing it to the room (“get AWAY from me, you creepy pervert!”).
Men vastly prefer your so-called nuclear neg over a lie like “Not tonight, I’m shampooing my hair” because in the latter case, they might waste time actually trying again if I didn’t understand the subtext. That opportunity cost IS a big problem. String together a few of these and a few years might go by!
“Would you prefer she use the nuclear version, “I don’t find you at all attractive. No thank you.”
.
Or the relationship-killer nuclear version, “I have enthusiastically expressed embraced explored ___ c ocks. What do you say now, bucko!”
I can go you one better. When I was in the ER rolling around in pain last month, one of the nurses interrupted the backrub my husband was giving me to ask if I felt “safe at home.”
So that was why I had along with asking my medical story they asked me if anyone had forced me to have sex in the last month. I let my husband read it winked at him and say “I wish!” I know I’ m a terrible person.
Last year in the same ER, a doctor asked my kid if I gave him his concussion (atheletic accident). My son replied that I never hit him, I just burn him with cigarettes. I laughed and said that I don’t smoke, but the doctor made my son roll up his sleeves to check for burns. He reprimanded my kid for messing with him and said, “This isn’t funny.” I replied, “No, it’s ridiculous. I know that you’re a mandatory reporter, but sometimes this stuff goes too far.”
You are F*** kidding me? I’m going to have to watch out for the kids too?! Now making fun of my husband doesn’t seen so fun
If a 40 yo woman has sex with a 14 yo boy and gets pregnant, even though she committed statutory rape, she can sue for child support from her victim. We even have case law upholding this in at least one state.
I read false rape society regularly so I knew about that. Fucked up in all possible ways…
Just a reminder that this is a RED flag for anyone who might miss that one. lol
Not if the guy could kill you with a touch if he sets a glass wall is romantic (Pushing Daisies reference)
Seriously, everyone should watch this show!
Sorry my doctor told me that is not good for pregnant women to see things that might want to stab yourself with a fork.
The trajectory is always the same: at first there’s “The One” love interest, then soon it turns into another guy, and another guy, and another guy… always situations involving tears.
Buffy fan here and briefly Felicity fan I didn’t watched Gilmore Girls but Dawson’s Creek (same time slot in my country) and ITA they make a huge deal about the virginity and then when they lose it is like “My hymen was the only thing keeping me from being a slut! Bring out the boys!” completely disgusted I usually lose interest right aftehr they lose the V card.
To this day the one thing I’ll never forgive Joss is killing Tara.
Or Fred or Wes or Walsh or….
The reason I ask is that Ana and J and Sue seem to know everyone, and have numerous personal of examples for every behavior possible. Way over 20, if I take the sum total of their posts.
This must be what life as an extrovert is like – it’s a bit alien to me.
People love to talk about themselves if you show that you are not going to judge them (I do judge them but I have a perfect “I understand” look so they can’t tell is really good skill to have for first dates) and I also have the family gift of people just pouring their heart’s out in my presence it happens even when I don’t even know the person I have people tell me in a bus stop the story of their lives, sex details and all and I’m like “WTF! I just wanted to go home”. Oh well I need to have material to write I guess. :/
Wind em up and they just keep on :
.
Is America in the midst of a sexual counter-revolution?
Yes – attitudes have definitely shifted
( 33% )
No – we’re the same as we’ve ever been.
( 67% )
.
“Amanda Marcotte: I genuinely feel that much of the horror we’re seeing now from the right isn’t a sign that America on the whole is sliding backwards, but more that our self-appointed moral guardians know they’re losing the war on sex. And they’re basically taking a major last stand. This is their Alamo.”
.
Horror?? What is this “war on sex?” Is the average guy on the street in this fight?
.
“Nancy L. Cohen: Yes, America is in the midst of a sexual counter-revolution, but it’s not what it seems. My book Delirium tells the story of how a small group of reactionaries, who want to control sex, hijacked American politics. This is what I’ve called the sexual counterrevolution: a four-decade old political campaign to turn back the changes brought on by the sexual revolution, feminism, and the gay civil rights movement.”
.
“The people who are behind this political movement make up maybe 15-20% of the nation. Their views are extreme and far out of the mainstream. I agree with Amanda–if they don’t meet resistance, they can impose their views on the rest of America.”
.
“The Pill provided the conditions for women to advance in the economy. Before 1970 women accounted for fewer than 10% in medical school and 4% in law school. There was an immediate jump when the Pill became available to unmarried college-aged women. Why? Training for a professional career is a big investment, and pill allowed women to delay marriage and childrearing to make it worthwhile. And because all women could delay marriage, they didn’t take themselves out of the marriage market by doing so.”
.
Well, she did call it a marriage market. Uh oh, she forgot to add that this pill allowed woman to fuck around. How it delayed marriage is not explained. How does this pill delay marriage?
.
” A lot of the polling I looked at for my book does show men agree with women on the social issues, but don’t care that much about them and vote on their economic and government views.”
.
“And yes, education, and seeing this insanity, seems to be making men pay attention too.”
.
Wishful thinking sweetie
.
“Amanda Marcotte: I think your point about caring is a major issue, Nancy. Only 15-20% of Americans are highly misogynist, sex-phobic religious fundamentalists, but they really really care about this issue. To counterbalance that, we need other Americans to understand that their basic rights are genuinely threatened. A minority can take over if they meet dispassionate opposition.”
.
Good effen luck
.
“Americans see absolutely nothing wrong with a single adult woman being sexual.”
.
True. But about half of the people will be wary if they over do it.
.
So that was why I had along with asking my medical story they asked me if anyone had forced me to have sex in the last month. I let my husband read it winked at him and say “I wish!” I know I’ m a terrible person.
You should have written that on the form.
You are F*** kidding me? I’m going to have to watch out for the kids too?! Now making fun of my husband doesn’t seen so fun
They are actually more aggressive in looking for child abuse.
For sure! Then she’ll want Charlie back and he’ll say no way. (I hope.)
Yup.
I do think Marnie’s a control freak. How about acting as an event planner for Jessa’s abortion?
Oh. I thought they were all just there to support Jessa during her abortion (in which case it’s perfectly reasonable to be annoyed that Jessa didn’t show up on time – actually didn’t show up at all). But I was staying up late when I watched it, so my comprehension might not have been functioning properly.
But I think Girls is doing that! We’re going to see Charlie kicked to the curb for getting too beta. We’re seeing the old horndog artist get Marnie tingling with a line he probably picked up from Roissy (seriously, it wouldn’t surprise me) and we’re seeing the arrogant jerk having crappy, uncaring sex with a girl who’s happy to tell her GYN she has a sexual partner. We’ve even got the college student who is deeply ashamed of her virginity.
It’s the SMP in microcosm for both women and men.
It still feels like Charlie’s concerns are secondary. The central focus of the series is on the four girls, including Marnie.
I feel that serious discourse about the SMP on tv or in news articles is always from a female perspective, and that men are “objectified” as they’re viewed from the perspective of satisfying women’s needs. I’m not critical of Girls itself, but I’m critical of the media that always focuses more on one side of the SMP.
Just seeing how Amanda Marcotte interprets the show demonstrates how female-centric discussions on the SMP are, and how this show plays into that pattern.
While it would be nice if women were unambiguous about their rejections, this is in no way comparable to men lying about wanting a relationship to get sex. Trying not to hurt the other person’s feelings with a harsh rejection is nothing like lying so that you can have sex.
On the other hand, an appropriate analogue would be women lying about their sexual past to get a relationship.
Men vastly prefer your so-called nuclear neg over a lie like “Not tonight, I’m shampooing my hair” because in the latter case, they might waste time actually trying again if I didn’t understand the subtext. That opportunity cost IS a big problem. String together a few of these and a few years might go by!
I understand that. I agree that women should not leave room for doubt if there is none. Saying she’s busy repeatedly is just needlessly cruel if she never intends to go out. On the other hand, “I have a BF” is pretty much a closed door. Any guy who hears that knows it’s not happening. And of course, she may actually have a boyfriend.
Enter Boothe Jonathan, a pretentious NYC artist of advanced years and small stature. He’s got Game – after Marnie tingles visibly in his presence he says to her, “The first time I fuck you I might scare you a little, because I’m a man, and I know how to do things.”
I admit that I re-watched this scene about 5 times..
In any case, it get’s Marnie so hot she rushes to the ladies room to masturbate.
How badly did you want to slap her?
I actually sympathized with her. Her relationship has been devoid of dominance and passion for so long that when someone else demonstrates it, it smacks her in the face and she takes her own pleasure into her own hands (literally).
In Girls, where is the young couple that is happily in love with each other, showing the young folks watching how it’s really supposed to be done and providing a contrast to these other awful people?
In the first episode, there was another couple present at the dinner. They were all over each other; I think they’re representing the contemporary “college married” couples. (Also they were very annoying.)
I haven’t seen enough of Shoshanna’s character to make a judgement about her (her heart seems to be in the right place, but with her intelligence, I’m curious to see what sort of choices she makes).
This was actually my one quibble with the show. Shoshanna seems needlessly naive, in an unattractive way. Her portrayal is only going to reinforce negative stereotypes about “older” virgins. : /
Another blessedly slow day at work, so here comes a bunch of my crap:
J said:
“Last year in the same ER, a doctor asked my kid if I gave him his concussion (atheletic accident). My son replied that I never hit him, I just burn him with cigarettes. I laughed and said that I don’t smoke, but the doctor made my son roll up his sleeves to check for burns. He reprimanded my kid for messing with him and said, “This isn’t funny.” I replied, “No, it’s ridiculous. I know that you’re a mandatory reporter, but sometimes this stuff goes too far.”
____________________________________
Is it really so hard to put yourself in that doc’s shoes?
You know you’re a good person, but I don’t. That shit ain’t a joke to us, because we see it every day.
Roll your eyes and scoff, but I’ve put an intraosseus line in a kid who’s arms were so scarred by his/her “punishment” for “mouthing off” that I couldn’t find a vein. My partner was instrumental in shutting down a nursing home we called “The Abuse Farm”. The staff there was stealing the food from the residents, or not feeding them at all.
There are worse things I’ve seen. I promise you you don’t want to know. Humans are nasty animals sometimes, and this shit happens.
Sometimes when we ask these questions, we recognize people who need help. Once in awhile, those people even get it.
By answering a few questions without wasting time or adding aggravation, you can help us help the helpless.
“I was completely surprised when during my first visit to the doctor for the pregnancy where my beloved was with me I was asked if I wanted him on the same room or not. ”
______________________________
This is due to health privacy laws.
You and the medical folks taking care of you are the only people on the planet who have any access to your health info, unless you expressly allow other people to access it. You can give verbal permission while you’re present, but if your hubby called on the phone and asked questions, they should be telling him,”Sir, I cannot confirm or deny ever seeing a patient by that name,” unless you’ve signed the appropriate forms.
There are good and bad parts to it.
You should see the crap that goes on during divorces. I once had a patient offer me a huge sum of money for a copy of their spouse’s chart, for example.
Another one that causes stress is when parents ask about the reproductive health (birth control, STIs, etc) of their kids. Laws vary from state to state, but reproductive issues are often separate from other health issues. The kids usually get legal privacy for that much earlier than 18, when it happens for everything else.
“Perhaps it is because of where I live and/or socioeconomic status, but most of the young girls I know in HS or just out are already at or around the 4 partner number.”
________________________________
“Dogsquat, you are going to confuse people with these nuanced positions, ……………….
………….If a guy has minimal experience with women, and than just lucked out with getting a successful LTR with minimal dating experience prior to that then by definition his thoughts come from a very narrow perspective.”
________________________________
I hope you’re wrong, but I worry that you’re right.
If I had more time I’d start a blog – somewhere between Roissy and Cosmo, aimed at guys who are currently single but want a girlfriend. I like DannyFrom504′s tone – no bullshit taken, no free passes, but very few broad, incendiary statements.
Problem is, I fear for my career if my anonymity is breached – and I just don’t have the time.
That’s one reason (among many others) I read and post here so much. I hope you keep pitching in, too – I think you can help a lot of guys who are where I was 6 years ago. Rollo and Roissy are useful and necessary – but so is digoxin. The therapeutic range is narrow. Too much and you kill the patient, too little and they die anyway.
I hope I’m in the middle somewhere, and I think you are too.
“And that’s one big reason why they don’t do it. Unless you live in an isolated group were arranged marrriages are the norm and there’s no three date rule, women who hold out are afraid of losing out. It takes more confidence than most women have.”
_________________________________________
J, I am going to refrain from being tactful for the next few responses to you, because I am having difficulty communicating with you. I do not believe you’re picking up much of my intended meaning, based on your responses here and elsewhere. Perhaps in my desire to avoid ruffling feathers, my language has become obfuscatory. I will work to correct that.
OK? Okay.
You are wrong about what I’m saying. Here it is, with no BS:
Sex often makes the obligations imposed on men by their would-be girlfriends an acceptable trade off. When sex is taken out of the equation, the young guy is often left with a person he likes looking at, but doesn’t like being around as much as his buddies.
Many young women have little to offer men other than sex. Finding a young woman who is a good teammate and enjoyable companion to a young man is a rare thing.
Young men have hundreds of resources and approaches to mold themselves into desirable people, increasing their chances of finding that teammate. Young women have Susan, a few bloggers she links to, and some folks who comment here. That’s it.
There are reasons for that disparity, and one of them is an apparently reflexive “blame” shifting when women are held to account. I am not interested in participating in that. I want people to be happy and achieve their goals. Holding one’s ears and yelling,”I might be bad, but not really. Besides, you’re way worse!” is not productive.
Some disclaimers:
No, that doesn’t describe every woman everywhere. Yes, I know some guys are dicks. I am not attacking women. I am identifying an area of weakness in some women, that they may rectify it and achieve their goals….because….wait for it….I really, really like women. Hearing a happy, content woman talk and laugh is one of the best noises in the world. I want to hear it more often.
“Yeah, that’s cute and funny and all, but with the average age of menarch at 12 and dropping and with the average age of marriage at 25 or 26, do you really expect that women are going to keep it zipped for 14 years?”
____________________________________
No, I don’t. I never said I did, either.
I am, however, extremely sick of hearing about women being powerless against PUAs and cads.
Here it is, jam packed with 8 essential vitamins and minerals:
-Sex is not a need. You will not die without it. I have been in hundreds and hundreds of emergency medical situations. I have saved several peoples’ lives, and made many, many “worst days ever” a little better. I have never once started an IV to give a life saving infusion of sex. Perhaps I’m doing it wrong, or one of my textbooks was missing a chapter.
-It is easy to avoid consensual sex, once a certain level of proficiency with garments covering the crotch is achieved.
-The people ultimately responsible for what is voluntarily put in vaginas are the very people those vaginas are a part of.
I’m afraid I for one still require some clarification. Are you saying that holding off on sex is not a viable strategy for women because it renders male investment intrinsically disproportionate to female investment? Or are you suggesting that women develop themselves extra-sexually?
Dogsquat, what if sex is not part of the equation, but a woman gets deceived into emotional turmoil from a cad?
You’ll have to take my word for it, but I did my due diligence in screening ex-Fake BF. He checked out with our mutual friends (girls who were pleased we were together and said he was a very good guy), he acted like a boyfriend with me and in front of his friends…I’ve described him numerous times on these threads and even some of the more militant commenters agreed that his behavior was “beta”. As it turned out, he was a giant asshole (he lied about my giving him a blowjob at a party when I was really softly crying on his shoulder in private).
Are you going to blame me for getting emotionally (and a little physically) invested in a guy who I was 100% sure was going to be my first boyfriend?
You and the medical folks taking care of you are the only people on the planet who have any access to your health info, unless you expressly allow other people to access it. You can give verbal permission while you’re present, but if your hubby called on the phone and asked questions, they should be telling him,”Sir, I cannot confirm or deny ever seeing a patient by that name,” unless you’ve signed the appropriate forms.
This might sound ignorant but this is the one of the most stupid thing I ever seen on this country. When I got married I make several promises including loving my husband in sickness and health. I know marriage vows are not legal but what is the point of making a commitment that can only be used when the other feels like it? It should be you are married you have full access to each other’s medical records if you don’t want that level of involvement with another person DON’T GET MARRIED!!!!
I’m starting to side with the people that want marriage to be harder to obtain so the people that actually understand it are the only ones that get it. One flesh that is it people is not that hard of a concept, if all you want is a sex buddy that shares the same house cohabitation is your way to go. I’m really happy that my husband as liberal as he is doesn’t seem to share this ideas since I’m always in the same room when he needs a medical appointment and I’m not working.
Most men and women are happier having some amount of regular sex vs. doing without. And most men and women are *happiest* having a single commited partner for the horizontal mambo. Hence the problem with involuntary celibacy. It can happen to women, too.
Sue: “On the other hand, “I have a BF” is pretty much a closed door. Any guy who hears that knows it’s not happening.”
Have we forgotten Game 101? Even I have been “involved” with women who said that. It was either wishful thinking, or was true but obviously didn’t matter all that much.
“I agree, and those numbers are increasing, for both sexes.”
You lost me. The men that are virgins are the ones that are left behind, you want them to be more so? And the v rate is increasing? I didn’t know that. Or maybe I did and lost the numbers,
“Are you going to blame me for getting emotionally (and a little physically) invested in a guy who I was 100% sure was going to be my first boyfriend?”
_____________________________
Nope.
Shit most definitely happens.
You end up with three guys like that, though, and I’ll point out the common theme…
You end up with three guys like that, though, and I’ll point out the common theme…
Some girls only need to get burned once (maybe twice?) before they start distrusting all men. Shit happens, yeah, but you cannot argue that those girls are not powerless against cads. I didn’t give in to losing my virginity with him, but he wrought a huge emotional toll regardless. He had the winning hand — I had no power in that “relationship”, and neither do the many other girls who find themselves in similar situations.
“When I got married I make several promises including loving my husband in sickness and health. I know marriage vows are not legal but what is the point of making a commitment that can only be used when the other feels like it? ”
_______________________________
Well, the great thing is you can choose to have your hubby there for everything.
In my area, there are many folks who adhere to Sharia. Sometimes, the only way they can get accurate information and good care is when they’re separated from their spouse. The man might lie about cheating in front of his wife, and obscure an STI diagnosis. Also, those dudes tend to speak for their wives. I don’t know how Allah figured a husband should be able to describe ovarian torsion or an aortic aneurism, but maybe they can in Arabic.
Also, you may one day change your mind. Maybe you wouldn’t want your husband to see (and smell – it’s pretty bad) you get a pilonidal cyst get incised and drained. Perhaps you wouldn’t want him listening to the sounds your rock hard turds make as they plonk into the plastic tub during a manual disimpaction.
I hope I’m in the middle somewhere, ***and I think you are too.***
I’d like to think so but some might disagree depending on the day.
I’ve been thinking lately about some of the disagreements I’ve had from time to time with various people, and here is sort of the big picture thing I’ve realized. All “analysis” of the SMP is essentially inductive reasoning. It is impossible to utilize deductive reasoning at all. I’ve had one life experience. Someone else has had another. I’ve had one circle of friends and acquaintances. Someone else has had another. My thought is you and I are often on a very similar page because we are similar ages with very similar life experiences vis a vis women and relationships with me obviously missing the military experience. But I suspect if you and I got together over beers and shared bouncing war stories we be nodding our head in agreement at the same shit we saw. A guy who married his first girlfriend and lived happily everafter can’t possibly relate to our experiences so his worldview is going to be radically different.
I think “analysis” of the SMP is further complicated by the fact that personally I think much of the sociological research is probably close to utter bullshit served up by people with ideological agendas masquerading as serious academics. My bailiwick is economics and finance so I’m familiar with just how horrendous much economic research and analysis is. There is a reason economics is called the dismal science, and expressions like “economists make astrologers look respectable” exist. My intuition is that probably much of the “academic” research into sociosexuality probably isn’t much better than economic analysis. I’ll take a guy’s journal who did 1000 approaches with notes on what worked and didn’t over some guy in an ivory tower.
I’ve got a sister. I don’t want her to get played, or used, or pumped and dumped. I am empathetic to the female POV and concerns, but I truly believe when push comes to shove, it is the “beta chump” who truly has the most to lose in the current SMP so I think sometimes my first instinct is to look out for his interests.
That’s one reason (among many others) I read and post here so much. I hope you keep pitching in, too – I think you can help a lot of guys who are where I was 6 years ago.
I appreciate you saying that. That means a lot coming from you. At one time, I was stuck at the bottom of a very deep hole. It was a dark, depressing place, and a couple guys threw me some rope, and helped to pull me out. One was a complete random stranger who IMed me after something I posted on T-nation. That started a multi-month exchange where I made incredible progress in a very short period of time, and I owed it to this guy. I’ve never forgot that. I try to pay that back. I’ve got one guy who I know I’ve helped, and I almost feel like a proud father hearing some of his recent successes. I think right now I’m sort of contemplating what are the best venues for me to deliver MY message and how to do that while occupying that middle ground you are referring to.
Rollo and Roissy are useful and necessary -but so is digoxin. The therapeutic range is narrow. Too much and you kill the patient, too little and they die anyway.
Excellent analogy. I had to Google therapeutic range to know what you meant. In my opinion, it is a guy thing to deliver a message in an over the top manner, and realize on implementation that you really need to moderate it. In other words, you don’t kick every girl to the curb who won’t screw you on the third date. But the key is to verify that she really is feeling authentic sexual desire for you, and not playing you for a chump. To this day, I’ m still waiting for some of the women to give concrete advice on how a guy is supposed to determine if a girl is really into him or sort of stringing him along, and whether he is being charged a large price difference. If one is going to criticize particular tactics or rules, then you have to be prepared to offer a guy a viable alternative.
To this day, I’ m still waiting for some of the women to give concrete advice on how a guy is supposed to determine if a girl is really into him or sort of stringing him along, and whether he is being charged a large price difference. If one is going to criticize particular tactics or rules, then you have to be prepared to offer a guy a viable alternative.
I think I tried to answer this question when you first posed it, but I don’t think I did a good job.
I can only speak from personal experience.
If I wasn’t into a guy after a first date, I would insist on going dutch at the end of it. I didn’t want to feel like I was taking advantage of him if I knew that I wasn’t going to see him again. If I was on the fence and then landed on “no” after the date, I would text him over the next day or two letting him know that I wasn’t feeling it, best of luck for the future.
As for the other guys who made it past the first date…my sexual desire for them was Obvious. As they escalated, I would happily oblige — from hot makeout sessions right up to the point where sex was on the table. This would happen around the 1-month mark. That would be when I told them that I was looking for a relationship/I was a virgin. I’m fairly confident that had I not been a virgin, I could have had a boyfriend 5 or 6 times over, after all that.
Now, I’m sure that there are girls out there who have no problem getting sexy (minus actual sex) and then being flaky about actually getting into a relationship. Those girls are trickier because most likely, they’ve been sold the Rules version of landing a boyfriend (i.e. playing “hard-to-get”). In this instance, you just have to go by what she says and does. Are her actions congruent with her words? Is she always 10 or 20 minutes late to your dates, or does she value your time? Does she seem to actually enjoy spending time with you or does she invite you to places with friends where she can “prove a point” to some other guy/girl in attendance? Etc.
Could you please explain this to me? There is a double negative there, and I can’t not misunderstand.
alsfjasdf. I don’t know if I’ve always been this poor at expressing myself or if it’s just the fact that it’s getting late, haha.
BASICALLY. What I said in my personal example. I was powerless against a Cad — I didn’t have sex with him, but he had an emotional hold on me that was very, very hard to break free from.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but you are saying that girls who were in a situation like I was are not powerless against cads. If my personal story is any indication, that is not true. Are you going to blame the girl whose boyfriend cheated on her for falling for a cad in the first place? No, because the information that he was a cheater was revealed after the fact. She is powerless in that relationship, because she did not know her boyfriend was a Cad until after he revealed himself to be one.
Same goes for girls who aren’t in relationships with cads, but are being actively pursued by them. Even if those girls don’t have sex with those cads, they could still get emotionally entangled with them. And that is an immense form of power in and of itself.
Hence: you cannot argue that girls are not powerless against cads. I know that’s the same double-negative statement, but if you read it carefully then hopefully you should understand what I mean by now.
Well, the great thing is you can choose to have your hubby there for everything.
And I can choose to deny to know anything about his unborn child or kill him/her if I feel like a bitch one day. That so civilized.
In my area, there are many folks who adhere to Sharia. Sometimes, the only way they can get accurate information and good care is when they’re separated from their spouse. The man might lie about cheating in front of his wife, and obscure an STI diagnosis.
Had it ever occurred to the person that did this law that if one spouse doesn’t know the other is sick they might get infected as well? How do doctors control for that under this “secrecy is a human right even from your own spouse” situation?
Also, you may one day change your mind. Maybe you wouldn’t want your husband to see (and smell – it’s pretty bad) you get a pilonidal cyst get incised and drained. Perhaps you wouldn’t want him listening to the sounds your rock hard turds make as they plonk into the plastic tub during a manual disimpaction.
I hope if I ever get that stupid I can ask him not to be there and he would understand without the need of me imposing myself on him you know the father of my children the man I pledged my life and health to I know meaningless this days but once upon a time people talked and discussed this things.
I know you want the best in the worst situation and I’m not trying to be snippy but sorry this is just another “I have a right to my privacy” BS that people pull because they only want the “pretty part” of commitment and you know how I feel about “I want my life to be perfect even if I have to screw everyone else’s to do so” and I really can’t think of a situation in which this can be good for any married couple.
@Susan Walsh – Welcome, and thanks for your comment.
Susan, thank you for the warm welcome. I’ve been lurking (obsessively and intensively) for about a week and thought I’d heed your call for more participation from your target demographic of young women. Thanks for providing this forum for discussion!
You’re so right too that we’ve raised women to see men as only “wanting one thing.” And we’ve failed to tell them about the male aversion to female sexual experience with other men.
Not only are many of my peers unaware of this aversion, they actively advertise their engagements with multiple male partners – apparently under the impression that this provides social proof as it might for men who have options with multiple female partners. They think this makes them seem more desirable. While it does attract some male attention, they don’t realize this attention results from having been characterized as easy. Ultimately they are disappointed, but rarely are they reflective or introspective…?
“But the key is to verify that she really is feeling authentic sexual desire for you, and not playing you for a chump. To this day, I’ m still waiting for some of the women to give concrete advice on how a guy is supposed to determine if a girl is really into him or sort of stringing him along, and whether he is being charged a large price difference. If one is going to criticize particular tactics or rules, then you have to be prepared to offer a guy a viable alternative.”
____________________________
I’ve been paying attention lately to the concept of privilege derived from ascribed status. Yeah, I’m a fucking nerd, I know.
Some stuff is flat-assed easier for me because I’m a white male over six feet tall. Some stuff is harder, too, but on balance I think I came out ahead.
Intellectually, I realize that having a police force representative of the population it polices is very important. However, I was pissed for a long time that I was told I’d never get a slot in the Pittsburgh PD because they needed more women and minorities.
My brain said,”Yeah, I get it. No problem. What the city needs is more important than what I want.”
My gut said,”Man, fuck that shit! I’d be a good cop.”
Then I got called back to the military, got out, and settled into another career. Totally over it, but I’ve never forgotten the first time being a tall white guy worked against me.
I’m wondering if asking a woman to disclose that information is threatening her privilege, and she experiences the same visceral distaste for disclosure as I did for affirmative action in the police hiring process.
You’re asking her to hand over a huge advantage to a guy. She’s basically putting herself at their mercy if she offers a viable strategy. It’s also very hard to admit to yourself (and others) that you’ve got an “unfair” advantage based on your genes. Lots of people can’t bring themselves to do it. They’ll go through all kinds of bizarre mental gymnastics to avoid admitting it. I’ve experienced that myself, and it’s really, really hard to describe.
I suspect it’s to preserve self-esteem in most cases, but with women and mating strategy, the motive might go even deeper.
Or, perhaps, the women simply don’t know.
In other news, I was thinking about just putting up a blog and copy/pasting some of my more “important” posts I make here to that one. Maybe some kid will stumble on to me here and click on the link. If I have the time and energy I could write something once in awhile solely for the blog. You want to get in on something like that?
“Shit happens, yeah, but you cannot argue that those girls are not powerless against cads.”
__________________
Could you please explain this to me? There is a double negative there, and I can’t not misunderstand.
Triple negative. Means exactly what it says though.
@ SayWhaat
I could not fail to disagree with you less. While girls can certainly get cheated by cads, if they choose wisely (as you’re doing), the probability of this happening a few times in a row is low. And as for getting actively pursued by cads, I don’t think girls have any right to complain unless they’re willing to approach guys and ask them out. Requiring that guys pursue you and then complaining that the wrong kinds of guys keep pursuing you is unfair.
It’s the same standard I apply to betas who keep getting friend-zoned or dumped for the alpha. Sure, it can happen once or twice. But if it keeps happening over and over, they shouldn’t be pursuing such girls.
@Mike @Dogsquat “But the key is to verify that she really is feeling authentic sexual desire for you, and not playing you for a chump. To this day, I’ m still waiting for some of the women to give concrete advice on how a guy is supposed to determine if a girl is really into him or sort of stringing him along, and whether he is being charged a large price difference. If one is going to criticize particular tactics or rules, then you have to be prepared to offer a guy a viable alternative.
I’d like to take a stab at it, but to which stage in relationship formation are you referring? The first few dates?
You’re asking her to hand over a huge advantage to a guy. She’s basically putting herself at their mercy if she offers a viable strategy. It’s also very hard to admit to yourself (and others) that you’ve got an “unfair” advantage based on your genes. Lots of people can’t bring themselves to do it. They’ll go through all kinds of bizarre mental gymnastics to avoid admitting it. I’ve experienced that myself, and it’s really, really hard to describe.
I imagine there’s some truth to this. But I don’t think most women experience it in these terms. It’s not so much a calculated withholding of information as a sense of uneasiness resulting from insufficient information and familiarity with the partner. I’ve never dated a man with the intention of taking advantage of him; initially, I am legitimately unsure if there is real sexual attraction, or, if there is, whether the man is trustworthy enough to receive that attraction. I would be unable to offer a strategy for determining if my interest is real because during the first few dates I am myself determining if my interest is real.
And as for getting actively pursued by cads, I don’t think girls have any right to complain unless they’re willing to approach guys and ask them out. Requiring that guys pursue you and then complaining that the wrong kinds of guys keep pursuing you is unfair.
For the record, I don’t require that guys pursue me, and I have done my fair share of initiating and expressing interest. I don’t think you’ll find a single woman here who will disagree.
What I am trying to say to you (and Dogsquat) is that the probability of getting conned by a cad has increased more than you guys would suspect. In this SMP, “betas” have the incentive (and are in fact motivated) to act like cads. It is very difficult for women to suss out who is truly a cad and who truly has good intentions, even if they are choosing wisely.
I imagine there’s some truth to this. But I don’t think most women experience it in these terms. It’s not so much a calculated withholding of information as a sense of uneasiness resulting from insufficient information and familiarity with the partner. I’ve never dated a man with the intention of taking advantage of him; initially, I am legitimately unsure if there is real sexual attraction, or, if there is, whether the man is trustworthy enough to receive that attraction. I would be unable to offer a strategy for determining if my interest is real because during the first few dates I am myself determining if my interest is real.
+1 to varanus. There’s less (if any) calculation and more instinct that goes into this sort of thing.
@SayWhaat
“It is very difficult for women to suss out who is truly a cad and who truly has good intentions, even if they are choosing wisely.”
Spot on. I’ve got stories from some female friends that blew my mind. As the cad population has increased, you have to wonder why they’ve changed their tactics to seem like relationship-minded guys? I mean, if most women give it up at the drop of a hat (they don’t), then they wouldn’t need to be played or deceived. Whatever the answer is, I’m sure women as a whole have encouraged this bad behavior : )
“I don’t know if I’ve always been this poor at expressing myself or if it’s just the fact that it’s getting late, haha.
_______________________________
Lolzer. No worries!
“Correct me if I’m wrong, but you are saying that girls who were in a situation like I was are not powerless against cads. If my personal story is any indication, that is not true.”
___________________________________
I disagree. I think you did just fine in your situation. Imagine if you’d slept with him and gotten a dose of neurochemically enhanced pair-bonding.
I submit to you that the damage would have been deeper, the scar tissue thicker. You avoided that by operating your trousers according to the service agreement provided by the manufacturer. You waited him out, he showed his true face, and you dealt with him accordingly.
I’m not saying it’s painless and fun – but you took some good steps to minimize the damage. You exercised your agency. There is always some risk in exposing yourself emotionally to another person, and your dice came up snake-eyes this time. Good on you for not betting the farm on this toss.
Strong work.
Back to the original argument:
“Hence: you cannot argue that girls are not powerless against cads.”
__________________________________________________
Let’s say, for argument’s sake, that this is true.
That means that women are not in control of their actions when presented with certain stimuli by men. Play that out to an extreme and personalize it a bit:
Say it’s ten years from now – you’re married and have 2 kids. You’re solo on a plane flight back home, and just so happen to be sitting next to Roosh.
Are you saying that he could Game you into fucking him? Or just really, really wanting to fuck him, but not doing it, hanging on by a shred of decency – needing to picture your kids crying because their daddy left mommy – tingling so bad the Captain comes back and puts your seatbelt on himself?
Really?
About repetition in mate selection:
I’ve said this before on HUS, but my nickname used to be Sergeant Save-A-Ho.
Through some combination of genes, upbringing, and bad chakra fluid – I was really attracted to messed up women. I could talk to two equally attractive women about every day stuff for 20 minutes, and I’d come away really liking one of them. I’d get the male equivalent of gina tingles for her.
That woman would invariably be messed up somehow. She’d have a bad coke habit, an eating disorder, untreated sexual abuse – something like that. We wouldn’t talk about it, but something in me could feel it.
Since I liked her and I’m handsome (my mommy told me) we’d start hanging out, we’d get close, her problems would arise, I’d try and help out, and before I knew it, we’d be An Item. I’d get “sucked in” to these toxic (for me, anyway) relationships with women who needed more help than some dumb-ass boyfriend could provide.
After going through this a few times, almost getting stabbed, spending tons of money, time, anguish, and heartache…I realized that I was the common denominator. Something in me was attracted to these fucked up chicks. I also realized that not all women are fucked up – just the ones I liked.
So I stopped dating for awhile. Did some therapy and a lot of introspection. I learned a little about psychology and how it applied in my life. Basically, I did a lot of work on myself.
Then I started dating again. It was hard at first. For a long time, I had to force myself to date women I didn’t “tingle” for. See, I still felt those sparks with certain pathologies, but I’d learned that meant Badness. I had to re-train my mind to find healthy women attractive.
It was hard. I had to do it, though. The alternatives were celibacy or shrugging and saying,”I like what I like, and I can’t do anything about it.” Celibacy would be a neutral path, but the latter would have landed me in a trailer park with a recurring role (shirtless and drunk, of course) on Cops.
That is what I want some women to recognize. If your wiring is fucked up (like mine was), you’re going to like unhealthy people. Sure, take some time to figure it out, but once there’s a pattern – you own that shit. It’s your fault if you fuck another player for the sixth time. It was my fault I dated the bulimic coke head with the stabby ex-boyfriend – I knew myself, and I KNEW those sparks I felt signified Something Awful – even if I didn’t know about her problems the first time I kissed her.
If shit just isn’t going right in your love life, stop blaming everyone else. You can’t control other people. At most you can nudge them a little bit, but people basically do what they were gonna do anyway. Your power over other people lies in allowing them into your life, or kicking them out. Picking the wrong person over and over and over again is not everyone else’s problem. You’re there the whole time, so how about getting your Booty Picking Gear tuned up and operating correctly?
That’s what I’m saying about women having power over cads.
For the record, I don’t require that guys pursue me, and I have done my fair share of initiating and expressing interest. I don’t think you’ll find a single woman here who will disagree.
What I am trying to say to you (and Dogsquat) is that the probability of getting conned by a cad has increased more than you guys would suspect. In this SMP, “betas” have the incentive (and are in fact motivated) to act like cads. It is very difficult for women to suss out who is truly a cad and who truly has good intentions, even if they are choosing wisely.
I see what you mean.
Not sure what sort of advice I’d give you to try to filter out us good guys from all the cads. If you can some how find a “natural” way to find out about the guy’s past sexual history. Don’t act judgmental about it (even though you will definitely judge him on his answers). Most cads will assume that pretending to be sexually inexperienced is not going to help them.
“Men cooperate too, a guy more or less understand that virgins exist, we are Catholics after all, and understand that she wont be banging him right away so after evaluating if he likes her enough to wait for sex they allow for things to progress slowly, they know that the price for sex is commitment so he commits and keep showing it while she shows more sexy side at similar rates is like a dance, slow escalation more kisses, tongue, hugs, hand jobs, blow jobs NOT ANAL (that is just stupid american bullshiting)…so there is a way to give just enough without going all the way till there is a date for the wedding in which cases most of my friends considered committed enough for sex, of course she cannot be giving blowjobs to random guys that also is slutty behaviour, boyfriend earns the most sexy side by sticking around and being nice rewarding assholes for beer is not part of “saving myself” policy.”
Sounds good. For him. May I ask what the girls get out of it? Are the hand jobs and blow jobs reciprocated in the other direction?
The teen with 40 year old. What Jezebel and other feminists are not getting is that an older man or woman might provide a more psychologically healthy experience for the teen precisely because of their maturity, than another anxious and horny teen could.
Goddamn, you’re smarter than I am. I hope you stick around. You were issued ovaries at birth, right?
I can buy being unsure about a guy at first. That’s kind of what I figured, anyway.
The second part of Mike’s question is:
Another issue guys have is feeling second (or worse) best in certain situations. Jesus Mahoney (Peace be upon Him) had a great post a few months ago about what it feels like when a woman makes him “prove himself” before they get sexual, but finding out later that she’s decided to bang a few guys within hours of meeting them. (Susan, I’m referring to the newspaper analogy if you’ve got that gem saved). That’s the reference to the “large price difference”.
Basically, some women will bang some dudes immediately, but require others to offer commitment, gifts, even human endocrine organs before getting Biblical.
@SayWhaat There’s less (if any) calculation and more instinct that goes into this sort of thing.
An attempt to reflect on the cognitive processes informing that intuition/instinct:
I am typically unable to say whether I’m attracted to someone merely by looking at them. There may be visually identifiable traits which contraindicate attraction (obesity, poor dental hygiene, etc). If those fundamental things check out, the person is still a tabula rasa. Attraction is not yet present, but there is potential. The initial stages of a relationship are about information-gathering and inference-making. It’s a liminal state in which I suss out qualifying or disqualifying aspects and attempt to extrapolate based on the information available to me. It’s about existing in a pre-attraction state that can feel very mysterious and unconscious while you’re in it. Sometimes, the unappealing qualities I discover impede the development of attraction to the potential partner. We do not have liftoff. Other times…the appealing qualities exceed some unquantifiable threshold and I “suddenly” develop a raging lady-boner for the person. The experience feels emotional/intuitive, though I expect it’s actually quite cerebral. I don’t think analysis of this subconscious calculus comes naturally to many women.
Then again, I know other women who are more easily aroused by visual stimuli. I’d be curious to hear others’ input.
I dunno about sussing out the male’s sexual history thing. My answer to that question is “Squat, Dog NMI. No children. Never Married. Never contracted an STI, here are my test results.”
I went to SERE school, so they’re never getting anything else out of me, ever, thanks to your tax dollars. I appreciate that, by the way.
Plus, I think guys are so used to lying about this issue (especially to other guys) that they’re really, really good at it.
I imagine there’s some truth to this. But I don’t think most women experience it in these terms. It’s not so much a calculated withholding of information as a sense of uneasiness resulting from insufficient information and familiarity with the partner. I’ve never dated a man with the intention of taking advantage of him; initially, I am legitimately unsure if there is real sexual attraction, or, if there is, whether the man is trustworthy enough to receive that attraction. I would be unable to offer a strategy for determining if my interest is real because during the first few dates I am myself determining if my interest is real.
Is that what you were asking?
The problem is how do we distinguish someone like you from someone who just wants to date us until she can get the hotter alpha that she wants?
Sounds good. For him. May I ask what the girls get out of it? Are the hand jobs and blow jobs reciprocated in the other direction?
I think you missed the part were women in general are more aroused by foreplay than by the rest, making out with a man you like feels reaaaaaaly good for most women even if there is not sex involved.
“Had it ever occurred to the person that did this law that if one spouse doesn’t know the other is sick they might get infected as well? How do doctors control for that under this “secrecy is a human right even from your own spouse” situation?”
________________________________
The docs run tests, and sometimes prescribe meds to both partners. It gets pretty hairy when the translator explains what the meds are for to the previously ignorant spouse. Yes, Tazers work through hijabi.
I get what you mean about spouses behaving as one with regard to health. I hope I end up like that – won’t have a choice if I marry my current SO, anyway – she’s got a prescription pad with her name printed on it already.
Keep in mind, though, that life is rather more fucked up for a lot of people.
It’s like the abuse questions some of you were making light of earlier. That’s superfantastic you people don’t have to worry about that crap. You’re lucky to be able to get indignant about it.
Another issue guys have is feeling second (or worse) best in certain situations. Jesus Mahoney (Peace be upon Him) had a great post a few months ago about what it feels like when a woman makes him “prove himself” before they get sexual, but finding out later that she’s decided to bang a few guys within hours of meeting them. (Susan, I’m referring to the newspaper analogy if you’ve got that gem saved). That’s the reference to the “large price difference”.
Basically, some women will bang some dudes immediately, but require others to offer commitment, gifts, even human endocrine organs before getting Biblical.
& @INTJ The problem is how do we distinguish someone like you from someone who just wants to date us until she can get the hotter alpha that she wants?
I see where you’re coming from. Those are excellent questions which deserve a better response than I can formulate tonight. I’ll sleep on it.
It’s like the abuse questions some of you were making light of earlier. That’s superfantastic you people don’t have to worry about that crap. You’re lucky to be able to get indignant about it.
Dog every month I receive a news article about a woman getting killed by her current or ex husband partner or lover in my own country, sometimes her kids included. I find it indignant because I don’t see how can harassing people at doctor’s office improve the odds of anyone that is abused to actually escape it. Show me numbers of men and women (and I must notice my husband never get this kind of questions asked even though statistically speaking he is also at a great risk) that had been saved by whatever a doctor is supposed to do if her patient say yes and I might believe it, IME all it happens is that the woman lies or don’t come back to the place that makes her remember that she is in abusive relationship. People’s lives are fucked up but trying to make everyone suspect only increases the ways a real bad guy can get away with it, IMO.
The problem with this question is that I’m sure SW and friends never actually tried to string a guy along for validation or free meals so for them explaining to other men that they are indeed sincere is tricky.
I think the question for guys should be how much the woman is investing herself?
If she never tries to reciprocate whether by asking you out next time herself, suggesting a place or offering to pay or cook then chances are she is gaining other things. A man can pay for a first date, no matter how cheap but as a rule if she doesn’t offer something in return “I pay next time” “Drinks on me” I will cook the dinner” are signs of her trying to show equality and good will, there is something fishy going on. When my now husband used to visit me we split half and half and that was my suggestion and once when he was short of money I saved up so he could travel to my country. If she acts like a selfish princess I consider that a red flag both as relationship prospect and intentions, even if she is dirt poor she can always offer some way to make the weight of dating not be only on man’s shoulders. Just my two cents.
@OTC Define finish. The marathon doesn’t end, and everyone else keeps on running no matter what you personally do. Marriage is not an end point, it is just the beginning.
Since that was pretty much my definition of “finish,” I have to wonder what your definition of “running” is. The marathon metaphor doesn’t really make sense to me.
The marathon of life I can understand. But the marathon of sex? What’s the finish line?
You guys are seriously weird. Far be it from me to deny you your life experiences, but I have no idea on which planet you live, because NONE of what you’ve written and discussed here reflects the lived experience of myself and my friends (mid 20s to mid 30s young urban professionals, mostly straight) – both male and female.
We date people we want to have relationships, and sometimes it works out, and sometimes it doesn’t. We hook up with people we are attracted to – and sometimes it turns into dating/LTRs and sometimes it doesn’t. Men get their hearts broken, women get their hearts broken, and most people end up in LTRs that they find satisfying, regardless of how much sex they’ve had prior to that relationship.
I (and my girlfriends) have NEVER had a man lie to us about wanting NSA sex. It’s said right up front, and those who want it go along with it, and those who don’t – don’t.
This whole “it’s a war out there!!” sounds so fatiguing – and again, totally irrelevant to anything I’ve ever encountered in my life. But hey – it’s obviously working out for you guys, so more power to you, I guess!!
As for the whole “women have no individual power” that one of the first commenters managed to ejaculate… oh, honey, tell that to my 6-figure salary and the team of engineers I manage. Or to Hillary Clinton. Or to Tarja Kaarina Halonen. It’s exactly the other way around – women as a group still suffer from sexism and are under-privileged… individual women sometimes manage to overcome that disadvantage and attain lots and lots of power.
Also, also – men are just as interested in marriage and relationships as women. How do I know this? because most people are in a relationship, and 50% of them are men.
Rollo and Roissy are useful and necessary – but so is digoxin. The therapeutic range is narrow. Too much and you kill the patient, too little and they die anyway.
Just a spoonful of sociopathy makes Dogsquat a healthy boy?
Just to be clear, I respect your right to hold any views you wish, but absolutely will not allow the sharing of Rollo and Roissy style advice here. As they both have blogs, it should be completely unnecessary anyway.
>> “To this day, I’ m still waiting for some of the women to give concrete advice on how a guy is supposed to determine if a girl is really into him or sort of stringing him along, and whether he is being charged a large price difference.”
There definitely *are* girls out there who will go on dates with guys they don’t really like for the free meal/attention (… of course NAWALT! NAWALT! NAWALT!) These Users also seem more prominent than they actually are because they date more. If a nice girl isn’t interested in a guy then she’ll politely decline, whereas a User will accept most date invitations, so they’re circulating a lot more and leaving many frustrated guys in their wakes.
…as for how to spot them? I wish I could give more of a useful answer. I tend to be very suspicious of anybody (male or female) who actually enjoys dating. I never understood people who regularly date multiple people at once. When I’m single, my “default” setting is dating zero people. If I’m seeing ANYBODY, then it’s a bit of an exceptional circumstance. (Though maybe that’s more of an Introvert thing.) If a girl dates around a lot, then IMO it’s probably more likely that she’s trying to channel her inner Carrie Bradshaw.
The really only useful advice that I have is to spend very little money at the beginning. If a girl sticks around through multiple cheap dates, then it’s more likely that she actually enjoys your company. Using somebody for a free three course meal is evil but understandable. Using somebody for free ice cream cones and cups of coffee is a bit silly.
Most of you probably already know this stuff, but it’s worth repeating.
{ 536 comments… read them below or add one }
« 1 2 3 4 »
I hate to sound cynical and MRA-ish here, but most women are going to have a tough time keeping a guy around while doing this. By waiting, they’re taking their biggest asset out of the bargain – at least temporarily
And that’s one big reason why they don’t do it. Unless you live in an isolated group were arranged marrriages are the norm and there’s no three date rule, women who hold out are afraid of losing out. It takes more confidence than most women have.
@Dogsquat
I’m researching a post and I was reading The Evolution of Human Sexuality by Donald Symons. An oldie but goodie, 1979. Anyway, he says in there that waiting is an aphrodisiac to males. Few get the opportunity to take it that far today, but I saw one shrink advise guys to wait, and then when the woman is willing, wait a few more dates. It’s also a good strategy for women because during that waiting period men are actually more predisposed to fall in love.
We’re so into instant gratification that we wind up with blips instead of earthquakes in the sack.
@Mike C
No need to do that! We like hearing from you.
“we’ve failed to tell them about the male aversion to female sexual experience with other men.”
.
The universal aversion
@Megaman
There’s a new study out that shows men being more “morally flexible” in negotiations than women, including outright deception. It was done with several hundred business students. It’s very relevant to what we’ve been discussing, but I’m not sure I want to deal with the firestorm that will erupt if I write about it.
Megaman:
+1
Damned if you do, damned if you don’t!
How one chooses to navigate the SMP is their own choice. No advice is one size fits all. We all have to do what works best for us.
Myself, I’d rather remain single then have to have sex on the third date just to be “considered” as a relationship prospect. I would be filtered out by any guy who had that rule, but I see it as the lesser of two evils. I’d rather not put myself in the vulnerable position of not knowing where I stand with a guy afterward, because I know it’s something that emotionally I wouldn’t recover from easily.
I’m the type of person if you say, “Yuck, this soda doesn’t taste right. Here, try it!” I would respond, “No thanks!”
@Mega-Dog-Varanus-MikeC-Lookland-Herb
Just a great exchange between posts #271-281. Clip these and print-out in pamphlets for women. Answers to many of the (apparent) mysteries of men, including where all of the “good” men have gone – are going…
@Lookland #281
“Women need to learn and internalize that men are people just like them with wants and needs ”
-I agree, but unfortunately the feminist editors, morphed it into this:
“Men need to learn and internalize that Women are [superior] people with wants and needs [that men should strive to meet]”
My first instinct is to think that the pendulum has just swung too far and will someday find equilibrium, but the problem is that the pendulum, and modern feminism is zero-sum. Feminism has manifested in ways that have increased opportunity and “equality” by limiting/taking from men, all while upholding the “traditional” expectations pressed onto men. I.e. the expectation that men should subordinate their needs-wants-desires in favor of this “equality” as well as the (ever-changing-expanding) needs of the family, present and future. As a man, to provide is an obligation. For a woman it is a prerogative. The increased competition, structurally reduced options, and superiority brainwashing that men have endured are not counterbalanced with an equitable exchange into alternative roles or opportunities – at least not without great pain, significant risk, and a voluntary write-down of his status.
While initially men were reluctant to absorb the added competition in school and the marketplace, I think that at this point most men are not in favor of a clawback – a return to 1950, but would actually be quite content with real equality, one in which opportunity, expectations, obligations, and prerogatives are truly pulled from the same bucket by both genders.
The challenge is that mens status in the eyes of women, call it SMV/MMV/social proof whatever, is still tied to the traditional expectations, roles, and obligations. And *most* of the gains for women, which seem to have been at the expense of men, have similarly garnered them very little, if any, bump in status-smv-mmv in the eyes of men.
So while I totally get that statements about wants and needs can be easily flipped, the difference is in how those needs/wants are structured into the system and at what cost, that is, are those wants/needs coming from the heart or are they constructs of an out-of-control system of superiority and entitlement? And of course, who is paying for them and with what capital?
The lies of feminism are based on the propagation of artificial wants/needs of women coupled with the continued subordination and devaluing of mens wants/needs. So I would argue that men are not asking for anything more than what they have always wanted/needed, while women are (often unknowingly) asking for wants and needs they have been told they want/need in addition to those that they have always wanted/needed. Men are responding accordingly.
In fact the growing response for both men and women seems to trapeze between a fractured set of needs/wants: sex, emotional intimacy, relationships, self-indulgence, self-sacrifice etc. What was once a sit-down meal (marriage) is now a Vegas buffet. What was once viewed as work+risk=rewards is now, work+risk+risk>rewards, a la “get mine while I can”…
Anyhow, enough of that. I just wanted to be one more (male) voice that says if I am willing-ready-wanting of a relationship, I will not be pressing for sex in the first three dates, or any other timeline. IOI’s: yes; Escalating physically: yes, (but perhaps slower than she might expect these days); expecting-pushing for sex: no. Women who give it up under these expectations or who claim to have needs (want sex) and put that need/want above the need/want of a relationship/marriage are eating from the buffet while expecting the candle lit table for two. Same goes for men really, but with so much more risk in the system and very little in terms of access to the rewards (other than sex of course), it is hardly a surprise the “get mine” wins out.
Just for fun
.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5OdQGbVNa4
.
J – “Yeah, that’s cute and funny and all, but with the average age of menarch at 12 and dropping and with the average age of marriage at 25 or 26, do you really expect that women are going to keep it zipped for 14 years?”
There is no reason a young woman cannot make it to marriage with 4 or less sexual partners. In 14 years, assuming she started having sex as soon as her period kicked in, that is a new guy about every 3.5 years. To me 4 relationships that lasted 3+ years that included physical relations is no big deal and completely normal. And I would not disqualify any women based on that number and situation. In fact, I would see her history as a good sign that she has some knowledge and skill being in a relationship.
I have no sympathy for women (or men) that don’t want a relationship but still want to “scratch the itch”. I see no reason why anyone would put off being serious simply because it might not be convenient at the moment. It isn’t convenient for me to have to work 8am to 4:30pm every day, but I get my ass up and go anyway.
@J
The Guardian had a live chat with Amanda Marcotte and Amanda Hess about the show. I checked out the transcript and it was unbelievable. Marcotte says she loves the show, and that Dunham is exposing what lengths women are forced to go to in order to please men. She accuses Charlie of objectifying Marnie by putting her on a pedestal.
@Tasmin
At the risk of creating a shit storm, the iconic feminist issues are the perfect illustration: abortion and child support.
As it stands in the US now it is an infringement on her rights to require a married woman to inform her husband she’s getting an abortion. That’s how absolute we’ve determined the right to abort a child is.
However, under no condition can a man select to not provide support for a child of his genetic linage (and in some cases, not of his genetic linage).
So, we can build a matrix of pregnancy effects:
Neither wants a child: child is aborted and everyone is happy.
Both want child: child is born and everyone is happy.
Man wants child, woman doesn’t: child is aborted and woman is happy.
Woman wants child, man doesn’t: child is born, woman is happy, and man pays for the woman’s choice.
At every point the man’s desires are subordinate to the woman and in one, the woman gets not only to act without respect to his desires but charge him for the privilege .
And trust me, when men want equalize by allowing for male abortion (ie, denial of paternity responsibilities) the first one manning the barricades to stop it are Feminists. Their argument is that it is unfair to women and, in the grandest of ironies, that men should think about it before they have sex.
When I used to like to bait feminists I pointed out that the fact a man could consider the risk of a woman getting pregnant in determining to have sex but the woman who would get pregnant apparently couldn’t and needed available abortion proved men were superior.
@Ted_D
There is a post (at the Spearhead I believe) about how men learn to “shovel the effing gravel”. It seems to be a fundamental difference between men and women in the west, the ability to see what needs to be done and just do it.
@Susan Walsh
And this surprises you?
Marcotte essentially thinks men are evil at best even if she doesn’t say it outright and she’s pretty mainstream, not feminist mainstream but culturally mainstream.
Any man who fails to provide exactly what a woman wants, when she wants it, regardless of how well she communicates her desires and regardless of his wants and needs is wrong and objectifying women and a tool of the patriarchy.
I’ve had that discussion, more or less, too many times to count. When asked if I knew a woman in another town where I worked and who I shared interests I joked, “no, but do you have her number?”. I then got a lecture about women not existing just for men’s benefit and was kicked out of a yoga studio where I was the most dedicated member.
Note: I have not seen the show
The Guardian had a live chat with Amanda Marcotte and Amanda Hess about the show. I checked out the transcript and it was unbelievable. Marcotte says she loves the show, and that Dunham is exposing what lengths women are forced to go to in order to please men.
I guess in art people will interpret what they see to conform to their existing worldview. Of course, the absurdities are plentiful in this statement they make. Are not women empowered? They have the agency to simply WALK AWAY from any situation they deem unacceptable. The problem with an Amanda Marcotte type is she can’t analyze things through the perspective of market dynamics, and absolutely cannot look in the mirror and realize what *some* female behavior says about the intrinsic motivations of women as a gender. It is much easier and more convenient to once again reframe everything as women being victimized by men even when they apparently do so without any force or compulsion but totally of their own free will.
She accuses Charlie of objectifying Marnie by putting her on a pedestal.
Haha….this is almost stupidly surreal. I’m convinced feminists have about 3-5 words they just love. And they whip them out at every turn, even when the make absolutely no sense in the context or situation being described. Objectification is one of those words. Every single thing a guy does that is “wrong” from her view is somehow an “objectification”.
As it stands in the US now it is an infringement on her rights to require a married woman to inform her husband she’s getting an abortion. That’s how absolute we’ve determined the right to abort a child is.
I was completely surprised when during my first visit to the doctor for the pregnancy where my beloved was with me I was asked if I wanted him on the same room or not. I imagined that this was for single mothers that came with a friend, or something like it. I know I’m naive, I did some research and then found out about this. Is amazing in my culture you have to beg a man to get involved with the pregnancy and the kids in here it looks like they do a great effort to try to kick them out, so weird.
“As it stands in the US now it is an infringement on her rights to require a married woman to inform her husband she’s getting an abortion.”
.
But according to Marcotte, women +somehow+ are getting this signal that their bodies belong to their husbands.
.
“The way female sexuality is policed in a way male sexuality isn’t, sending the signal that women’s very bodies are the property of eventual spouses”
.
– Amanda Marcotte
There is no reason a young woman cannot make it to marriage with 4 or less sexual partners. In 14 years, assuming she started having sex as soon as her period kicked in, that is a new guy about every 3.5 years.
That’s not unreasonable, Ted. In fact, it’s about the number of partners that the average American woman has had.
Waiting for someone to add, “Multiply any number a woman gives you by three.”
In five, four, three…
The Guardian had a live chat with Amanda Marcotte and Amanda Hess about the show.
Link?
Marcotte says she loves the show, and that Dunham is exposing what lengths women are forced to go to in order to please men.
I can see that reading in that Hannah is a people pleaser with low self-esteem, as was Aura in Tiny Furniture. Jessa is pretty much a slut though, and I don’t throw that term around lightly.
She accuses Charlie of objectifying Marnie by putting her on a pedestal.
LOL. That’s a way harder sell. I think Hannah’s comments are more relevant when she says he “has a vagina,” but is also wistful about what it must be liked to be “loved so much.”
Charlie is a male Hannah, a people pleaser punching above his weight class
and this:
@Megaman
It’s conventional because by and large, most girls in their sexual prime lose respect and attraction for a guy who expresses emotional intimacy before things have become physical.
The girls rejecting them are the ones viewing them as chumps, not the guys giving the advice.
Susan:
“Alias
That eharmony article was fascinating – I was surprised how clearly meeting in a bar stood out as a poor strategy. High loss of attraction, highest divorce rate. This must say something about personality traits of people who frequent bars, even the ones who are looking to meet someone there.”
————-
Yeah, I don’t know what’s happened to the other articles with those stats?
weird.
The personality trait is–
poor strategy + my soul-mate will fall right onto my lap after I down a few shots.
J – “That’s not unreasonable, Ted. In fact, it’s about the number of partners that the average American woman has had.”
Be careful. If you start accusing me of being reasonable, you’ll ruin my reputation as an unreasonable old grouch.
A couple of things I’d like to throw out:
Although we both seem to believe this is reasonable, I have seen here and other places many times how unreasonable this is. (I mean, we can’t possibly have college kids forming relationships. What happens after graduation when they have to split? /sarcasm off.) Why is this a big deal? If you are graduating, you can go any damn where in the world you want to get a job. How about you both look, and the first one to land something good takes the other along for the ride to a new city? Why is that so difficult to comprehend?
Perhaps it is because of where I live and/or socioeconomic status, but most of the young girls I know in HS or just out are already at or around the 4 partner number. A few of my daughters friends hit that before they graduated from HS. I’ve seen the stats, but I can tell you that although it may play out that women on average end up at around 4-5 partners, there are pockets where that is so uncommon that you might have a better shot at finding a virgin. Seems for whatever reason, the Pittsburgh Metro area is such a pocket.
I can completely agree that it is unreasonable to expect people to wait 14 years to have sex. But, I disagree that it is unreasonable to expect them to get into and stay in LTRs during those 14 years. The fact that they don’t, and that many intentionally avoid relationships for those years is troubling to me. Why is it that LTRs are “too much work” while in college? Did the curriculum get much more difficult in the last 10 years? Do people have less hours in the day? It is exactly this attitude that perpetuates the “wait until I’m 30 to think about marriage” train of thought, which seems to be a losing proposition for many.
Is it not possible to pursue education/career goals WHILE maintaining a LTR? They don’t seem to be related, and I find it hard to believe there isn’t enough time. Although, I’m sure it is difficult when someone spends all their free time drinking/partying/”having fun”. Yeah, responsibility is no fun, but it’s life. Isn’t college supposed to be preparation for the real world?
@Ana #313
I can go you one better. When I was in the ER rolling around in pain last month, one of the nurses interrupted the backrub my husband was giving me to ask if I felt “safe at home.”
Last year in the same ER, a doctor asked my kid if I gave him his concussion (atheletic accident). My son replied that I never hit him, I just burn him with cigarettes. I laughed and said that I don’t smoke, but the doctor made my son roll up his sleeves to check for burns. He reprimanded my kid for messing with him and said, “This isn’t funny.” I replied, “No, it’s ridiculous. I know that you’re a mandatory reporter, but sometimes this stuff goes too far.”
J:
“Lack of responsibility. My parents, who were pretty strict with me, were so much cooler with my kids–becasue they weren’t responsible for them.”
———-
Yeah, you may have a point when it comes to their grandchildren or other people’s kids, but some do this with their younger children. Perhaps they’re just worn out.
Do you think the difference in your parents is also because you have boys?
@Ana
I can beat that in a way that goes to your convo with Ozy about the 40 yo man/14 yo girl.
If a 40 yo woman has sex with a 14 yo boy and gets pregnant, even though she committed statutory rape, she can sue for child support from her victim. We even have case law upholding this in at least one state.
In pursuit of female autonomy and male responsibility when it comes to reproduction we’ve gotten plain fucked up.
Ted, I think your post is spot on That’s why I think serial monogamy is preferable to random sexual activity.
As to kids–male or female– having sex in high school, I am absolutely against it. I’m sure there are some male commenters who will castigatee me for not wanting my son’s to be players in high school, but boys lack the emotional and financial wherewithal to deal with the long-range consequences of fatherhood or with the pain of having a child aborted or adopted away.
Dogsquat:
“but most women are going to have a tough time keeping a guy around while doing this. By waiting, they’re taking their biggest asset out of the bargain – at least temporarily”
————-
The waiting period is supposed to bide time for getting to know his character/intentions/whether he’s relationship-minded and also to demonstrate that you have other qualities you can offer besides sex, that you’re compatible, etc..
It’s no different than a guy waiting to establish something serious before he invests large sums of his money.
There can be demonstrations of physical affection without sex, it’s not like you’ll be meeting behind a glass divider or anything.
You’re simply holding off on making a big investment until you know the return will be worthwhile.
“it’s not like you’ll be meeting behind a glass divider or anything.”
———
Just a reminder that this is a RED flag for anyone who might miss that one. lol
@Alias
It is? I could swear for a lot of women it’s a display of higher value if the man is the one behind the glass.
No smilely enough though I’m making a joke because there is sadly more than a little truth in it.
Iggles:
“Myself, I’d rather remain single then have to have sex on the third date just to be “considered” as a relationship prospect. I would be filtered out by any guy who had that rule, but I see it as the lesser of two evils. ”
——–
You can always counter by requesting he place a down payment on a car for you by the 3rd date. lol
Seriously, if you don’t sleep around and he’s expecting you to, you’re not compatible- period. In a perfect world- people would be upfront about their intentions and not waste each other’s time. sigh
@Alias
I like it, but I’d change it to “prove you have three months salary for the engagement ring” (while I think that standard is asinine, this is a perfect use for it).
Herb:
“It is? I could swear for a lot of women it’s a display of higher value if the man is the one behind the glass.”
——
That’s another red flag right there.
I hope you know to steer away from these women.
Just keep on driving, unless, God forbid, you’re ever in the position where they let you make that ONE phone call- only then, sir, only then.
Herb:
“I like it, but I’d change it to “prove you have three months salary for the engagement ring” (while I think that standard is asinine, this is a perfect use for it).”
——
NOW you tell me?
Too little too late. ha
@J, @Mike C
Here is the link to the Guardian article – the live chat is at the bottom.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2012/apr/27/girls-live-chat-episode-three
Re Marcotte’s accusing Charlie (he’s described as being *too* great a boyfriend) of objectification, it reminds me of her disdain for Nice Guys. She accuses them of being spoiled and entitled, believing that they should get to have sex with anyone they want, which is the only reason they resent the Friend Zone. She strikes me as being at a sociopathic level of lacking empathy.
What’s brilliant about the show is its incisive portrayal of SMP dynamics, including Game. I assure you Roissy would endorse it wholeheartedly (or he should). In one corner, we have Charlie, cute, sweet, an ideal boyfriend, but too pussy whipped. His gf Marnie of 4 years is literally begging him to “be a man and tell her to fuck off.” It’s clear that she’s going to dump him soon.
In the other corner we have Adam, a total dick. He never answers Hannah’s texts, so she dresses up and goes over to his apartment, calling from the sidewalk below. They have the kind of sex in which he tells her to be quiet, and in the most recent episode, turns away and smushes her face during sex so he doesn’t have to look at her. After sex, he squeezes her belly and back fat like it’s Playdoh. It’s strictly no-strings, and no fun for her, but she describes him as her boyfriend to others.
Enter Boothe Jonathan, a pretentious NYC artist of advanced years and small stature. He’s got Game – after Marnie tingles visibly in his presence he says to her, “The first time I fuck you I might scare you a little, because I’m a man, and I know how to do things.” Dunham says a guy actually used that line on her, then confessed he had learned it from his friend at Vice Magazine. In any case, it get’s Marnie so hot she rushes to the ladies room to masturbate.
Seriously, everyone should watch this show!
IDK, Alias. I just know the boys could do no wrong as far as my folks were concerned.
@SW
Re Marcotte’s accusing Charlie (he’s described as being *too* great a boyfriend) of objectification, it reminds me of her disdain for Nice Guys. She accuses them of being spoiled and entitled, believing that they should get to have sex with anyone they want, which is the only reason they resent the Friend Zone. She strikes me as being at a sociopathic level of lacking empathy.
Well there ARE so-called nice guys who feel entitled to sex, but Charlie’s not one of them.
In the other corner we have Adam, a total dick. … It’s strictly no-strings, and no fun for her, but she describes him as her boyfriend to others.
Hannah’s best line to Adam: “I almost came.” So telling, so decriptive of the SMP…all that bullshit to be with someone who doesn’t make you come.
In any case, it get’s Marnie so hot she rushes to the ladies room to masturbate.
How badly did you want to slap her?
Seriously, everyone should watch this show!
Cosigned!
Susan and J, well, to be honest, the show sounds more and more awful the more I hear about it. I’m cringing just reading the dialogue.
Maybe because I am way closer in age to these girls, and I am not far enough removed from it? I just can’t use my empathy to identify with those girls, because to do so would make me feel even worse.
Plus, if that’s an accurate portrayal of what other girls my age actually tingle for, no wonder things are so messed up! Ugh. /sadface
@SW–I love these comments from the Guardian link:
“Although after their evening encounter, Marnie quickly escorts herself to the nearest ladies’ room to relieve all of her sexual frustrations. Ironically, this is the first seemingly “enjoyable” sexual experience in the entire series so far.”
“In Girls, women’s bodies do not have to be strictly funny or strictly sexy, which may be this new show’s boldest stroke. Instead, they are emotionally complicated: one more source, in the uncertain landscape of post-college life, of anxieties and self-doubt.”
“But Girls is less an extension of Sex and the City than it is a response to it – a tacit and even subversive acknowledgement that the sex lives of young post-feminist women are bleak. In Hannah’s relationship, we see how the hook-up culture degrades girls. In Marnie’s, we see how it degrades guys.”
@J
It was even better! A completely sincere, “That was really good. I almost came.” His offering her an orange Gatorade at that point was priceless.
No Hope, you’ll love it. I promise!
It’s an indictment of the SMP, not an endorsement. It’s not a post-college SATC; it’s about what happens when the SATC dream doesn’t come true. It’s sad but it would only reinforce your values.
@Hope
I’m twenty years and a penis removed from them and I have been having the same reaction.
@Hope
I do not think you would like it. I’m cheering it on because it confirms my own world view, and she’s the first writer to tell it like it is, instead of all those FWB movies that have the alpha guy begging the girl to be in a relationship with him. I used to want to throw things at the TV when I watched Sex and the City. I feel more sympathetic with this show.
@Susan
As opposed to the PUAs who treat women like shit because they feel entitled to have sex with whoever they want and have learned that treating women like shit is fairly good at achieving that end.
Yeah, boy, got to get rid of those nice guys.
Ah, Gatorade, the beverage of love….I’ve gotta start keeping a bottle on the nightstand.
Adam drinks Gatorade because he works out a lot, because he’s a former fat boy and sort of a male “butterface,” which qualifies him to make fun of Hannah’s weight. He’s both sadly damaged AND prickish, like a little baby Roissy.
J, I guess it’s not my thing. There is NEVER a portrayal of a happy, healthy and good relationship between young people in the mainstream media. It always has to be “interesting” to be entertaining, ironic to be hip, and totally dysfunctional to get critics to love it.
I grew up watching this kind of horrible junk and thought it was “normal.” As stupid as that is, that is what a new generation of girls must be thinking. It might seem like an indictment, but it’s still very subtle brainwashing. I never had good rolemodels in my personal life, so I didn’t have a fully healthy relationship until I met my husband.
Shows like these are poison imo.
Herb,
I’m asking this seriously, “What’s not to like?”
There is NEVER a portrayal of a happy, healthy and good relationship between young people in the mainstream media. It always has to be “interesting” to be entertaining, ironic to be hip, and totally dysfunctional to get critics to love it.
That is true, we don’t see a lot of normal relationships portrayed in the media, and it would help people to see more of that. OTOH, DH and I recently got season tickets to the opera. We’ve seen one about a courtesan (Manon), one about a cad tricking a woman into sex, getting her pregnant and abadoning her (Faust), and one in which a tyrant attempts to steal a loyal wife from her husband (Rosalinda). Happy families aren’t dramatic.
I grew up watching this kind of horrible junk and thought it was “normal.” …
I understand. I’ll rescind my endorsement for you, but I’d still force my hypothetical daughter watch it with me as I said repeatedly, “See, this is what happens when you’re stupid.”
Adam drinks Gatorade because he works out a lot, because he’s a former fat boy
and sort of a male “butterface,” which qualifies him to make fun of Hannah’s
weight. He’s both sadly damaged AND prickish, like a little baby Roissy.
————————————-
He’s way more than prick ISH…ewww Everyone should stay far far away from him.
More ranting on this subject. In early high school I was watching Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Felicity, and Gilmore Girls. Shows like these aren’t new. The trajectory is always the same: at first there’s “The One” love interest, then soon it turns into another guy, and another guy, and another guy… always situations involving tears. Felicity was hooking up in college with a bunch of guys even though she turned down Ivy League to go to NYU for her “The One.” Anyway, eventually I lost track, stopped caring and quit watching. I don’t know how any of those shows actually ended.
In college I stayed with one guy in a dysfunctional relationship through all four years, and continued to be with the same guy for three years after graduation. Finally I met some women in real life who had good, healthy relationships, and I realized just how brainwashed I was by the idea that all relationships always had to be full of drama, upset, fighting and tears. The relationship I had was not “normal.” I didn’t have a mother or father who told me any of these things. And all of my female friends were doing stupid stuff, too.
Since these are TV shows, and stories are all fictional anyway, they could totally put in characters who are happy, good and living the ideal romance. But they never do. Never. In Girls, where is the young couple that is happily in love with each other, showing the young folks watching how it’s really supposed to be done and providing a contrast to these other awful people? Nowhere to be seen. I bet such a couple never materializes on the show, because that wouldn’t be “authentic.” The typical drama on TV just makes me sick these days.
/rant off
I understand. I’ll rescind my endorsement for you, but I’d still force my
hypothetical daughter watch it with me as I said repeatedly, “See, this is what
happens when you’re stupid.”
————————————————————
and when you don’t listen to your mother
@Hope
There is NEVER a portrayal of a happy, healthy and good relationship between young people in the mainstream media.
Going by people’s comments, I think that the redeeming aspect of Girls is that it is not afraid to call dysfunctional relationships dysfunctional. It’s certainly not presenting them as normal, happy, healthy or good.
@J
Uhm, context…I think I missed a staff meeting.
Do you mean Girls? The sad and clueless played for laughs quit being my thing years ago.
Tbf,
In terms of viewing material, happy/stable relationships ARE kind of “boring”. I’m very happy with my relationship with my bf, but it would make for a pretty awful show. (…does anybody want to watch two people cuddling and watching South Park?
) It’s usually the conflict that drives a story. I’m just glad that this show portrays the shittier side of hookup culture.
I do wonder if Hannah would be more appreciative of a bf like Charlie. The only thing is that her “Charlie” (her natural assortative mating counterpart) would have a lower SMV than Adam.
I haven’t seen enough of Shoshanna’s character to make a judgement about her (her heart seems to be in the right place, but with her intelligence, I’m curious to see what sort of choices she makes).
Jessa is a slut. Hannah is simply pathetic. Marnie is the most likable character of the three. It’s unfortunate that there isn’t anyone there to show Charlie how to respect himself without being an asshole, and that there isn’t anyone to point out to Marnie how much better off she is with Charlie than with some PUA. I get the feeling she’s going to get P&D’d by that artist guy.
It’s odd though to see this quote in the Guardian article:
I see a lot of control freak girls on television (and sometimes in real life too), but I never saw Marnie as one of those. If anything, I see her as attempting to give her friends the advice and guidance that they should have gotten from their parents (but didn’t).
Bellita, that’s clear to an older, wiser audience, but to an impressionable teenager, the “dark” stuff seems so cool! When a young girl from a broken family ONLY sees dysfunction on TV, that normalizes it for her. Monkey see, monkey do. I was that young impressionable teenage girl writing diary entries. I thought that sort of thing “spoke to me” and “validated my experiences.”
Girls is basically telling young people, “this is cool, and if your life is like this, it’s like you’re on TV, too!” It doesn’t matter if older people say “this is dysfunctional.” Young dysfunctional people flock to dysfunction like flies to poop.
@Hope
Hey now, lay off the Scooby Gang. I remember going to Buffy season premiere parties.
Although I will give you disfunctional…also, don’t have sex in the Whedonverse. You will wind up dead or royally screwed over.
To this day the one thing I’ll never forgive Joss is killing Tara. All season I’d been waiting for them to get back together and when she came in and gave that long speech about rebuilding and all they needed to work through and ended with ” It’s a long and important process, and can we just skip it? C-Can you just be kissing me now? ” my heart melted.
Then the bastard killed her.
Since I’m being maudlin anyway, I was thinking yesterday about what emotional commitment from guys looks like and if anyone had distilled it in a movie. I think the best bet is when Rob proposes to Laura late in High Fidelity. It’s not anything romcon and it doesn’t get the girl (see the whole movie…actually, for Hollywood it’s not a bad view into how men think about women IMHO):
That last sentence is why challenging will never win a man and why the idea of having to game your wife every day repulses so many of us.
When a man looks at you and realizes you’re the one thing in his life he never gets tired of, you’ve got him if you’re smart enough to keep him.
Sue: “44% of guys in bars said they would lie about wanting a relationship to get sex”
How many women lie to get *out* of sex? Give out fake numbers? “I have a boyfriend?” If at least 44% of women in bars, then perhaps they’re a good match for the 44% of men in bars.
Either lying and deception are part of the game, or not.
Alright, I’m off to get the car’s oil change and then I’ll be back for one last check before I head off to SJW (Submissive Journey Weekend) and classes on ironing, sewing, and such (The gf is requiring me to go the Self-Image/Self-Esteem session).
I’ll make one last check after I get back with the car and then it’ll be until Monday.
Ted; “Keep in mind, for me that is only about 10 to 20 people max my entire life.”
The reason I ask is that Ana and J and Sue seem to know everyone, and have numerous personal of examples for every behavior possible. Way over 20, if I take the sum total of their posts.
This must be what life as an extrovert is like – it’s a bit alien to me.
Emily, just because two people are happy in a relationship and treat each other well doesn’t mean there can’t be a good story. There are lots of good stories that feature non-dysfunctional couples, although they’re not “chick crack” stuff.
The Dune series for example has the Jessica and the Duke as a great, loving couple, Captain/First Officer style. Her relationship with her son is quite interesting, and her son, who eventually becomes the story’s early protagonist, has a wonderful love story. The main conflict revolves around other things.
Though I can’t think of too many other examples besides Dune. I love the series because it presents a “light” way first and foremost, and I had a great spiritual awakening from reading the books.
Taking a big picture perspective of “Girls”, I have to say that it is further evidence of how the media is so focused on the problems that women face. If they care about the effect of society on men, it’s only because of how it affects women. We’d never see a show about how the modern sexual marketplace, educational situation, and job market affects young men.
@Hope
I should probably drop it now because neither of us have seen Girls and you don’t really want to, but I think it’s unfair to criticize a show that targets that “older, wiser audience” for potentially leading young people astray. It’s not trying to draw the age group that flocked to Buffy, Felicity or Gilmore Girls and it’s not giving anyone the same message that these shows do. From what I gather, Girls is probably the best cautionary tale out there for what happens when you do go astray. And I don’t see how the show could do this without being as clear-eyed about the dysfunction as possible. So while protesting dysfunction in a drama is legitimate, protesting it in a satire seems to miss the point.
INTJ, that is partially because young men have stopped watching most TV shows, turned to video games en masse, and only watch well-developed shows with good plots like Game of Thrones (and even then guys like my husband still prefer the Internet).
It’s about the advertising dollars. Shows that are “chick crack” bring in good revenue while being relatively inexpensive to make. Men will still watch sports, but syndicated shows aren’t doing all that well among the prime purchasing power male demographics.
J: “As to kids–male or female– having sex in high school, I am absolutely against it. I’m sure there are some male commenters who will castigatee me for not wanting my son’s to be players in high school, but boys lack the emotional and financial wherewithal to deal with the long-range consequences of fatherhood or with the pain of having a child aborted or adopted away.”
No, I won’t take the strawman bait.
While true on paper, for a boy, waiting until you leave high school to losing virginity is a bit like starting a marathon 3 hours after everyone else does. You’ll never catch up. There’s a huge difference between losing the V at a reasonable enough time to not be a loser, and being a player.
@Hope
I just reread my comment @361 and realize it may sound dismissive of your opinion. That was not my intent.
I share your disgust at dysfunction in mainstream programming. There are dozens of TV shows I stopped watching because they got so much of their mileage from celebrating it. But I’m looking forward to Girls and betting that it’s not one of them.
@ Hope
Someone would have to be blind not to see how unhappy the characters in Girls are. I definitely don’t think girls are going to start acting like the characters after watching the show. In fact, quite the opposite, I think it serves as an excellent warning to everybody.
@OffTheCuff
While true on paper, for a boy, waiting until you leave high school to losing virginity is a bit like starting a marathon 3 hours after everyone else does. You’ll never catch up.
Why do you need to catch up as long as you eventually finish?
My post (365) was a response to post #354
>> “While true on paper, for a boy, waiting until you leave high school to losing virginity is a bit like starting a marathon 3 hours after everyone else does. You’ll never catch up. There’s a huge difference between losing the V at a reasonable enough time to not be a loser, and being a player.”
I think the real solution would be to get rid of this idea that virgin = loser.
The reason I ask is that Ana and J and Sue seem to know everyone, and have numerous personal of examples for every behavior possible. Way over 20, if I take the sum total of their posts.
This must be what life as an extrovert is like – it’s a bit alien to me.
LOL. Actually, I’m an MBTI introvert, but for some reason, people love to tell me their stories, probably because I’m a also a perceiver, not a judger. I’m also a woman and older than most people on the blog, so I’ve been in more environments where people share stories, for a longer time.
@MikeC
“If a guy has minimal experience with women, and than just lucked out with getting a successful LTR with minimal dating experience prior to that then by definition his thoughts come from a very narrow perspective.”
I won’t discount the benefit of coincidence for inexperienced guys WRT meeting their SO, but the same could be said for the mighty, experienced male. But a successful relationship isn’t maintained for years by accident. So replace “narrow” with pragmatic and “luck” with patience, perseverance, and hard work, and then you’re closer to the truth for every inexperienced guy I’ve known who’s successfully landed a relationship.
If the goal is a lifelong commitment with one particular woman, I’d say experience with (X number of) other women is overrated at best and counterproductive at worst.
Bel: “Why do you need to catch up as long as you eventually finish?”
Define finish. The marathon doesn’t end, and everyone else keeps on running no matter what you personally do. Marriage is not an end point, it is just the beginning.
Bellita and INTJ, the thing about acclimation and validation is that they’re very subtle. As I mentioned, the girls on the shows I had watched were also miserable, maybe even more so. There were lots of tears, angst, obsession, and dysfunction. Those portrayals still normalize the unhappiness. It sends out the message, “Well, this is what’s going on out there. There ain’t nothin better.”
I’ve kept quiet until now, but after reading the plot summary and various developments, I have not seen any alternatives. It’s either “hook up with this scumbag” or “have a boyfriend who’s a girl.” It’s either “tingles by the game-wielding jerk who doesn’t give a crap about her” or “totally turned off by the devoted nice guy.” What kind of message is that sending? Choose the lesser of two evils?
@OTC
While true on paper, for a boy, waiting until you leave high school to losing virginity is a bit like starting a marathon 3 hours after everyone else does. You’ll never catch up. There’s a huge difference between losing the V at a reasonable enough time to not be a loser, and being a player.
But if he drops out of high school to support a baby, or cracks up because a girl aborts or gives up a baby he wanted her keep, he’ll be fine? No lost time or effort there? I guess I could get my sons a box of condoms, but frankly I can’t trust them to change socks on a daily basis, hold on to a new Ipod without breaking it, or turn in their ACT fees to the school office on time. I’m sure they’ll do fine with handling sex responsibly. No worries.
I get your point on paper, and I don’t want my sons to feel rejected or like losers. But I’m not pushing them to find girls to screw either. So far things have been light and in a religious youth groups setting. That’s good for now.
@J
Haha, you can’t have both Adam and Boothe be Roissy! Maybe Adam can be Roosh?
Hope, did you ever watch Everwood? I loved that show.
@Hope
Date Cthulthu, why settle for the lesser of two evils.
@Emily
Drama = conflict. Always. I’d rather watch it on TV than in my own life
You think so? I find him sort of physically repulsive. I love how he’s a player anyway, though.
@INTJ
For sure! Then she’ll want Charlie back and he’ll say no way. (I hope.)
I do think Marnie’s a control freak. How about acting as an event planner for Jessa’s abortion?
I don’t think so. I’ve watched it with a group of young women, and they were laughing but also groaning. They all liked it because while it is well-written and funny, it doesn’t glamorize the dysfunction. The show is saying, the SMP is majorly effed up. I also watched it with my son and his gf, and they were interested to discuss it afterwards. It’s definitely got people talking.
@ Oxy
Tom: You got a study or something to back up “divorce is always men’s fault”? That’s an extraordinary claim that requires extraordinary evidence.
_____________
I have never said nor do I believe it is always the mans fault. Lack of communication is usually the biggest problem in most marriages. Someone gets hurt, or pissed, or disrespected, and they dont know how to talk about it, so they just stay mad and resentment sets in.
Most couples even have problems talking about sex, what they want, need, fantacies they`d like to try etc. If I were a betting man, I would say the treatment of women by men is a big factor in a lot of marriages that go south. But by no means is it always the mans fault. She with holds sex, he gets pissed, he doesnt talk about it, he treats her like shit, she gets pissed, and with holds more sex, etc, etc, etc…..lol…Pretty soon they are both looking for someones shoulder to cry on instead of talking about it.
Wow, that’s some interesting moral equivalency. You’re saying that lying to enter a woman’s vagina is on the same level as a woman softpedaling a rejection by saying she has a BF? Would you prefer she use the nuclear version, “I don’t find you at all attractive. No thank you.” Come on.
Seriously, who pays a higher price in your analogy?
Don’t forget I have 24 women in focus groups, get emails, have friends with kids, etc. I’ve probably reported on about 50-100 women here over time.
That eharmony article was fascinating – I was surprised how clearly meeting in a bar stood out as a poor strategy. High loss of attraction, highest divorce rate.
++++++++++++++
Imagine a dating service slamming a free dating custom.. No hidden interest there..lol
But I think Girls is doing that! We’re going to see Charlie kicked to the curb for getting too beta. We’re seeing the old horndog artist get Marnie tingling with a line he probably picked up from Roissy (seriously, it wouldn’t surprise me) and we’re seeing the arrogant jerk having crappy, uncaring sex with a girl who’s happy to tell her GYN she has a sexual partner. We’ve even got the college student who is deeply ashamed of her virginity.
It’s the SMP in microcosm for both women and men.
@OTC
You have a very selective memory
43% of male college students are virgins. 34% when you include oral. 24% of seniors. That’s from three different data sources.
This is the message. “Be careful what you wish for. You ushered in the Sexual Revolution, and now romance is dead, sex pretty much sucks for everyone, and we can’t tell who’s male and who’s female any more. Mind games are the only thing that get people stimulated, and they feel disgusted afterwards. Is there no better way?”
Susan, no I didn’t watch Everwood, although I did watch Full House (I watched the reruns). I didn’t understand enough English to know everything that was going on when I watched it, but I could tell that it was portraying an overall loving family. The twins were also cute as babies.
Anyway, I’m not seeing a “better way” in Girls. Maybe that will come later, but I’m not holding my breath either. These girls are not portrayed as self-aware or self-reflective. I’m not fond of schadenfreude as a form of entertainment.
I would change my mind if Girls did portray a happy couple though. I remember being so surprised and grateful to meet my husband, because he was a red pill guy who was the perfect Goldilocks combination, and he was not afraid to get married and have kids in his 20s! I think there are lots of good men who get overlooked, and the mainstream isn’t spotlighting them.
>> “You think so? I find him sort of physically repulsive. I love how he’s a player anyway, though.”
Yeah, I wouldn’t describe him as “hot”. J’s description of him as a “butterface” was pretty spot-on. That being said, Lena Dunham isn’t very pretty herself. I still think that he has a slightly higher SMV value than she does, which IMO is one of the main reasons why she tolerates his douchey behaviour.
Sue: “Wow, that’s some interesting moral equivalency. You’re saying that lying to enter a woman’s vagina is on the same level as a woman softpedaling a rejection by saying she has a BF? Would you prefer she use the nuclear version, “I don’t find you at all attractive. No thank you.” Come on. Seriously, who pays a higher price in your analogy?”
I’m not say it’s equivalent. I am saying that if deception is part of your relationship toolbox, then you are opening yourself more to it being used back on you. Nothing about morals, just practicality, remember? Just like, as if a man uses deception, then he can expect to get it back some day.
Second, that is not a nuclear rejection, that’s honest and succinct. A nuke is cruel, way out of proportion to the proposition, and perhaps announcing it to the room (“get AWAY from me, you creepy pervert!”).
Men vastly prefer your so-called nuclear neg over a lie like “Not tonight, I’m shampooing my hair” because in the latter case, they might waste time actually trying again if I didn’t understand the subtext. That opportunity cost IS a big problem. String together a few of these and a few years might go by!
“Would you prefer she use the nuclear version, “I don’t find you at all attractive. No thank you.”
.
Or the relationship-killer nuclear version, “I have enthusiastically expressed embraced explored ___ c ocks. What do you say now, bucko!”
Sue: “43% of male college students are virgins. 34% when you include oral. 24% of seniors. That’s from three different data sources.”
It’s a shame so many are so far behind.
I can go you one better. When I was in the ER rolling around in pain last month, one of the nurses interrupted the backrub my husband was giving me to ask if I felt “safe at home.”
I know I’ m a terrible person.
So that was why I had along with asking my medical story they asked me if anyone had forced me to have sex in the last month. I let my husband read it winked at him and say “I wish!”
Last year in the same ER, a doctor asked my kid if I gave him his concussion (atheletic accident). My son replied that I never hit him, I just burn him with cigarettes. I laughed and said that I don’t smoke, but the doctor made my son roll up his sleeves to check for burns. He reprimanded my kid for messing with him and said, “This isn’t funny.” I replied, “No, it’s ridiculous. I know that you’re a mandatory reporter, but sometimes this stuff goes too far.”
You are F*** kidding me? I’m going to have to watch out for the kids too?! Now making fun of my husband doesn’t seen so fun
If a 40 yo woman has sex with a 14 yo boy and gets pregnant, even though she committed statutory rape, she can sue for child support from her victim. We even have case law upholding this in at least one state.
I read false rape society regularly so I knew about that. Fucked up in all possible ways…
Just a reminder that this is a RED flag for anyone who might miss that one. lol
Not if the guy could kill you with a touch if he sets a glass wall is romantic (Pushing Daisies reference)
Seriously, everyone should watch this show!
Sorry my doctor told me that is not good for pregnant women to see things that might want to stab yourself with a fork.
The trajectory is always the same: at first there’s “The One” love interest, then soon it turns into another guy, and another guy, and another guy… always situations involving tears.
Buffy fan here and briefly Felicity fan I didn’t watched Gilmore Girls but Dawson’s Creek (same time slot in my country) and ITA they make a huge deal about the virginity and then when they lose it is like “My hymen was the only thing keeping me from being a slut! Bring out the boys!” completely disgusted I usually lose interest right aftehr they lose the V card.
To this day the one thing I’ll never forgive Joss is killing Tara.
Or Fred or Wes or Walsh or….
The reason I ask is that Ana and J and Sue seem to know everyone, and have numerous personal of examples for every behavior possible. Way over 20, if I take the sum total of their posts.
This must be what life as an extrovert is like – it’s a bit alien to me.
People love to talk about themselves if you show that you are not going to judge them (I do judge them but I have a perfect “I understand” look so they can’t tell is really good skill to have for first dates) and I also have the family gift of people just pouring their heart’s out in my presence it happens even when I don’t even know the person I have people tell me in a bus stop the story of their lives, sex details and all and I’m like “WTF! I just wanted to go home”. Oh well I need to have material to write I guess. :/
Wind em up and they just keep on :
.
Is America in the midst of a sexual counter-revolution?
Yes – attitudes have definitely shifted
( 33% )
No – we’re the same as we’ve ever been.
( 67% )
.
“Amanda Marcotte: I genuinely feel that much of the horror we’re seeing now from the right isn’t a sign that America on the whole is sliding backwards, but more that our self-appointed moral guardians know they’re losing the war on sex. And they’re basically taking a major last stand. This is their Alamo.”
.
Horror?? What is this “war on sex?” Is the average guy on the street in this fight?
.
“Nancy L. Cohen: Yes, America is in the midst of a sexual counter-revolution, but it’s not what it seems. My book Delirium tells the story of how a small group of reactionaries, who want to control sex, hijacked American politics. This is what I’ve called the sexual counterrevolution: a four-decade old political campaign to turn back the changes brought on by the sexual revolution, feminism, and the gay civil rights movement.”
.
“The people who are behind this political movement make up maybe 15-20% of the nation. Their views are extreme and far out of the mainstream. I agree with Amanda–if they don’t meet resistance, they can impose their views on the rest of America.”
.
“The Pill provided the conditions for women to advance in the economy. Before 1970 women accounted for fewer than 10% in medical school and 4% in law school. There was an immediate jump when the Pill became available to unmarried college-aged women. Why? Training for a professional career is a big investment, and pill allowed women to delay marriage and childrearing to make it worthwhile. And because all women could delay marriage, they didn’t take themselves out of the marriage market by doing so.”
.
Well, she did call it a marriage market. Uh oh, she forgot to add that this pill allowed woman to fuck around. How it delayed marriage is not explained. How does this pill delay marriage?
.
” A lot of the polling I looked at for my book does show men agree with women on the social issues, but don’t care that much about them and vote on their economic and government views.”
.
“And yes, education, and seeing this insanity, seems to be making men pay attention too.”
.
Wishful thinking sweetie
.
“Amanda Marcotte: I think your point about caring is a major issue, Nancy. Only 15-20% of Americans are highly misogynist, sex-phobic religious fundamentalists, but they really really care about this issue. To counterbalance that, we need other Americans to understand that their basic rights are genuinely threatened. A minority can take over if they meet dispassionate opposition.”
.
Good effen luck
.
“Americans see absolutely nothing wrong with a single adult woman being sexual.”
.
True. But about half of the people will be wary if they over do it.
.
.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2012/mar/14/sex-women?newsfeed=true
.
So that was why I had along with asking my medical story they asked me if anyone had forced me to have sex in the last month. I let my husband read it winked at him and say “I wish!” I know I’ m a terrible person.
You should have written that on the form.
You are F*** kidding me? I’m going to have to watch out for the kids too?! Now making fun of my husband doesn’t seen so fun
They are actually more aggressive in looking for child abuse.
@ SW
Yup.
Oh. I thought they were all just there to support Jessa during her abortion (in which case it’s perfectly reasonable to be annoyed that Jessa didn’t show up on time – actually didn’t show up at all). But I was staying up late when I watched it, so my comprehension might not have been functioning properly.
It still feels like Charlie’s concerns are secondary. The central focus of the series is on the four girls, including Marnie.
I feel that serious discourse about the SMP on tv or in news articles is always from a female perspective, and that men are “objectified” as they’re viewed from the perspective of satisfying women’s needs. I’m not critical of Girls itself, but I’m critical of the media that always focuses more on one side of the SMP.
Just seeing how Amanda Marcotte interprets the show demonstrates how female-centric discussions on the SMP are, and how this show plays into that pattern.
@ OTC
While it would be nice if women were unambiguous about their rejections, this is in no way comparable to men lying about wanting a relationship to get sex. Trying not to hurt the other person’s feelings with a harsh rejection is nothing like lying so that you can have sex.
On the other hand, an appropriate analogue would be women lying about their sexual past to get a relationship.
I understand that. I agree that women should not leave room for doubt if there is none. Saying she’s busy repeatedly is just needlessly cruel if she never intends to go out. On the other hand, “I have a BF” is pretty much a closed door. Any guy who hears that knows it’s not happening. And of course, she may actually have a boyfriend.
I agree, and those numbers are increasing, for both sexes.
I admit that I re-watched this scene about 5 times..
I actually sympathized with her. Her relationship has been devoid of dominance and passion for so long that when someone else demonstrates it, it smacks her in the face and she takes her own pleasure into her own hands (literally).
In the first episode, there was another couple present at the dinner. They were all over each other; I think they’re representing the contemporary “college married” couples. (Also they were very annoying.)
This was actually my one quibble with the show. Shoshanna seems needlessly naive, in an unattractive way. Her portrayal is only going to reinforce negative stereotypes about “older” virgins. : /
@ J
Might that have been Rodelinda? That was the opera my BF and I saw on our second date.
You should have written that on the form.
Funny. I don’t have the guts though.
Might that have been Rodelinda?
Aaaarrrgghhhh! Yes. Damn this middle age.
“Sue: “43% of male college students are virgins. 34% when you include oral. 24% of seniors. That’s from three different data sources.”
It’s a shame so many are so far behind.
I agree, and those numbers are increasing, for both sexes.”
And this is a bad thing, why?
Another blessedly slow day at work, so here comes a bunch of my crap:
J said:
“Last year in the same ER, a doctor asked my kid if I gave him his concussion (atheletic accident). My son replied that I never hit him, I just burn him with cigarettes. I laughed and said that I don’t smoke, but the doctor made my son roll up his sleeves to check for burns. He reprimanded my kid for messing with him and said, “This isn’t funny.” I replied, “No, it’s ridiculous. I know that you’re a mandatory reporter, but sometimes this stuff goes too far.”
____________________________________
Is it really so hard to put yourself in that doc’s shoes?
You know you’re a good person, but I don’t. That shit ain’t a joke to us, because we see it every day.
Roll your eyes and scoff, but I’ve put an intraosseus line in a kid who’s arms were so scarred by his/her “punishment” for “mouthing off” that I couldn’t find a vein. My partner was instrumental in shutting down a nursing home we called “The Abuse Farm”. The staff there was stealing the food from the residents, or not feeding them at all.
There are worse things I’ve seen. I promise you you don’t want to know. Humans are nasty animals sometimes, and this shit happens.
Sometimes when we ask these questions, we recognize people who need help. Once in awhile, those people even get it.
By answering a few questions without wasting time or adding aggravation, you can help us help the helpless.
Ana said:
“I was completely surprised when during my first visit to the doctor for the pregnancy where my beloved was with me I was asked if I wanted him on the same room or not. ”
______________________________
This is due to health privacy laws.
You and the medical folks taking care of you are the only people on the planet who have any access to your health info, unless you expressly allow other people to access it. You can give verbal permission while you’re present, but if your hubby called on the phone and asked questions, they should be telling him,”Sir, I cannot confirm or deny ever seeing a patient by that name,” unless you’ve signed the appropriate forms.
There are good and bad parts to it.
You should see the crap that goes on during divorces. I once had a patient offer me a huge sum of money for a copy of their spouse’s chart, for example.
Another one that causes stress is when parents ask about the reproductive health (birth control, STIs, etc) of their kids. Laws vary from state to state, but reproductive issues are often separate from other health issues. The kids usually get legal privacy for that much earlier than 18, when it happens for everything else.
Ted said:
“Perhaps it is because of where I live and/or socioeconomic status, but most of the young girls I know in HS or just out are already at or around the 4 partner number.”
________________________________
Chipped ham + pierogies + Iron City = BootyTime
Mike C:
“Dogsquat, you are going to confuse people with these nuanced positions, ……………….
………….If a guy has minimal experience with women, and than just lucked out with getting a successful LTR with minimal dating experience prior to that then by definition his thoughts come from a very narrow perspective.”
________________________________
I hope you’re wrong, but I worry that you’re right.
If I had more time I’d start a blog – somewhere between Roissy and Cosmo, aimed at guys who are currently single but want a girlfriend. I like DannyFrom504′s tone – no bullshit taken, no free passes, but very few broad, incendiary statements.
Problem is, I fear for my career if my anonymity is breached – and I just don’t have the time.
That’s one reason (among many others) I read and post here so much. I hope you keep pitching in, too – I think you can help a lot of guys who are where I was 6 years ago. Rollo and Roissy are useful and necessary – but so is digoxin. The therapeutic range is narrow. Too much and you kill the patient, too little and they die anyway.
I hope I’m in the middle somewhere, and I think you are too.
@SW
“It’s very relevant to what we’ve been discussing, but I’m not sure I want to deal with the firestorm that will erupt if I write about it.”
Flame on! I expect many regulars to dismiss it forthwith just based on the description you gave : )
I’m liking “Girls” too. I can’t think of another women who has physically and emotionally bared herself like Lena Dunham.
Maybe it’s my age, but I found Boothe Jonathan repulsive. I can’t understand why Marnie, who is probably a “10″ in the SMP, would be turned on by him.
J said:
“And that’s one big reason why they don’t do it. Unless you live in an isolated group were arranged marrriages are the norm and there’s no three date rule, women who hold out are afraid of losing out. It takes more confidence than most women have.”
_________________________________________
J, I am going to refrain from being tactful for the next few responses to you, because I am having difficulty communicating with you. I do not believe you’re picking up much of my intended meaning, based on your responses here and elsewhere. Perhaps in my desire to avoid ruffling feathers, my language has become obfuscatory. I will work to correct that.
OK? Okay.
You are wrong about what I’m saying. Here it is, with no BS:
Sex often makes the obligations imposed on men by their would-be girlfriends an acceptable trade off. When sex is taken out of the equation, the young guy is often left with a person he likes looking at, but doesn’t like being around as much as his buddies.
Many young women have little to offer men other than sex. Finding a young woman who is a good teammate and enjoyable companion to a young man is a rare thing.
Young men have hundreds of resources and approaches to mold themselves into desirable people, increasing their chances of finding that teammate. Young women have Susan, a few bloggers she links to, and some folks who comment here. That’s it.
There are reasons for that disparity, and one of them is an apparently reflexive “blame” shifting when women are held to account. I am not interested in participating in that. I want people to be happy and achieve their goals. Holding one’s ears and yelling,”I might be bad, but not really. Besides, you’re way worse!” is not productive.
Some disclaimers:
No, that doesn’t describe every woman everywhere. Yes, I know some guys are dicks. I am not attacking women. I am identifying an area of weakness in some women, that they may rectify it and achieve their goals….because….wait for it….I really, really like women. Hearing a happy, content woman talk and laugh is one of the best noises in the world. I want to hear it more often.
J said:
“Yeah, that’s cute and funny and all, but with the average age of menarch at 12 and dropping and with the average age of marriage at 25 or 26, do you really expect that women are going to keep it zipped for 14 years?”
____________________________________
No, I don’t. I never said I did, either.
I am, however, extremely sick of hearing about women being powerless against PUAs and cads.
Here it is, jam packed with 8 essential vitamins and minerals:
-Sex is not a need. You will not die without it. I have been in hundreds and hundreds of emergency medical situations. I have saved several peoples’ lives, and made many, many “worst days ever” a little better. I have never once started an IV to give a life saving infusion of sex. Perhaps I’m doing it wrong, or one of my textbooks was missing a chapter.
-It is easy to avoid consensual sex, once a certain level of proficiency with garments covering the crotch is achieved.
-The people ultimately responsible for what is voluntarily put in vaginas are the very people those vaginas are a part of.
I cannot be any more clear than that.
Susan said:
“Anyway, he says in there that waiting is an aphrodisiac to males.”
_________________________________________
The first girl I ever fell in love with was a virgin.
We were long distance, as I was in the military. Her and I fell in love very fast and hard, in part due to chemistry and in part to circumstance.
We waited an eternity to have sex (better part of a year). To this day it was one of the best moments of my life. Truly an amazing, wondrous time.
I loved that girl with every cell in my body, and I’d have felt the same if she told me we needed to be together for ten years before sex.
@Dogsquat –
I’m afraid I for one still require some clarification. Are you saying that holding off on sex is not a viable strategy for women because it renders male investment intrinsically disproportionate to female investment? Or are you suggesting that women develop themselves extra-sexually?
Dogsquat, what if sex is not part of the equation, but a woman gets deceived into emotional turmoil from a cad?
You’ll have to take my word for it, but I did my due diligence in screening ex-Fake BF. He checked out with our mutual friends (girls who were pleased we were together and said he was a very good guy), he acted like a boyfriend with me and in front of his friends…I’ve described him numerous times on these threads and even some of the more militant commenters agreed that his behavior was “beta”. As it turned out, he was a giant asshole (he lied about my giving him a blowjob at a party when I was really softly crying on his shoulder in private).
Are you going to blame me for getting emotionally (and a little physically) invested in a guy who I was 100% sure was going to be my first boyfriend?
You and the medical folks taking care of you are the only people on the planet who have any access to your health info, unless you expressly allow other people to access it. You can give verbal permission while you’re present, but if your hubby called on the phone and asked questions, they should be telling him,”Sir, I cannot confirm or deny ever seeing a patient by that name,” unless you’ve signed the appropriate forms.
This might sound ignorant but this is the one of the most stupid thing I ever seen on this country. When I got married I make several promises including loving my husband in sickness and health. I know marriage vows are not legal but what is the point of making a commitment that can only be used when the other feels like it? It should be you are married you have full access to each other’s medical records if you don’t want that level of involvement with another person DON’T GET MARRIED!!!!
I’m starting to side with the people that want marriage to be harder to obtain so the people that actually understand it are the only ones that get it. One flesh that is it people is not that hard of a concept, if all you want is a sex buddy that shares the same house cohabitation is your way to go. I’m really happy that my husband as liberal as he is doesn’t seem to share this ideas since I’m always in the same room when he needs a medical appointment and I’m not working.
@LH
“And this is a bad thing, why?”
Most men and women are happier having some amount of regular sex vs. doing without. And most men and women are *happiest* having a single commited partner for the horizontal mambo. Hence the problem with involuntary celibacy. It can happen to women, too.
Sue: “On the other hand, “I have a BF” is pretty much a closed door. Any guy who hears that knows it’s not happening.”
Have we forgotten Game 101? Even I have been “involved” with women who said that. It was either wishful thinking, or was true but obviously didn’t matter all that much.
“I agree, and those numbers are increasing, for both sexes.”
You lost me. The men that are virgins are the ones that are left behind, you want them to be more so? And the v rate is increasing? I didn’t know that. Or maybe I did and lost the numbers,
varanus said:
“Or are you suggesting that women develop themselves extra-sexually?”
___________________________
That’s it right there. Rounds complete, target destroyed.
SayWhaat said:
“Are you going to blame me for getting emotionally (and a little physically) invested in a guy who I was 100% sure was going to be my first boyfriend?”
_____________________________
Nope.
Shit most definitely happens.
You end up with three guys like that, though, and I’ll point out the common theme…
Some girls only need to get burned once (maybe twice?) before they start distrusting all men. Shit happens, yeah, but you cannot argue that those girls are not powerless against cads. I didn’t give in to losing my virginity with him, but he wrought a huge emotional toll regardless. He had the winning hand — I had no power in that “relationship”, and neither do the many other girls who find themselves in similar situations.
Ana said:
“When I got married I make several promises including loving my husband in sickness and health. I know marriage vows are not legal but what is the point of making a commitment that can only be used when the other feels like it? ”
_______________________________
Well, the great thing is you can choose to have your hubby there for everything.
In my area, there are many folks who adhere to Sharia. Sometimes, the only way they can get accurate information and good care is when they’re separated from their spouse. The man might lie about cheating in front of his wife, and obscure an STI diagnosis. Also, those dudes tend to speak for their wives. I don’t know how Allah figured a husband should be able to describe ovarian torsion or an aortic aneurism, but maybe they can in Arabic.
Also, you may one day change your mind. Maybe you wouldn’t want your husband to see (and smell – it’s pretty bad) you get a pilonidal cyst get incised and drained. Perhaps you wouldn’t want him listening to the sounds your rock hard turds make as they plonk into the plastic tub during a manual disimpaction.
You have that right.
@Dogsquat
Got it. I can dig it.
I hope I’m in the middle somewhere, ***and I think you are too.***
I’d like to think so but some might disagree depending on the day.
I’ve been thinking lately about some of the disagreements I’ve had from time to time with various people, and here is sort of the big picture thing I’ve realized. All “analysis” of the SMP is essentially inductive reasoning. It is impossible to utilize deductive reasoning at all. I’ve had one life experience. Someone else has had another. I’ve had one circle of friends and acquaintances. Someone else has had another. My thought is you and I are often on a very similar page because we are similar ages with very similar life experiences vis a vis women and relationships with me obviously missing the military experience. But I suspect if you and I got together over beers and shared bouncing war stories we be nodding our head in agreement at the same shit we saw. A guy who married his first girlfriend and lived happily everafter can’t possibly relate to our experiences so his worldview is going to be radically different.
I think “analysis” of the SMP is further complicated by the fact that personally I think much of the sociological research is probably close to utter bullshit served up by people with ideological agendas masquerading as serious academics. My bailiwick is economics and finance so I’m familiar with just how horrendous much economic research and analysis is. There is a reason economics is called the dismal science, and expressions like “economists make astrologers look respectable” exist. My intuition is that probably much of the “academic” research into sociosexuality probably isn’t much better than economic analysis. I’ll take a guy’s journal who did 1000 approaches with notes on what worked and didn’t over some guy in an ivory tower.
I’ve got a sister. I don’t want her to get played, or used, or pumped and dumped. I am empathetic to the female POV and concerns, but I truly believe when push comes to shove, it is the “beta chump” who truly has the most to lose in the current SMP so I think sometimes my first instinct is to look out for his interests.
That’s one reason (among many others) I read and post here so much. I hope you keep pitching in, too – I think you can help a lot of guys who are where I was 6 years ago.
I appreciate you saying that. That means a lot coming from you. At one time, I was stuck at the bottom of a very deep hole. It was a dark, depressing place, and a couple guys threw me some rope, and helped to pull me out. One was a complete random stranger who IMed me after something I posted on T-nation. That started a multi-month exchange where I made incredible progress in a very short period of time, and I owed it to this guy. I’ve never forgot that. I try to pay that back. I’ve got one guy who I know I’ve helped, and I almost feel like a proud father hearing some of his recent successes. I think right now I’m sort of contemplating what are the best venues for me to deliver MY message and how to do that while occupying that middle ground you are referring to.
Rollo and Roissy are useful and necessary -but so is digoxin. The therapeutic range is narrow. Too much and you kill the patient, too little and they die anyway.
Excellent analogy. I had to Google therapeutic range to know what you meant. In my opinion, it is a guy thing to deliver a message in an over the top manner, and realize on implementation that you really need to moderate it. In other words, you don’t kick every girl to the curb who won’t screw you on the third date. But the key is to verify that she really is feeling authentic sexual desire for you, and not playing you for a chump. To this day, I’ m still waiting for some of the women to give concrete advice on how a guy is supposed to determine if a girl is really into him or sort of stringing him along, and whether he is being charged a large price difference. If one is going to criticize particular tactics or rules, then you have to be prepared to offer a guy a viable alternative.
I think I tried to answer this question when you first posed it, but I don’t think I did a good job.
I can only speak from personal experience.
If I wasn’t into a guy after a first date, I would insist on going dutch at the end of it. I didn’t want to feel like I was taking advantage of him if I knew that I wasn’t going to see him again. If I was on the fence and then landed on “no” after the date, I would text him over the next day or two letting him know that I wasn’t feeling it, best of luck for the future.
As for the other guys who made it past the first date…my sexual desire for them was Obvious. As they escalated, I would happily oblige — from hot makeout sessions right up to the point where sex was on the table. This would happen around the 1-month mark. That would be when I told them that I was looking for a relationship/I was a virgin. I’m fairly confident that had I not been a virgin, I could have had a boyfriend 5 or 6 times over, after all that.
Now, I’m sure that there are girls out there who have no problem getting sexy (minus actual sex) and then being flaky about actually getting into a relationship. Those girls are trickier because most likely, they’ve been sold the Rules version of landing a boyfriend (i.e. playing “hard-to-get”). In this instance, you just have to go by what she says and does. Are her actions congruent with her words? Is she always 10 or 20 minutes late to your dates, or does she value your time? Does she seem to actually enjoy spending time with you or does she invite you to places with friends where she can “prove a point” to some other guy/girl in attendance? Etc.
SayWhaat said:
“Shit happens, yeah, but you cannot argue that those girls are not powerless against cads.”
__________________
Could you please explain this to me? There is a double negative there, and I can’t not misunderstand.
alsfjasdf. I don’t know if I’ve always been this poor at expressing myself or if it’s just the fact that it’s getting late, haha.
BASICALLY. What I said in my personal example. I was powerless against a Cad — I didn’t have sex with him, but he had an emotional hold on me that was very, very hard to break free from.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but you are saying that girls who were in a situation like I was are not powerless against cads. If my personal story is any indication, that is not true. Are you going to blame the girl whose boyfriend cheated on her for falling for a cad in the first place? No, because the information that he was a cheater was revealed after the fact. She is powerless in that relationship, because she did not know her boyfriend was a Cad until after he revealed himself to be one.
Same goes for girls who aren’t in relationships with cads, but are being actively pursued by them. Even if those girls don’t have sex with those cads, they could still get emotionally entangled with them. And that is an immense form of power in and of itself.
Hence: you cannot argue that girls are not powerless against cads. I know that’s the same double-negative statement, but if you read it carefully then hopefully you should understand what I mean by now.
Well, the great thing is you can choose to have your hubby there for everything.
And I can choose to deny to know anything about his unborn child or kill him/her if I feel like a bitch one day. That so civilized.
In my area, there are many folks who adhere to Sharia. Sometimes, the only way they can get accurate information and good care is when they’re separated from their spouse. The man might lie about cheating in front of his wife, and obscure an STI diagnosis.
Had it ever occurred to the person that did this law that if one spouse doesn’t know the other is sick they might get infected as well? How do doctors control for that under this “secrecy is a human right even from your own spouse” situation?
Also, you may one day change your mind. Maybe you wouldn’t want your husband to see (and smell – it’s pretty bad) you get a pilonidal cyst get incised and drained. Perhaps you wouldn’t want him listening to the sounds your rock hard turds make as they plonk into the plastic tub during a manual disimpaction.
I hope if I ever get that stupid I can ask him not to be there and he would understand without the need of me imposing myself on him you know the father of my children the man I pledged my life and health to I know meaningless this days but once upon a time people talked and discussed this things.
I know you want the best in the worst situation and I’m not trying to be snippy but sorry this is just another “I have a right to my privacy” BS that people pull because they only want the “pretty part” of commitment and you know how I feel about “I want my life to be perfect even if I have to screw everyone else’s to do so” and I really can’t think of a situation in which this can be good for any married couple.
@Susan Walsh –
Welcome, and thanks for your comment.
Susan, thank you for the warm welcome. I’ve been lurking (obsessively and intensively) for about a week and thought I’d heed your call for more participation from your target demographic of young women. Thanks for providing this forum for discussion!
You’re so right too that we’ve raised women to see men as only “wanting one thing.” And we’ve failed to tell them about the male aversion to female sexual experience with other men.
Not only are many of my peers unaware of this aversion, they actively advertise their engagements with multiple male partners – apparently under the impression that this provides social proof as it might for men who have options with multiple female partners. They think this makes them seem more desirable. While it does attract some male attention, they don’t realize this attention results from having been characterized as easy. Ultimately they are disappointed, but rarely are they reflective or introspective…?
Mike said:
“But the key is to verify that she really is feeling authentic sexual desire for you, and not playing you for a chump. To this day, I’ m still waiting for some of the women to give concrete advice on how a guy is supposed to determine if a girl is really into him or sort of stringing him along, and whether he is being charged a large price difference. If one is going to criticize particular tactics or rules, then you have to be prepared to offer a guy a viable alternative.”
____________________________
I’ve been paying attention lately to the concept of privilege derived from ascribed status. Yeah, I’m a fucking nerd, I know.
Some stuff is flat-assed easier for me because I’m a white male over six feet tall. Some stuff is harder, too, but on balance I think I came out ahead.
Intellectually, I realize that having a police force representative of the population it polices is very important. However, I was pissed for a long time that I was told I’d never get a slot in the Pittsburgh PD because they needed more women and minorities.
My brain said,”Yeah, I get it. No problem. What the city needs is more important than what I want.”
My gut said,”Man, fuck that shit! I’d be a good cop.”
Then I got called back to the military, got out, and settled into another career. Totally over it, but I’ve never forgotten the first time being a tall white guy worked against me.
I’m wondering if asking a woman to disclose that information is threatening her privilege, and she experiences the same visceral distaste for disclosure as I did for affirmative action in the police hiring process.
You’re asking her to hand over a huge advantage to a guy. She’s basically putting herself at their mercy if she offers a viable strategy. It’s also very hard to admit to yourself (and others) that you’ve got an “unfair” advantage based on your genes. Lots of people can’t bring themselves to do it. They’ll go through all kinds of bizarre mental gymnastics to avoid admitting it. I’ve experienced that myself, and it’s really, really hard to describe.
I suspect it’s to preserve self-esteem in most cases, but with women and mating strategy, the motive might go even deeper.
Or, perhaps, the women simply don’t know.
In other news, I was thinking about just putting up a blog and copy/pasting some of my more “important” posts I make here to that one. Maybe some kid will stumble on to me here and click on the link. If I have the time and energy I could write something once in awhile solely for the blog. You want to get in on something like that?
@ Dogsquat
Triple negative. Means exactly what it says though.
@ SayWhaat
I could not fail to disagree with you less. While girls can certainly get cheated by cads, if they choose wisely (as you’re doing), the probability of this happening a few times in a row is low. And as for getting actively pursued by cads, I don’t think girls have any right to complain unless they’re willing to approach guys and ask them out. Requiring that guys pursue you and then complaining that the wrong kinds of guys keep pursuing you is unfair.
It’s the same standard I apply to betas who keep getting friend-zoned or dumped for the alpha. Sure, it can happen once or twice. But if it keeps happening over and over, they shouldn’t be pursuing such girls.
@Mike @Dogsquat
“But the key is to verify that she really is feeling authentic sexual desire for you, and not playing you for a chump. To this day, I’ m still waiting for some of the women to give concrete advice on how a guy is supposed to determine if a girl is really into him or sort of stringing him along, and whether he is being charged a large price difference. If one is going to criticize particular tactics or rules, then you have to be prepared to offer a guy a viable alternative.
I’d like to take a stab at it, but to which stage in relationship formation are you referring? The first few dates?
You’re asking her to hand over a huge advantage to a guy. She’s basically putting herself at their mercy if she offers a viable strategy. It’s also very hard to admit to yourself (and others) that you’ve got an “unfair” advantage based on your genes. Lots of people can’t bring themselves to do it. They’ll go through all kinds of bizarre mental gymnastics to avoid admitting it. I’ve experienced that myself, and it’s really, really hard to describe.
I imagine there’s some truth to this. But I don’t think most women experience it in these terms. It’s not so much a calculated withholding of information as a sense of uneasiness resulting from insufficient information and familiarity with the partner. I’ve never dated a man with the intention of taking advantage of him; initially, I am legitimately unsure if there is real sexual attraction, or, if there is, whether the man is trustworthy enough to receive that attraction. I would be unable to offer a strategy for determining if my interest is real because during the first few dates I am myself determining if my interest is real.
Is that what you were asking?
For the record, I don’t require that guys pursue me, and I have done my fair share of initiating and expressing interest. I don’t think you’ll find a single woman here who will disagree.
What I am trying to say to you (and Dogsquat) is that the probability of getting conned by a cad has increased more than you guys would suspect. In this SMP, “betas” have the incentive (and are in fact motivated) to act like cads. It is very difficult for women to suss out who is truly a cad and who truly has good intentions, even if they are choosing wisely.
+1 to varanus. There’s less (if any) calculation and more instinct that goes into this sort of thing.
@SayWhaat
“It is very difficult for women to suss out who is truly a cad and who truly has good intentions, even if they are choosing wisely.”
Spot on. I’ve got stories from some female friends that blew my mind. As the cad population has increased, you have to wonder why they’ve changed their tactics to seem like relationship-minded guys? I mean, if most women give it up at the drop of a hat (they don’t), then they wouldn’t need to be played or deceived. Whatever the answer is, I’m sure women as a whole have encouraged this bad behavior : )
SayWhaat said:
“I don’t know if I’ve always been this poor at expressing myself or if it’s just the fact that it’s getting late, haha.
_______________________________
Lolzer. No worries!
“Correct me if I’m wrong, but you are saying that girls who were in a situation like I was are not powerless against cads. If my personal story is any indication, that is not true.”
___________________________________
I disagree. I think you did just fine in your situation. Imagine if you’d slept with him and gotten a dose of neurochemically enhanced pair-bonding.
I submit to you that the damage would have been deeper, the scar tissue thicker. You avoided that by operating your trousers according to the service agreement provided by the manufacturer. You waited him out, he showed his true face, and you dealt with him accordingly.
I’m not saying it’s painless and fun – but you took some good steps to minimize the damage. You exercised your agency. There is always some risk in exposing yourself emotionally to another person, and your dice came up snake-eyes this time. Good on you for not betting the farm on this toss.
Strong work.
Back to the original argument:
“Hence: you cannot argue that girls are not powerless against cads.”
__________________________________________________
Let’s say, for argument’s sake, that this is true.
That means that women are not in control of their actions when presented with certain stimuli by men. Play that out to an extreme and personalize it a bit:
Say it’s ten years from now – you’re married and have 2 kids. You’re solo on a plane flight back home, and just so happen to be sitting next to Roosh.
Are you saying that he could Game you into fucking him? Or just really, really wanting to fuck him, but not doing it, hanging on by a shred of decency – needing to picture your kids crying because their daddy left mommy – tingling so bad the Captain comes back and puts your seatbelt on himself?
Really?
About repetition in mate selection:
I’ve said this before on HUS, but my nickname used to be Sergeant Save-A-Ho.
Through some combination of genes, upbringing, and bad chakra fluid – I was really attracted to messed up women. I could talk to two equally attractive women about every day stuff for 20 minutes, and I’d come away really liking one of them. I’d get the male equivalent of gina tingles for her.
That woman would invariably be messed up somehow. She’d have a bad coke habit, an eating disorder, untreated sexual abuse – something like that. We wouldn’t talk about it, but something in me could feel it.
Since I liked her and I’m handsome (my mommy told me) we’d start hanging out, we’d get close, her problems would arise, I’d try and help out, and before I knew it, we’d be An Item. I’d get “sucked in” to these toxic (for me, anyway) relationships with women who needed more help than some dumb-ass boyfriend could provide.
After going through this a few times, almost getting stabbed, spending tons of money, time, anguish, and heartache…I realized that I was the common denominator. Something in me was attracted to these fucked up chicks. I also realized that not all women are fucked up – just the ones I liked.
So I stopped dating for awhile. Did some therapy and a lot of introspection. I learned a little about psychology and how it applied in my life. Basically, I did a lot of work on myself.
Then I started dating again. It was hard at first. For a long time, I had to force myself to date women I didn’t “tingle” for. See, I still felt those sparks with certain pathologies, but I’d learned that meant Badness. I had to re-train my mind to find healthy women attractive.
It was hard. I had to do it, though. The alternatives were celibacy or shrugging and saying,”I like what I like, and I can’t do anything about it.” Celibacy would be a neutral path, but the latter would have landed me in a trailer park with a recurring role (shirtless and drunk, of course) on Cops.
That is what I want some women to recognize. If your wiring is fucked up (like mine was), you’re going to like unhealthy people. Sure, take some time to figure it out, but once there’s a pattern – you own that shit. It’s your fault if you fuck another player for the sixth time. It was my fault I dated the bulimic coke head with the stabby ex-boyfriend – I knew myself, and I KNEW those sparks I felt signified Something Awful – even if I didn’t know about her problems the first time I kissed her.
If shit just isn’t going right in your love life, stop blaming everyone else. You can’t control other people. At most you can nudge them a little bit, but people basically do what they were gonna do anyway. Your power over other people lies in allowing them into your life, or kicking them out. Picking the wrong person over and over and over again is not everyone else’s problem. You’re there the whole time, so how about getting your Booty Picking Gear tuned up and operating correctly?
That’s what I’m saying about women having power over cads.
@ SayWhaat
I see what you mean.
Not sure what sort of advice I’d give you to try to filter out us good guys from all the cads. If you can some how find a “natural” way to find out about the guy’s past sexual history. Don’t act judgmental about it (even though you will definitely judge him on his answers). Most cads will assume that pretending to be sexually inexperienced is not going to help them.
“Men cooperate too, a guy more or less understand that virgins exist, we are Catholics after all, and understand that she wont be banging him right away so after evaluating if he likes her enough to wait for sex they allow for things to progress slowly, they know that the price for sex is commitment so he commits and keep showing it while she shows more sexy side at similar rates is like a dance, slow escalation more kisses, tongue, hugs, hand jobs, blow jobs NOT ANAL (that is just stupid american bullshiting)…so there is a way to give just enough without going all the way till there is a date for the wedding in which cases most of my friends considered committed enough for sex, of course she cannot be giving blowjobs to random guys that also is slutty behaviour, boyfriend earns the most sexy side by sticking around and being nice rewarding assholes for beer is not part of “saving myself” policy.”
Sounds good. For him. May I ask what the girls get out of it? Are the hand jobs and blow jobs reciprocated in the other direction?
The teen with 40 year old. What Jezebel and other feminists are not getting is that an older man or woman might provide a more psychologically healthy experience for the teen precisely because of their maturity, than another anxious and horny teen could.
@varanus:
Goddamn, you’re smarter than I am. I hope you stick around. You were issued ovaries at birth, right?
I can buy being unsure about a guy at first. That’s kind of what I figured, anyway.
The second part of Mike’s question is:
Another issue guys have is feeling second (or worse) best in certain situations. Jesus Mahoney (Peace be upon Him) had a great post a few months ago about what it feels like when a woman makes him “prove himself” before they get sexual, but finding out later that she’s decided to bang a few guys within hours of meeting them. (Susan, I’m referring to the newspaper analogy if you’ve got that gem saved). That’s the reference to the “large price difference”.
Basically, some women will bang some dudes immediately, but require others to offer commitment, gifts, even human endocrine organs before getting Biblical.
Any thoughts on that?
@SayWhaat
There’s less (if any) calculation and more instinct that goes into this sort of thing.
An attempt to reflect on the cognitive processes informing that intuition/instinct:
I am typically unable to say whether I’m attracted to someone merely by looking at them. There may be visually identifiable traits which contraindicate attraction (obesity, poor dental hygiene, etc). If those fundamental things check out, the person is still a tabula rasa. Attraction is not yet present, but there is potential. The initial stages of a relationship are about information-gathering and inference-making. It’s a liminal state in which I suss out qualifying or disqualifying aspects and attempt to extrapolate based on the information available to me. It’s about existing in a pre-attraction state that can feel very mysterious and unconscious while you’re in it. Sometimes, the unappealing qualities I discover impede the development of attraction to the potential partner. We do not have liftoff. Other times…the appealing qualities exceed some unquantifiable threshold and I “suddenly” develop a raging lady-boner for the person. The experience feels emotional/intuitive, though I expect it’s actually quite cerebral. I don’t think analysis of this subconscious calculus comes naturally to many women.
Then again, I know other women who are more easily aroused by visual stimuli. I’d be curious to hear others’ input.
@INTJ:
I dunno about sussing out the male’s sexual history thing. My answer to that question is “Squat, Dog NMI. No children. Never Married. Never contracted an STI, here are my test results.”
I went to SERE school, so they’re never getting anything else out of me, ever, thanks to your tax dollars. I appreciate that, by the way.
Plus, I think guys are so used to lying about this issue (especially to other guys) that they’re really, really good at it.
@ varanus
The problem is how do we distinguish someone like you from someone who just wants to date us until she can get the hotter alpha that she wants?
Sounds good. For him. May I ask what the girls get out of it? Are the hand jobs and blow jobs reciprocated in the other direction?
I think you missed the part were women in general are more aroused by foreplay than by the rest, making out with a man you like feels reaaaaaaly good for most women even if there is not sex involved.
Ana said:
“Had it ever occurred to the person that did this law that if one spouse doesn’t know the other is sick they might get infected as well? How do doctors control for that under this “secrecy is a human right even from your own spouse” situation?”
________________________________
The docs run tests, and sometimes prescribe meds to both partners. It gets pretty hairy when the translator explains what the meds are for to the previously ignorant spouse. Yes, Tazers work through hijabi.
I get what you mean about spouses behaving as one with regard to health. I hope I end up like that – won’t have a choice if I marry my current SO, anyway – she’s got a prescription pad with her name printed on it already.
Keep in mind, though, that life is rather more fucked up for a lot of people.
It’s like the abuse questions some of you were making light of earlier. That’s superfantastic you people don’t have to worry about that crap. You’re lucky to be able to get indignant about it.
Lots of people aren’t.
@Dogsquat
The second part of Mike’s question is:
Another issue guys have is feeling second (or worse) best in certain situations. Jesus Mahoney (Peace be upon Him) had a great post a few months ago about what it feels like when a woman makes him “prove himself” before they get sexual, but finding out later that she’s decided to bang a few guys within hours of meeting them. (Susan, I’m referring to the newspaper analogy if you’ve got that gem saved). That’s the reference to the “large price difference”.
Basically, some women will bang some dudes immediately, but require others to offer commitment, gifts, even human endocrine organs before getting Biblical.
& @INTJ
The problem is how do we distinguish someone like you from someone who just wants to date us until she can get the hotter alpha that she wants?
I see where you’re coming from. Those are excellent questions which deserve a better response than I can formulate tonight. I’ll sleep on it.
It’s like the abuse questions some of you were making light of earlier. That’s superfantastic you people don’t have to worry about that crap. You’re lucky to be able to get indignant about it.
Dog every month I receive a news article about a woman getting killed by her current or ex husband partner or lover in my own country, sometimes her kids included. I find it indignant because I don’t see how can harassing people at doctor’s office improve the odds of anyone that is abused to actually escape it. Show me numbers of men and women (and I must notice my husband never get this kind of questions asked even though statistically speaking he is also at a great risk) that had been saved by whatever a doctor is supposed to do if her patient say yes and I might believe it, IME all it happens is that the woman lies or don’t come back to the place that makes her remember that she is in abusive relationship. People’s lives are fucked up but trying to make everyone suspect only increases the ways a real bad guy can get away with it, IMO.
@Mike and @INTJ
The problem with this question is that I’m sure SW and friends never actually tried to string a guy along for validation or free meals so for them explaining to other men that they are indeed sincere is tricky.
I think the question for guys should be how much the woman is investing herself?
If she never tries to reciprocate whether by asking you out next time herself, suggesting a place or offering to pay or cook then chances are she is gaining other things. A man can pay for a first date, no matter how cheap but as a rule if she doesn’t offer something in return “I pay next time” “Drinks on me” I will cook the dinner” are signs of her trying to show equality and good will, there is something fishy going on. When my now husband used to visit me we split half and half and that was my suggestion and once when he was short of money I saved up so he could travel to my country. If she acts like a selfish princess I consider that a red flag both as relationship prospect and intentions, even if she is dirt poor she can always offer some way to make the weight of dating not be only on man’s shoulders. Just my two cents.
@OTC
Define finish. The marathon doesn’t end, and everyone else keeps on running no matter what you personally do. Marriage is not an end point, it is just the beginning.
Since that was pretty much my definition of “finish,” I have to wonder what your definition of “running” is. The marathon metaphor doesn’t really make sense to me.
The marathon of life I can understand. But the marathon of sex? What’s the finish line?
You guys are seriously weird. Far be it from me to deny you your life experiences, but I have no idea on which planet you live, because NONE of what you’ve written and discussed here reflects the lived experience of myself and my friends (mid 20s to mid 30s young urban professionals, mostly straight) – both male and female.
We date people we want to have relationships, and sometimes it works out, and sometimes it doesn’t. We hook up with people we are attracted to – and sometimes it turns into dating/LTRs and sometimes it doesn’t. Men get their hearts broken, women get their hearts broken, and most people end up in LTRs that they find satisfying, regardless of how much sex they’ve had prior to that relationship.
I (and my girlfriends) have NEVER had a man lie to us about wanting NSA sex. It’s said right up front, and those who want it go along with it, and those who don’t – don’t.
This whole “it’s a war out there!!” sounds so fatiguing – and again, totally irrelevant to anything I’ve ever encountered in my life. But hey – it’s obviously working out for you guys, so more power to you, I guess!!
As for the whole “women have no individual power” that one of the first commenters managed to ejaculate… oh, honey, tell that to my 6-figure salary and the team of engineers I manage. Or to Hillary Clinton. Or to Tarja Kaarina Halonen. It’s exactly the other way around – women as a group still suffer from sexism and are under-privileged… individual women sometimes manage to overcome that disadvantage and attain lots and lots of power.
Also, also – men are just as interested in marriage and relationships as women. How do I know this? because most people are in a relationship, and 50% of them are men.
@Dogsquat
Just a spoonful of sociopathy makes Dogsquat a healthy boy?
Just to be clear, I respect your right to hold any views you wish, but absolutely will not allow the sharing of Rollo and Roissy style advice here. As they both have blogs, it should be completely unnecessary anyway.
>> “To this day, I’ m still waiting for some of the women to give concrete advice on how a guy is supposed to determine if a girl is really into him or sort of stringing him along, and whether he is being charged a large price difference.”
There definitely *are* girls out there who will go on dates with guys they don’t really like for the free meal/attention (… of course NAWALT! NAWALT! NAWALT!) These Users also seem more prominent than they actually are because they date more. If a nice girl isn’t interested in a guy then she’ll politely decline, whereas a User will accept most date invitations, so they’re circulating a lot more and leaving many frustrated guys in their wakes.
…as for how to spot them? I wish I could give more of a useful answer. I tend to be very suspicious of anybody (male or female) who actually enjoys dating. I never understood people who regularly date multiple people at once. When I’m single, my “default” setting is dating zero people. If I’m seeing ANYBODY, then it’s a bit of an exceptional circumstance. (Though maybe that’s more of an Introvert thing.) If a girl dates around a lot, then IMO it’s probably more likely that she’s trying to channel her inner Carrie Bradshaw.
The really only useful advice that I have is to spend very little money at the beginning. If a girl sticks around through multiple cheap dates, then it’s more likely that she actually enjoys your company. Using somebody for a free three course meal is evil but understandable. Using somebody for free ice cream cones and cups of coffee is a bit silly.
Most of you probably already know this stuff, but it’s worth repeating.
« 1 2 3 4 »