968»

The Endurance of Courtship

long-term-relationship-love-couple-apathy-flirting-ecards-someecardsThanks to all the readers who sent me the link to the Alex Williams’ New York Times article The End of Courtship? this past weekend. The article accurately lays out how at least some people conduct their romantic lives (sex lives?) today. 

A musician asked Shani, 30, out on a date for Friday night. She next heard from him at 10:30 p.m. on Friday, at which point he texted “want to meet up?,” clearly implying she was welcome to cab over to a bar where he was already hanging out with college buddies. 

Shani declined the offer, politely, which is more than I would have done. To the Times, however, she was more open about her frustration.

Dating culture has evolved to a cycle of text messages, each one requiring the code-breaking skills of a cold war spy to interpret.

It’s one step below a date, and one step above a high-five.

There’s more going on here than a shift in the culture. There is no universe in which asking someone out on a date does not mean setting aside a specific time for the two of you to become better acquainted. It’s a signal of intent to prioritize getting to know another person. In contrast, texting late in the evening to say “hey” or “sup” is a move, perhaps calculated, to seem just slightly more than indifferent. Often these throwaway texts imply that you’re doing someone a favor by acknowledging that they crossed your mind while you were out having sooooo much fun.

Dating is fine. Meeting up is fine. Both have their place. But meeting up is not dating, and this guy pulled a bait and switch. Pretty douchey. 

Raised in the age of so-called “hookup culture,” millennials — who are reaching an age where they are starting to think about settling down — are subverting the rules of courtship.

Instead of dinner-and-a-movie, which seems as obsolete as a rotary phone, they rendezvous over phone texts, Facebook posts, instant messages and other “non-dates” that are leaving a generation confused about how to land a boyfriend or girlfriend.

Donna Freitas, a religion professor and expert on hookup culture:

The problem is that “young people today don’t know how to get out of hookup culture. In interviews with students, many graduating seniors did not know the first thing about the basic mechanics of a traditional date. They’re wondering, ‘If you like someone, how would you walk up to them? What would you say? What words would you use?’ 

The truth is, dating has never died in the post-college scene. It can’t – without some form of courtship available to men and women in their 20s, no one would marry. Both sexes want the opportunity to date in their search for a life partner, and the majority wants to avoid people with a casual view of sex (and the sexual history to match). So they figure it out. 

There appears to be a bifurcation among the 20-somethings, and this is showing up even in online dating. Most people who strike up a connection on a dating site will arrange to meet in person for a first date, then schedule more dates if all goes well. The process continues until it is clear that the pair has the potential of being a real couple, at which point they begin introducing one another to friends, showing up together in groups, etc. 

A minority, however, is seeking some continuation of the hookup scene that they presumably experienced in college, where getting acquainted between 11 pm and 2 am is sufficient grounds for hopping into bed together after the bar closes. That constitutes a date. 

Nick, 25 and Julie, 22, connected online and arranged to meet for a drink. The evening went well and at the end of the date, Nick told Julie he’d love to “explore this great city with you.” Julie expected more dates for two, so she was surprised when she next heard from Nick late one Friday night about two weeks later. He called and said, “Where you at? I’m drinking in your neighborhood. Wanna meet up?” Julie was very interested in seeing Nick again, so she talked a friend into being her wingman and grabbed a cab to the bar where Nick was hanging out. When the bar closed, Nick suggested they go back to his place to hook up. Julie declined. The next time Julie logged into the dating site, Nick had blocked her.

These are guys who have no interest in dating. They use the word “date,” something they wouldn’t have done in college, because they know that the 20-something landscape is more varied than the college culture. They’re simply modifying the script in hopes of getting the same end result – a no-strings encounter after a brief period of acquaintance. I’m not sure why they simply don’t advertise for casual encounters up front, but increasingly men who want to avoid relationships are using the word date. And that’s confusing for women.

The most important strategy women have at their disposal when dating in their 20s is the extensive use of filters. You must ruthlessly filter out men who are not offering what you want. Which is a real date. Men are counting on you not asking too many questions, like, “Hey Nick, how does meeting you at this dive at midnight count as exploring this great city?”

When people don’t want much out of a connection, they don’t put much effort in.  If a 20-something guy is open to a relationship with the right girl, he’ll go the dating route. Real dates. Courtship. It’s still the best way for two people to get together and fall in love. If he’s looking primarily to get sex with a variety of people, he may use the word date, but his effort will be minimal and the “dates” will be late night rendezvous.

Referring to the use of technology, especially texting, to facilitate dating, Williams says:

In the context of dating, it removes much of the need for charm; it’s more like dropping a line in the water and hoping for a nibble.

Not only that, it’s not unusual for guys to send out mass texts, or at least texts to more than one girl at once. Kristen got a text from Jake around midnight one Saturday night, a month or so after he’d broken up with her. It said, “I need you here now.” Kristen didn’t reply but happily ditched her friends to catch a cab to Jake’s apartment. When she got there, she rang his bell but he didn’t buzz her in, telling her it was not a good time after all. He asked her to “Just go. Please.” Kristen refused to leave without some explanation, and while she was standing there another girl arrived and pressed Jake’s doorbell. It turned out she was Jake’s new love interest, and he’d sent the same text to both of them. Given a choice, he preferred new to old. 

Williams also mentions the pervasive Millennial condition known as FOMO – fear of missing out. They don’t want to settle too soon on a person for a relationship when online dating, speed dating and group hangs all create opportunities to meet many new people in a short time. Dating becomes a perpetual audition, and keeping things informal – and cheap – is a pragmatic way of not investing too much in someone when someone just a bit better might be right around the corner.

Of course, there are real economic concerns as well. The recession, a sluggish job market and student debt all have Millennials feeling financially insecure. Add in the fact that young women in cities outearn their male counterparts, and traditional dating becomes awkward at best. Still, it’s happening. I see young couples out on dates every time I go out in the evening. Nearly all the women I know who graduated from college two years ago are in serious relationships or actively dating. Like Shani, they decline invitations for booty calls masquerading as dates. 

If you want a meaningful relationship, you must filter guys according to the degree of effort they put in. Garbage in, garbage out. There’s nothing wrong with hanging out in social groups, or meeting up with someone you’d like to know better. But that initial interest should graduate quickly into real dates. Focus on men who are willing to put in the kind of effort you’re willing to put in. You can help them out by encouraging their interest, initiating some plans, and sharing the expense of dating. 

Courtship will endure, because people want romance. By filtering out the guys who don’t do real dates, you make yourself available for the ones who do.

One Pingback/Trackback

  • JP

    “It turned out she was Jake’s new love interest, and he’d sent the same text to both of them. Given a choice, he preferred new to old. ”

    I don’t think that the problem being described in this vignette is hook-up culture.

    I think that the problem here is that Jake may have some sort of non-disclosed cognitive dysfunction.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      I don’t think that the problem being described in this vignette is hook-up culture.

      I think that the problem here is that Jake may have some sort of non-disclosed cognitive dysfunction.

      There is nothing unusual about Jake. Unfortunately.

  • Toz

    Susan, I think you’re missing a pretty important ingredient here. The women in these stories almost are all very attracted to these men. These men have options and thus can act very douchy, just as a very beautiful woman has options and can also act very douchy (being wishy-washy, flaky and so on). Complaining about their douchiness isn’t going to solve anything. The attraction is primal in both cases and their behavior is only what they can get away with.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Toz

      Susan, I think you’re missing a pretty important ingredient here. The women in these stories almost are all very attracted to these men.

      Why are you sure of that? Shani said no thanks, Julie said no thanks. It’s true they were initially attracted, but neither chose to hook up with the guy. Kristen and Jake had been in a serious relationship for two years – Jake was no player.

      These men have options and thus can act very douchy, just as a very beautiful woman has options and can also act very douchy (being wishy-washy, flaky and so on). Complaining about their douchiness isn’t going to solve anything.

      First, people with lots of options can act douchey, but not all do. There are many attractive men who seek committed relationships in their 20s – in fact, the number of guys looking to play the field after their mid 20s are generally best avoided for relationships anyway. So filtering for douchey behavior saves time and energy. Women should “Next” guys after one shady move, period.

      For the record, I have no problem with men Nexting women after one flakey move.

  • Jonathan

    “When people don’t want much out of a connection, they don’t put much effort in.”

    I would phrase it differently. When people think the expected value of a connection is low, they don’t put much effort in.

    She could be the most attractive woman you’ve met in a while, but if most of your recent dates have been time consuming, costly and led nowhere you might start cutting back on your expenditure per date.

    As for rudeness, the behavior of the young men in the NYT article and your examples suggests imbalances favoring males in the population sex ratios of the respective locales. How do women behave when the sex ratio in their dating market favors them?

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Jonathan

      I would phrase it differently. When people think the expected value of a connection is low, they don’t put much effort in.

      But doesn’t the level of effort reflect what the party wants? A man looking for casual sex might think the value of the connection is potentially high, however briefly. There are some men determined to avoid getting “stuck” with one chick, so rather than expending 100% of their effort on one woman, they may choose to spend 10% of that effort on 10 women. But that’s their maximum value equation.

      As for rudeness, the behavior of the young men in the NYT article and your examples suggests imbalances favoring males in the population sex ratios of the respective locales. How do women behave when the sex ratio in their dating market favors them?

      We know that the sex ratio effectively drives the “price” of sex. In most cities, today, the sex ratio of college educated males to females is low, so those males do have options. However, as males age it becomes more likely that they will consider commitment because it fulfills an important life goal. They may still have more options, and they may filter aggressively while dating. That’s fair – women may have to go on more first dates, try harder to get dates, including initiating them, etc. A woman seeking a committed partner cannot afford to waste one moment with men who show every sign of remaining indefinitely single.

      I don’t doubt for a moment that women can be extremely rude in their dealings with men. In fact, no doubt there are roughly equal numbers of women who have no intention of settling down, but go on real dates for the validation, social life, and sex. We’ve heard stories here at HUS of men who woke up the morning after a hookup hoping for a relationship, only to have the woman make it clear it was a one-time thing.

  • Mikey

    While decent advice for girls, basically telling them stop giving away the milk for free, the flip-side of this advice is awful for guys. Until girls collectively start to take this advice, (most don’t and are still in hookup culture) it would be awful for even a relationship minded guy to try to “traditional date.” I’m willing to bet Julie turned down tons of guys attempting to take her out on a traditional date to chase Nick, the guy who wouldn’t. Of course that question was never asked.

    Nothing scares off a girl, yes even a good girl, more quick nowadays more than trying to set up anything that looks like a traditional date. (Older crowd excluded of course). Want to get rejected even from a girl who’s into you, ask her to a “dinner” “movie” etc. You only can do this post physical relationship in 2013.

    Until women start taking your advice, the best odds of success for a guy is to keep it light, away from the notion of a “date”, and screen for relationships usually after sex or deep physical contact.

    Not to say this is a license to be a douche and block girls who didn’t sleep with you like Nick, I’m just saying, attempting to do the polar opposite of Nick is no the solution either.

    From the Trenches.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Mikey

      Until girls collectively start to take this advice, (most don’t and are still in hookup culture) it would be awful for even a relationship minded guy to try to “traditional date.

      But we already know that the vast majority of women in college do not regularly participate in hookup culture. Most students try it, but most don’t have sex during a hookup and the number of sexual partners for the vast majority of college students is 1-2. Most women can’t wait to get out of college in hopes that they can finally go on a real date.

      Nothing scares off a girl, yes even a good girl, more quick nowadays more than trying to set up anything that looks like a traditional date. (Older crowd excluded of course). Want to get rejected even from a girl who’s into you, ask her to a “dinner” “movie” etc. You only can do this post physical relationship in 2013.

      I think this is true in college, but it is definitely not true after. I’ve been amazed as the young women I know have gone from graduation with zero dates, to dating regularly two years out. Some of the women I know who are dating in their early 20s have been asked out by men for real dates in the following locales:

      gym
      work
      social circle and mixing of friend groups, i.e. work friends and college friends meet at brunch
      blind dates set up by coworkers
      online dating

  • Vae Victus

    There is no courtship.

    There is no dating.

    There is only hooking up. Why can’t people understand this?

  • Vae Victus

    Mikey nailed it…

  • http://bastiatblogger.blogspot.com/ Bastiat Blogger

    I had a couple of friends e-mail me links to that article and the general reaction was:

    1) The forthcoming book that was mentioned in the article—”The End of Sex…”—sounded very self-absorbed, as it appears to implicitly assume that disgruntled young women represent all that matters in the current generation. The POV *sounds* heavily biased towards those women and to judge the culture solely based on how well it is meeting perceived female needs.

    2) Even if they were so inclined, a lot of young guys just can’t afford to spend lavish amounts of money on traditional dates, because the costs of personal, independent living are quite high. Young women are also doing comparatively quite well in terms of education and economic accomplishments, so the dominant logic of the traditional date now can seem like a “heads I win, tails you lose” game against men. This is simply an inevitable side effect of feminist progress on the schooling/jobs front.

    3) Because people are marrying later and later, they are more psychologically dependent on their social circles of friends than they were in the past. Thus it is important, especially for men, to see how a new relationship will fit within an existing social web. This same story seems to be coming up again and again in all of these vignettes—young men are very conscious of how a new girl is perceived by their tribal bands of close friends, and will disqualify an otherwise-attractive girl if she lacks cultural-fit.

    Perhaps there is an equivalent of this for women, but IME it doesn’t seem to be as prevalent on the female side.

    4) Dating sites and Facebook place such emphasis on personal lifestyle expression that activities-compatibility is far more important than it was in the past. People are less willing to compromise on this issue.

    Thus, a guy may want to see if a woman wants to meet him out at a sports bar or live music venue or whatever because he is operating from the notion that she is a “cool girl” who does in fact enjoy those same activities. If the girl secretly hates football or whatever, then she will not be cool from his—and his friends’—POV, and they may not be right for each other from a lifestyle-convergence standpoint.

    If you are 19 or 20 and meeting your future spouse, you probably have not had time to develop much in terms of lifestyle design and you could heavily influence each other and evolve together. But if you are 30+ when you are looking for your future spouse, you will have relatively entrenched interests and possibly won’t be looking to compromise much where they are concerned.

    5) Summing it all up, it seems like traditional, male investment-heavy courtship now takes place post-sex but pre-engagement-type commitment, rather than taking place pre-sex (then again, in the historical past engagement was traditionally presumed to come with sex, so sex + lifelong commitment came as more of a package deal). Sex has been separated from marriage by approx. 10-12 years, and economically-besieged young men just can’t afford to make significant investments in all of these “serial monogamy” relationships that are, for whatever reason, failing to lead to marriage.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @BB

      Thus, a guy may want to see if a woman wants to meet him out at a sports bar or live music venue or whatever because he is operating from the notion that she is a “cool girl” who does in fact enjoy those same activities.

      Fair enough. As I said, I think there’s a place and purpose for meeting up. Then what? She comes out to the bar to watch the Pats win (yeah!) and they get along really well. Does he escalate sexually or attempt courtship? If he does escalate sexually, and she complies, then he’s very possibly dealing with a promiscuous woman, which may or may not knock her out of the running for commitment.

  • JoeTheSchmo

    Why set up a date when modern women are so flakey?

    This way you can avoid the time waste by inviting them to stuff that’s already happening. That way, if they don’t show up, nothing’s lost.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @JoeSchmo

      Why set up a date when modern women are so flakey?

      This way you can avoid the time waste by inviting them to stuff that’s already happening. That way, if they don’t show up, nothing’s lost.

      True, but if they do, nothing much is gained either. At best, you’ll be in a group situation like a party, a bar, or at a concert. Then what? You meet someone and hit it off, what’s the next move? Casual sex or date. Pick one.

  • Anne

    “Nothing scares off a girl, yes even a good girl, more quick nowadays more than trying to set up anything that looks like a traditional date”.

    Ahem. Depends entirely on the vibes he’s giving off. If he’s given a desperate vibe, I’m sure. But in that case, there is nothing more to do either way.
    I will always be skeptical of a guy suggesting “drinks” or, God forbid, something even more casual for a first date. The first dates I’ve been on (which have gone further) have been dinners. In a proper restaurant. Candles and all.
    A movie for a date will always be bad btw. No communication whatsoever.

  • JP

    “There is nothing unusual about Jake. Unfortunately.”

    Is there some sort of internal logic to having both women appear at the same time that I’m missing?

    I mean, wouldn’t you *first* see if New Girl shows up and *then* text Old Girl?

    Or text them 60 minutes apart or something?

    That’s really what I was talking about.

    I kind of understand if you were someone who sent out *mass* texts because you are well into the world of the commodity and there’s really no question with what’s going on there.

    Even if you didn’t care about their actual feelings, you would avoid the “please go away” aspect of this where you have only two women involved.

    Also, FOMO leads to MO.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @JP

      Is there some sort of internal logic to having both women appear at the same time that I’m missing?

      Ah, now I see your point. In this story, Kristen didn’t respond to the text, she just got herself over there. Presumably, Jake got a response from New Girl, no response from Old Girl, and figured he was in business. When Old Girl Kristen showed up, he had a problem. Meanwhile, it never even occurred to Kristen that he had extended the same invitation to someone else. Why would it?

      Also, FOMO leads to MO.

      Indeed.

  • Mikey

    @Anne Advising guys to take girls out only on candle lit dinners as a first date is a recipe for celibacy. While you may feel you are entitled to such fancy dinners (great for you), my advice was to guys. It would be a poor investment money and time wise, let alone the massive rejection you’d likely get for having that as your opening move with girls in their 20′s.

    I’m not saying it’s not right for you, perhaps it is, but again we are at the cross-roads of my earlier point, what is good for YOU by setting standards is not good for guys to comply with as a strategy for THEM.

    Solid point on desperation though, if he has a non desperate frame, he can do much of anything, however, most guys who lead off with fancy dates do not have such frame usually, that’s why they lead with the fancy dinner.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Mikey

      I’m with you re fancy dinners. A guy is wise to keep monetary investment to a minimum until he feels sure that a woman is attracted. While I wouldn’t go so far as some – she buys her own Starbucks lattes until she puts out – I think that it’s fine to be creative and come up with dates that are not terribly expensive. Without a doubt, my best dates were cheap ones. Even after I was married, my husband and I had so much fun in NY doing free things. We were relatively poor, just starting out and with student loans, and we did so many fantastic things that were free. We walked everywhere, went to museums and galleries, found all sorts of ethnic dives with great food. We had adventures. We went to readings by famous writers, wine tastings, and just hung out with friends – those are where our best memories were made.

  • Sassy6519

    That article saddens me. :(

    Nothing scares off a girl, yes even a good girl, more quick nowadays more than trying to set up anything that looks like a traditional date. (Older crowd excluded of course). Want to get rejected even from a girl who’s into you, ask her to a “dinner” “movie” etc. You only can do this post physical relationship in 2013.

    You’d be surprised how willing women are to go on dates with men that they are actually attracted to. I think this is the caveat here. I’ve only ever rejected date offers from men that I wasn’t romantically/sexually attracted to. Whenever a good-looking man with a good head on his shoulders has asked me out on a date, I jumped at the chance for it.

    I see this problem involving 3 major components.

    1. Women reject dates from men that they are not attracted to.

    2. Women accept dates from men they are attracted to. The problem is, however, that most objectively/universally attractive men have options and can utilize them. If they can get sex without having to be in a relationship, there is barely any incentive for them to date or be monogamous. They typically end up falling in two camps. These attractive men either focus their attentions on plowing through willing women, or they genuinely want relationships and pursue women of equal caliber. The women who are only worth hooking up with, viewed as lower caliber in the eyes of the attractive men, feel cheated and jaded. They can’t get the men they want to date them. Some of these women accept the hooking up scenarios. They would rather hookup with the man than not be with him at all. Other women decide to reject the hookup offers. That still results in them being single, however

    3. The non-objectively/non-universally attractive men see the hotter guys getting way more romantic/sexual attention from women. They emulate their behaviors, hoping to reap the same rewards. Moderate success can be had that way, which is better than the practically non-existent success the men experienced before. The incentives drive the behavior, and these men take on the “hooking up script” in order to have better results.

  • Abbot

    Men court the court-worthy. Thus the dearth of courting…

    .

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    I don’t see how inviting a friend out to a social circle gathering constitutes a “douchey” move.

    I am going to stop inviting friends out to friend-gatherings, but I’m not sure how they are going to be friend-gatherings with no friends? I am much more comfortable with this script than some notion of “dating” so some girl I barely know and PROBABLY doesn’t have much interesting in her life can feel like a princess or whatever.

    Social gathering allows me to learn a little more about her and add her to my social circle without me having to invest too much, and vice versa.

    Blocking her on the dating website would constitute a douchey move, but that’s not exactly what ALL guys do.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @ADBG

      I don’t see how inviting a friend out to a social circle gathering constitutes a “douchey” move.

      It doesn’t if that was the original invitation. A guy texts a girl out of the blue, “hey, what are you up to? would you like to meet up?” That’s great – the young women I know socialize that way a lot of the time. Of course it’s OK to invite someone to hang out and have a few beers.

      That’s not what happened here. A guy said, “Do you want to go on a date with me Friday night?” Then he texted her at 10:30, say, “Hey, I’m in the East Village with friends, why don’t you hop in a cab and come down here?”

      That was his idea of the date. She goes alone to join him in a bar at 11 pm with a bunch of his college buddies. What purpose does that serve? How well does that plan enable them to get to know one another? What does he expect when the bar closes?

  • Abbot

    “The incentives drive the behavior, and these men take on the “hooking up script”

    Its like an inflationary trap

    .

  • http://uncabob.blogspot.com/ Bob

    @ Jonathan,

    “How do women behave when the sex ratio in their dating market favors them?”

    When I was in college the guy across the hall told me he had been turned down ten times in a row asking women to dance at a nightclub. Another told me a woman told him, “You’re about a foot too short” when he asked her to dance.

    I’ve never had these things happen to me but I’m not very sympathetic to a lot of women after the many stories men have told me.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Bob

      I’ve never had these things happen to me but I’m not very sympathetic to a lot of women after the many stories men have told me.

      Everyone has stories. I’ve had a man say to me at the end of a first date that I thought had gone well, “you can suck my dick if you want.” I was also invited to a guy’s family Christmas Eve celebration, and when it came time to sit down to dinner, it was discovered that he had left. There I was with his extended family, about 40 miles from home, and he had just peaced out. His grandfather had to drive me home after dinner. I had a boyfriend break into my apartment while I was sleeping to leave a letter of apology after a fight. I had a man force me out of the car on the freeway at 2 in the morning after he stated his intention to spend the night at my place and I said that wasn’t happening. I had a man grab my breast hard on St. Patrick’s Day in an Australian bar in LA.

      That’s about 1% of my stories. Neither sex has a monopoly on shitty behavior.

  • OffTheCuff

    Sue: “They’re simply modifying the script in hopes of getting the same end result – a no-strings encounter after a brief period of acquaintance.”

    Unfortunately, you are not a mind reader. Yes, these men might be looking for casual only, but far more likely know that courtship comes *after* attraction is established. They’re just being, what’s the word… selective with their commitment. Don’t wanna give it away to easy, now.

    I can’t blame the guy who blocked her. After you’ve gone on a hundred “dates” that turn out to be nothing, he’s following PrivateMan’s method to the letter.

    Sue: ” I’m not sure why they simply don’t advertise for casual encounters up front, but increasingly men who want to avoid relationships are using the word date. And that’s confusing for women.”

    As above, you make a huge assumption men only want casual. These guys are just dual-ladder guys. Short of swinger sites, putting “casual only” on your profile is certain death. The time to divulge that is early, but not THAT early.

    Remember, men adapt to what actually works.

    But, other than that, solid advice for the women. Insist on actual dates!

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @OTC

      Yes, these men might be looking for casual only, but far more likely know that courtship comes *after* attraction is established. They’re just being, what’s the word… selective with their commitment. Don’t wanna give it away to easy, now.

      Well guess what they wind up with? Nada. Playing Player Hardass is not working, at least not with these women.

      I can’t blame the guy who blocked her. After you’ve gone on a hundred “dates” that turn out to be nothing, he’s following PrivateMan’s method to the letter.

      You don’t blame a guy who blocks a woman for not putting out the second time they ever met? That’s his right, but it makes him a total asshole. Re PrivateMan’s method, he’s alone, and he doesn’t want to be. I don’t know why men are taking advice from men who have bad marriages, no love life, and are essentially involuntarily celibate. Half the Game blogs fit this description.

      These guys are just dual-ladder guys.

      If they were dual ladder guys, and they did the date thing, expressing interest in seeing the woman again, why change the scene to shady at the second meeting? The woman who would make a great companion to explore a new city is now relegated to “fuck me or you’re gone” with no clue as to why.

  • http://@ Iggles

    I’m not done reading your post yet and I had to comment!

    This made me see RED:

    Kristen refused to leave without some explanation, and while she was standing there another girl arrived and pressed Jake’s doorbell. It turned out she was Jake’s new love interest, and he’d sent the same text to both of them. Given a choice, he preferred new to old. 

    What a P.O.S.!!!
    Seriously, Kristen is much better off without that jerk! Ugh.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Iggles

      Seriously, Kristen is much better off without that jerk! Ugh.

      She moved on and has been with a different guy for a couple of years. Interestingly, she ran into that guy one evening and he pulled her aside to offer a sincere apology for his behavior. He said he was trying to become a better person. Save it, dude, I don’t want to hear your 12 steps.

  • Mikey

    @Sassy6519 J

    It’s unfortunate but true. It’s not a function of women just rejecting guys who they are not attracted to. I’m sure many guys here have many stories of asking a girl out date wise, getting rejected, only to hook up with her later with no investment. Happens all the time.

    It has become a function of tactics. Asking for a date is a demonstration of lower value basically, the fancier the date, the more try hard it looks to girls. Now, like I said, as women get older and become more in tune with seeking relationships, they are more into finding dates and agreeing to them. But, my advice pertains to guys looking for girls in their 20′s. It’s a bad tactic, a bad investment to take this approach.

    And it shouldn’t be dismissed with notions of “I’m not like that” or “only immature girls are like that”, guys who are pounding the pavement (non PUA’s) will tell you this is the reality of the world.

    In other words guys learn to adjust to get results (no connotations of a date) or they die repeatedly on the alter of idealism of the way things should be.

    I personally use the social gathering/ non date date as a method, does not need to be outright PUA style booty call, but any girl demanding a fancy date initially is a giant red flag anyways.

  • http://7thseriesgongshow.blogspot.com Mr. Nervous Toes

    I have definitely gotten away from calling anything a ‘date’. I do think there’s more anxiety surrounding dating now than there used to be. The fast pace of physical escalation is probably part of it, lack of experience in dating another, but the loss of dating ethics is probably the biggest problem IMO.

    I would generally say that dating ethics is just the expected behaviour of the man and the woman in the field of dating. The problem is, there are no rules, there is no script to follow anymore. Does the guy pay for everything? Does the woman split the bill? It’s not agreed on in the general population, so we have the problem that there’s a lot of potential for conflict during the date over whether to be traditional or not. For a guy, trying to be dominant and getting her preferences wrong in terms of dating etiquette can be a deal-breaker, and that’s really unfair to men.

    From my personal experience, it’s much easier to date a woman once you can make educated guesses about what those preferences are, because no woman will ever tell you. As such, there’s a lot of value in the information gathering offered by casual interaction before you progress to date 1,2,3…

  • Mikey

    “I think this is true in college, but it is definitely not true after. I’ve been amazed as the young women I know have gone from graduation with zero dates, to dating regularly two years out. Some of the women I know who are dating in their early 20s have been asked out by men for real dates in the following.”

    This ignore my point, your advice for women is not the same as advice for men. Asking girls if they go on dates is not an evaluation of its effectiveness for men. Heck when I ask girls I know who are married, they still give the advice they love dates and recommend them as a strategy even though they readily admit their husband got them not using that method. It’s almost impossible to get a woman to admit dates are not a good strategy, because it benefits them and feeds into a romantic idealism.

    It’s better to ask the guys what works for them. They’ll tell you asking out for formal dates is a losing bet. It is default game guys are taught since day one, if it worked so well betas would be king of the jungle.

    Like I said, I’m not advocating “college hook up culture”, but to say formal dating is the answer is leading guys into a world of pain. The answer is something in between which most successful guys calibrate to.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Mikey

      Heck when I ask girls I know who are married, they still give the advice they love dates and recommend them as a strategy even though they readily admit their husband got them not using that method.

      Perhaps, but I’m giving examples here of women who did not tolerate that behavior. And I applaud them for it – these men disrespected them.

      Like I said, I’m not advocating “college hook up culture”, but to say formal dating is the answer is leading guys into a world of pain. The answer is something in between which most successful guys calibrate to.

      I understand that guys have gotta do what works for them. I’ve concluded that it is essential for women to DQ guys who exhibit any shady behavior. Once a woman is out of college, she should be dating with an eye toward finding her future husband. And the cost of her giving a douchebag six months of her life is very high. Even if she kicks 100 Pretend Assholes to the curb, she is still better off focusing on those men who are emotionally available and confident enough to say so.

  • Mikey

    @SusanWash

    “We walked everywhere, went to museums and galleries, found all sorts of ethnic dives with great food. We had adventures. We went to readings by famous writers, wine tastings, and just hung out with friends – those are where our best memories were made.”

    Fine with all of this after some attachment is made. I think my point got lost, it was people will read your article as advocating the anti-Nick, as some of the comments have already suggested, girls are entitled to “dates.”

    In 2013, for guys, you need a low investment screen (expect flakes), coffee, etc, social meet up offers, before you get to the stages you’re talking about. You have to spin plates. (Again, a female strategy would disagree with this, a male wouldn’t) If you lead with that stuff, you’re going to get blown out many times when you didn’t need to. Lots of guys and women are reading this column instead as guys should start courting women again and leading off with this stuff.

    Basically, she only gets investment of dates when attraction and worthiness are demonstrated. You opening move should never be planning a creative date without screening her and having deepening attraction first.

  • Anne

    “I had a man force me out of the car on the freeway at 2 in the morning after he stated his intention to spend the night at my place and I said that wasn’t happening. ”

    I will never complain about a bad date again.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Anne

      I will never complain about a bad date again.

      It was so scary! There I was on the shoulder of the 405 about 20 miles from home. I didn’t even know how far the next exit was. I walked a couple of miles (in very high heels) – I remember it was March and very cold (nights in LA are quite cool). It was foggy. Eventually, a car pulled up and offered me a ride. It was a single guy. I remember thinking, “What if this is Ted Bundy?” But I got in. He was really nice. He took me all the way home and expected nothing. I was very grateful.

  • Sassy6519

    I had a man force me out of the car on the freeway at 2 in the morning after he stated his intention to spend the night at my place and I said that wasn’t happening.

    Jeebus!

  • pennies

    Jeez Susan! That’s a lot of bad behavior! And I was whining about people waving me off plans at the last minute on occasion…

  • Johnycomelately

    “Male investment-heavy courtship now takes place post-sex but pre-engagement-type commitment.”

    “Sex has been separated from marriage by approx. 10-12 years.”

    This.

    Women want commitment without reciprocity, they equate sex with commitment but in the hook up landscape it is the equivalent of a peck on the cheek.

    You can’t have the advantages of option seeking with the benefit of commitment.

    Casualized labour can’t complain about the lack of work security, it’s the nature of the contract.

  • Abbot
  • Madelena

    I prefer a coffee first date myself. I actually tend to suggest it. Keep it light and simple, and there is room to cut it short if you really aren’t feeling it.

  • OffTheCuff

    Sue: “Well guess what they wind up with? Nada. Playing Player Hardass is not working, at least not with these women.”

    Again, you dont know that – you are looking it from the woman’s perspective. For *this* woman, it didn’t work. But if you ask this guy his success rate, you might get a very different answer. Maybe it worked the next day, and he made her his girlfriend shortly after.

    Sue: “You don’t blame a guy who blocks a woman for not putting out the second time they ever met? That’s his right, but it makes him a total asshole.”

    It is admittedly bit of a badass move, and an extreme example. But the underlying principle is if there’s no definite physical attraction to work off of, move on sooner rather than later.

    Sue: “If they were dual ladder guys, and they did the date thing, expressing interest in seeing the woman again, why change the scene to shady at the second meeting? The woman who would make a great companion to explore a new city is now relegated to “fuck me or you’re gone” with no clue as to why.”

    Because she’s not on the girlfriend ladder, and its just a line. Or, he wants a FWB to explore the city with… exploring a city has no correlation to monogamy after all. Or, perhaps, the physicality is the qualification for that exploration as a possible GF.

    Sue: “I’ve concluded that it is essential for women to DQ guys who exhibit any shady behavior.”

    Absolutely, 100%! Say yes to the good ones! Of course, this necessarily means no exceptions for the super-hot player… it’s that price discrimination that creates more of them.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @OTC

      I reluctantly cosign everything you say. :P

  • Sassy6519

    It has become a function of tactics. Asking for a date is a demonstration of lower value basically, the fancier the date, the more try hard it looks to girls. Now, like I said, as women get older and become more in tune with seeking relationships, they are more into finding dates and agreeing to them. But, my advice pertains to guys looking for girls in their 20′s. It’s a bad tactic, a bad investment to take this approach.

    And it shouldn’t be dismissed with notions of “I’m not like that” or “only immature girls are like that”, guys who are pounding the pavement (non PUA’s) will tell you this is the reality of the world.

    Um, dude……..I’m a young 20s woman who has been on plenty of dates. I’m not saying that there are not women out there who may flake at the prospect of a date. Women like that do exist. I just don’t believe that they are the majority.

    I have been witness to many women, and I mean MANY women, who have been beside themselves with glee and anticipation at the prospect of a date with a guy they liked. I’ve seen it more times than I can count.

    To be frank, I think it’s just easier for many people to blame a lack of success on a tactic (asking for a legitimate date) rather than their inherent unattractiveness/shortcomings. A lot of dating/romantic/sexual failure also occurs because both men and women pursue people who simply aren’t interested in them. No one will be attractive to everyone.

    The thought of rejecting someone simply because they asked to go on a date doesn’t compute for me. In my opinion, there has to be a legitimate reason why the date offer was rejected. I’m not saying that some women don’t have crazy/superficial reasons for rejecting date offers. I’m just not sure that women are rejecting the date offers simply because they are date offers.

  • Zach

    @Susan

    Lot to comment on here.

    First of all, I can sympathize with the women, but only to an extent. The problem with saying that “a lot of women don’t do booty calls” is that it’s almost never a hard and fast rule. I know plenty of girls who go on tons of dates and generally turn down booty calls/casual hookups, but there’s always an exception now and again, and it’s never for the guy who’s taken them out before (it’s for the ones you would call dbags). So when men see even these women, the ones who do appreciate dates, violating their own code, it shoots a lot of holes in the courtship script.

    Secondly, dating is both expensive and exhausting. I make good money and can afford to go on a fair number of dates, but after a while it starts to add up, even for me (figure average 1 date a week @$80/date, with drinks averaging $60 and dinners $120 or so). There have been periods where I’ve gone on 2-3 dates a week 3-4 weeks in a row, and spent over $1,000 in that span. That’s a lot of investment, and I’d like to see some return on it. Given that I’m not just looking for sex, I have pretty high standards about who I even invite on a date, and then who I invite on date 2, so I’m cutting girls left right and center with nothing to show for it except some halfway decent conversation, maybe a kiss/makeout, and a $200 whole in my pocket. Eventually you start to ask yourself “why am I doing this when I might find a girl at a bar, sleep with her, then have a relationship come out of it”? And believe me, I have some friends who have relationships with girls they’ve met in exactly that fashion, and while some of the girls are idiotic bimbos, some are actually very smart, attractive and fun. It’s been seven months since I broke up with my ex and I’ve been on probably 30 first dates since then, if not more (probably more). I’ve also had 3-4 one night stands (or 2-3 night stands). Of those 30 girls, I asked maybe 7 or so for a second date, and got it with about 5. Of those 5, I went past date 3 with 2 of them. Neither of those worked out further than 6 weeks, one for weird reasons (long story about mutual friends, ex-gf/bfs, etc), and one because she was actually in it for the sex (believe it or not). That’s a ton of money and a LOT of time spent dating with nothing to show for it. With the 3-4 girls I’ve taken home for a one night stand, it didn’t take all that much effort or $$ and I at least got laid. And remember, I’m someone who’s actually looking for an LTR (hell I even stopped trying to take girls home from bars and got numbers only for a few months), so I should be more immune to date fatigue than most. However, I’m exhausted. On Saturday night, there was a cute girl at the bar I was at giving me eyes all night. I was tired, so I wasn’t going to try and take her home. However, I normally would talk to her to get her number. I had this conversation in my head: “I’ll probably chat her up, get her number, and we’ll go one a date. Maybe I’ll like her, maybe she’ll suck. Either way, I’m out $80 and a night of my life, and then I have to clear that suck/like her hurdle 2-3 more times before anything really happens (and drop another $150). Fuck it, I’m just to grab the next round with my friends.” Six months ago, I would’ve gone up to her in two seconds.

    As a side note to point 2, I don’t think the dual-ladder system is bad for guys. Some girls you like enough to sleep with, and some enough to date. I think it’s a perfectly fine system. You concentrate your resources on the ones you want to date, and then the other ones you throw a line to every so often (my friend calls them “weekend girls”). Btw, this previous guy is similar to me, in that he goes on tons of dates. However, he doesn’t have my sometimes-aversion to casual sex, and has slept with 15-16 girls in the last 7 months. He also goes on 1-2 dates a week, and not generally with the girls he sleeps with on the weekends. Even he has admitted he’s so exhausted with dating that he might settle for the current “weekend” girl he’s seeing, even though she’s an absolute moron.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Zach

      Eventually you start to ask yourself “why am I doing this when I might find a girl at a bar, sleep with her, then have a relationship come out of it”? And believe me, I have some friends who have relationships with girls they’ve met in exactly that fashion, and while some of the girls are idiotic bimbos, some are actually very smart, attractive and fun.

      For the record, that’s a perfectly reasonable way of looking at it.

      Either way, I’m out $80 and a night of my life, and then I have to clear that suck/like her hurdle 2-3 more times before anything really happens (and drop another $150). Fuck it, I’m just to grab the next round with my friends.” Six months ago, I would’ve gone up to her in two seconds.

      I’m really struck by this. You are a high SMV guy with an Ivy League degree. You have the ability to get casual sex pretty much whenever you want it, or at least a decent shot on any given night. Yet you share the same ennui and dissatisfaction that women do.

      As a side note to point 2, I don’t think the dual-ladder system is bad for guys. Some girls you like enough to sleep with, and some enough to date. I think it’s a perfectly fine system. You concentrate your resources on the ones you want to date, and then the other ones you throw a line to every so often (my friend calls them “weekend girls”).

      I don’t think it’s bad for guys or girls. I think that women should earn commitment and be worthy of it. If they are not worthy of it, that’s on them.

      Even he has admitted he’s so exhausted with dating that he might settle for the current “weekend” girl he’s seeing, even though she’s an absolute moron.

      As someone who shares your alma mater, you can imagine how painful that is for me to hear. At this point I can only pray that you go to b-school and meet smart women worthy of commitment there.

  • Sassy6519

    Hmmm. I think one of my comments is in limbo somewhere.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Mikey

    Um, dude……..I’m a young 20s woman who has been on plenty of dates. I’m not saying that there are not women out there who may flake at the prospect of a date. Women like that do exist. I just don’t believe that they are the majority.

    I have been witness to many women, and I mean MANY women, who have been beside themselves with glee and anticipation at the prospect of a date with a guy they liked. I’ve seen it more times than I can count.

    To be frank, I think it’s just easier for many people to blame a lack of success on a tactic (asking for a legitimate date) rather than their inherent unattractiveness/shortcomings. A lot of dating/romantic/sexual failure also occurs because both men and women pursue people who simply aren’t interested in them. No one will be attractive to everyone.

    The thought of rejecting someone simply because they asked to go on a date doesn’t compute for me. In my opinion, there has to be a legitimate reason why the date offer was rejected. I’m not saying that some women don’t have crazy/superficial reasons for rejecting date offers. I’m just not sure that women are rejecting the date offers simply because they are date offers.

  • pennies

    @Susan — I remember thinking, “What if this is Ted Bundy?”

    Haha now I’m remembering that creepy thread where you shared the picture of your fam in an old classic car — didn’t you just miss a brush with a serial killer? Am I just making this all up?

    I am so glad nothing happened to you!

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @pennies

      Yes, supposedly the Manson gang looked at my mom and three of us kids and contemplated murder at the red light. The light changed and we sped away. That intersection was very near the Sharon Tate murders.

      I’m just an ordinary citizen – it makes me wonder about the “near misses” we must all experience without ever knowing.

  • Mike C

    Sassy @ 14

    You nailed it.

  • Mike C

    Back in the mid to late 90s I was in my early to mid twenties. At that point in time, the “proper date”/courtship model seemed to still work. I asked my ex-wife on dates in the beginning and that is how our relationship progressed. After we broke up for the first time at the end of 1997, even in 1998 and 1999, I had some success with “dating” and even some of my flings started with “proper dates”. I think things changed in 2000 or around that time. I went back to grad school and remember this girl I met literally the first few weeks in the gym there. Approached her in the gym, got her number, and set up a “date”. Long story short, total bust, and I think it was because I went the “proper date” route. I was kind of fumbling and bumbling that first year (2nd year of grad school I got back with the ex-wife) but I think I sort of accidently stumbled onto “meeting up” instead of “going out on a date”. By the time 2005/2006 rolled around, and I was single again, and bouncing it seemed clear to me that “dating” was dead. All the guys I knew were operating off the super casual “let’s meet up” script, and that is the script I used for the first few girls before meeting my now fiancee. She and I actually went out on “proper dates”, but somehow I had sensed she would appreciate it and that the old script would be OK with her.

    I can’t really argue with the advice in this post for women. I think it is good advice for the women genuinely interested in a relationship. But I agree with Mikey that I would not give that advice to guys. The best move for guys is to still play it casual and indifferent and do the “meet up” thing unless he can very clearly determine he is dealing with a more traditional type girl/woman.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      The best move for guys is to still play it casual and indifferent and do the “meet up” thing unless he can very clearly determine he is dealing with a more traditional type girl/woman.

      I just want to say this is totally reasonable and fair, from a male POV. The advice implicit in this is that women who want to be treated differently better do everything in their power to demonstrate that they are traditional.

  • Sassy6519

    I just want to say this is totally reasonable and fair, from a male POV. The advice implicit in this is that women who want to be treated differently better do everything in their power to demonstrate that they are traditional.

    Definitely. That makes sense to me.

  • pennies

    @Zach — There have been periods where I’ve gone on 2-3 dates a week 3-4 weeks in a row, and spent over $1,000 in that span.

    A question – if a woman you take out for drinks isn’t feeling it, does she ever offer to pay for her drink? That’s what I used to do. I didn’t want someone to pick up my tab if I knew there wasn’t going to be a second date.

    If a guy offered to pay and I accepted, that was my way of saying that there would definitely be a second date/I liked the guy.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    I’ve always done things backwards. I was an early Internet junkie before being nerdy was cool. So I was chatting in dial-up days and getting to know guys via IM, getting emotionally entangled before real dates.

    In fact, that’s how all my LTRs went. “Texting” first, then falling in love, and dating last. I wouldn’t even know how to do dating first. Could this be because my mind is sort of wired like a guy’s?

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Hope

      Could this be because my mind is sort of wired like a guy’s?

      No way, I’d say you are the most classically feminine woman here. I think that you were particularly immune to some negative aspects of American culture, and you were also willing to invest and risk a great deal from the outset. You went all in very early – emotionally escalating to the point where you contributed significantly financially.

      I think your strategy was brilliant, but having said that, I’m not sure how often it can be applied. It’s like your relationship was a perfect storm in a way – are there lessons there that can be replicated for the population at large? (Note: I hope the answer is yes.)

  • Abbot

    “So when men see even these women, the ones who do appreciate dates, violating their own code, it shoots a lot of holes in the courtship script.”

    Precisely why so many are not court worthy. How can a man even begin to justify exhibiting anything beyond courteous respect until a woman at least proves somehow to him that she does not step out of the sexual character presently on display?

  • http://bastiatblogger.blogspot.com/ Bastiat Blogger

    I am with Zach re: dual-ladder/”dual-cool” as an effective strategy for many men.

    FWIW, I still enjoy traditional dates and I consider a nice, private evening to be one of life’s great pleasures, but I’m also older than these guys who are just coming out of campus hook-up culture (and I increasingly have to compete based on experienced social refinement over youthful vigor), I work in a lucrative industry, and even with these important caveats I am still careful to avoid low-percentage plays with dead-end mercenary girls. I would not advise guys in their 20s, in this SMP, to engage in high-end traditional dating until they are quite sure that the relationship has serious/marriage potential.

    There are perils to heavy traditional dating expenditures that women may not always fully appreciate because these costs tend to be absorbed by men. Case Study: A few years ago, I went on one of my frequent, wild episodes of romantic flamboyance and took a girl on a South America trip that included hiking the Inca Trail. I absorbed all expenses, including an outfitting package that included a complete wardrobe of Arc’teryx technical outdoors clothing and a Nikon D3 for the girl in question. The trip was outstanding, but we broke up about six weeks later (my fault, although it was a story without heroes). I have little doubt that the new man/Fuck Phantom who emerged before the smoke had even cleared was enjoying himself as he peeled the sleek, tight climbing apparel off of her nubile body; perhaps, between chortles, he even gave silent thanks to her previous benefactor. God only knows what they used that fucking camera for.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      I have little doubt that the new man/Fuck Phantom who emerged before the smoke had even cleared was enjoying himself as he peeled the sleek, tight climbing apparel off of her nubile body; perhaps, between chortles, he even gave silent thanks to her previous benefactor. God only knows what they used that fucking camera for.

      God, this is a brilliant piece of writing. There’s a mild element of self-deprecation here that just serves to shore up BB’s charm.

  • Mike C

    I’ve concluded that it is essential for women to DQ guys who exhibit any shady behavior. ***Once a woman is out of college, she should be dating with an eye toward finding her future husband.*** And the cost of her giving a douchebag six months of her life is very high. Even if she kicks 100 Pretend Assholes to the curb, she is still better off focusing on those men who are emotionally available and confident enough to say so.

    I basically agree. This is what is going to change the market. It is critical to understand that ultimately women control the market as the “choosers”. Men simply try to adapt and figure out “what works”. Women set the de facto standards by what they respond positively to, and what they reject.

    Of course, there is an opportunity cost to kicking 100 “Pretend Assholes” to the curb, but you have to decide whether you want to make Type 1 or Type 2 errors. In this SMP, no strategy is going to be perfect. When a critical mass of young women start changing what they respond to, guys will adapt to the new conditions. And let me say I am very happy to read that bolded part you’ve written.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Mike C

      you have to decide whether you want to make Type 1 or Type 2 errors.

      Exactly. I recognize that if women take my advice and implement it to the letter, they will be DQ’ing some men who would actually make good mates. Guys who are spinning plates or demanding sex in an effort to provide the dominance that women reward. I have given this a lot of thought.

      It can be very difficult for women to discern who’s pretending to not care and who really doesn’t give a shit. That’s the problem. If we believe that there are a lot of potential mates out there for any one of us, then I think it’s good strategy for both sexes to invest resources with those who display interest and mutual investment.

  • Mike C

    “So when men see even these women, the ones who do appreciate dates, violating their own code, it shoots a lot of holes in the courtship script.”

    I think one thing it would behoove all women to understand is that the vast majority of men put a very high priority on consistency and the universal applicability of one single standard to all situations. Most men don’t look kindly on the notion of “feelings” being used to justify completely different responses depending on that situation. So if a woman has a code, she has to live by that code with all men, not have some men where she decides to “play it differently”. That is the sort of thing that men watch closely and can make a guy feel like a chump. No guy wants to properly date/court/invest in the woman who previously was a meetup/hookup girl. The key point is young women have to develop a set code of behavior and stick to it, and be a little less prone to going with feelings in the moment.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      I think one thing it would behoove all women to understand is that the vast majority of men put a very high priority on consistency and the universal applicability of one single standard to all situations.

      +1

      This is a question of character. Both sexes have every right to seek and demand character in a mate. In fact, I wish both sexes exercised this judgment more often.

      • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

        After hearing hundreds of stories, these are the guidelines I stand by:

        First date, whoever initiated pays. Usually the male. If online dating, male pays.

        After first date, depends on individuals. If male is provider-oriented, female should contribute by securing tickets, preparing meals, planning special dates, etc. If more egalitarian, female should share expenses, though I prefer taking turns to splitting the check.

        Feminism killed chivalry. Men should not be on the hook to pay.

  • Anne

    @pennies
    You should always offer to pay your share, but he will get it. Whoever initiated the date pays, and that should be him, as you let him ask you out. Insisting on paying because he didn’t find you fascinating enough, is stupidity.
    When he pays, you say “thank you very much” and leave it at that. A discussion around the payment is very uncomfortable. Nobody wants that. Last time I reached for the bill, he snapped it out of my hand, curled it into a ball and threw it away. It’s supposed to be ignored.

  • pennies

    What I used to do is ask if I could chip in half and sometimes a guy would say “sure.” The whole conversation was carefully coded but it often seemed like we were not really talking about money as much as if we both wanted a date #2/more flirtation.

  • Richard Aubrey

    He was really nice. He took me all the way home and expected nothing. I was very grateful.
    “expected nothing”. Of course he expected nothng. He was a man. If he’d been an acquaintance, your responsibility would have been to inquire if he like walnuts in his brownies; frosting or no. That’s because you could find him afterwards.
    Jeez. What standards do we have here?

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Richard

      I’m not sure what you’re getting at. I accepted a ride from a stranger, and he was generous in delivering me home. I thanked him.

      Do you feel that I failed him in some way?

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Susan, you are too kind, but I don’t think I am “classically feminine” at all. I had to learn a lot of it! When I was younger I would try to impress guys first with my “nerd cred.” I spent hours waxing philosophic about video game mechanics, discussing the latest tech stuff like computer hardware, and reminiscing about old geeky things. Even today I looked up Diablo 3 information for quite a while. :P

    I was always uncomfortable with the idea of dating because of the expectations. I had access to uncensored male thinking from 12 on because I was online in the 90s. I knew how they felt about taking girls out and “not getting any.” I also refused to play the game on the same rules as other girls, and I bent the rules by going around and asking the guys what to do. They give great advice because they tend to be rather logical about these things. So the “date” was just a means to an end. I could skip the “dating” and do what I wanted instead… and I wanted great conversations.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Hope

      I could skip the “dating” and do what I wanted instead… and I wanted great conversations.

      And to your credit, you filtered men using that criterion. You were not put off by a man who wanted a real connection. You and your husband practiced the Principle of Most Interest – an intense emotional connection that was nurtured in a way that trust and security grew quickly.

  • Zach

    @pennies

    I have had women offer to split, some even sincerely, but you have to understand agreeing to split or not leads to asymmetric outcomes. First of all, you have to guess whether she means it. Even if youre good at picking up the signs, youre going to be wrong sometimes. Also, some girls who “mean it” dont really mean it. I had one girl who before we even went on one date (but when she was clearly into me) go on a long pseudo feminist rant about how shed never expect a guy to pay and always would split the bill. On date 2, I took her at her word and let her split it. After that, things went downhill and I heard from mutual friends that one of the huge problems was she couldnt believe I let her pay. So the risks are not equal. You refuse her offer, and youre out some money. You take her up on it and you may save some cash but you run a material risk of a black mark against your name. Thats doubly true here in NYC, where a lot of girls are used to going out with guys with money who will always pay.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Zach

      I agree that women are extremely fickle about paying. Even those who will happily share expenses later will seek a provider instinct in a guy early on.

      I won’t presume to advise guys on this. But I will say that agreeing to let a woman go halfsies almost never works. Much better to pick up the check, wink and tell her dinner is on her next time.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Also, I don’t remember who told me this, but I was told that it is very flattering to a guy when a cute girl wants to talk to him, just talk, no extra stuff, no wanting him to buy her anything, because it means that she was interested in him for himself.

    Incidentally my husband said he felt like he was “courting” me even though we were “just talking.” So men really feel like talking, sans the accoutrement of dating, is important. That may be why they seem so “flaky” nowadays when it comes to dating.

  • Pingback: Courtship, Sex, and Commitment « Happycrow's Eyeball Factory

  • Abbot

    “No guy wants to properly date/court/invest in the woman who previously was a meetup/hookup girl.”

    Why can’t such women accept that is how men are and leave it at that? Why do they denigrate men for merely thinking this way?

    .

  • Anne

    “Eventually you start to ask yourself “why am I doing this when I might find a girl at a bar, sleep with her, then have a relationship come out of it”? And believe me, I have some friends who have relationships with girls they’ve met in exactly that fashion, and while some of the girls are idiotic bimbos, some are actually very smart, attractive and fun.”

    “No guy wants to properly date/court/invest in the woman who previously was a meetup/hookup girl.”

    In other words, men have absolutely no clue what they want either?

  • http://happycrow.wordpress.com Russ in Texas

    @Susan#75,

    I absolutely hate that thinking about such things is necessary, but having met women who really do view dating as “ticket to lots of free dinners,” having a plan in place to identify women of that sort right off the bat is a good idea; one of those “an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure” things that a good filter provides.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Russ

      having a plan in place to identify women of that sort right off the bat is a good idea; one of those “an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure” things that a good filter provides.

      Absolutely! Men need filters too. The frustration and anger that arises when someone has taken advantage of your good will and generosity leads to cynicism about the opposite sex. I wholeheartedly support men qualifying women for that kind of behavior up front. In fact, I know one couple whose first date was going running together. Vox Day’s wife suggested walking their dogs together the day after they met (smart preemptive move there).

      A date doesn’t have to cost anything. As I said in the post, its purpose is to signal an interest in getting to know another person better one on one. But it should require some effort. Asking a woman over to “watch a movie” at midnight is not a date. Asking her to cab over to your side of town when you’ve already had a few is not a date.

      There’s nothing wrong with socializing in groups, hanging out casually, etc. That is not dating. If a man doesn’t escalate alone time for a purpose other than sex, his interest is strictly sexual. Women need to understand that.

  • http://happycrow.wordpress.com Russ in Texas

    Abbott, Anne,

    Because not all men are the same, nor are all women. It’s sets-of-assumptions which apply in some cases but not all.

  • Tasmin

    @Susan
    “I had a man grab my breast hard on St. Patrick’s Day in an Australian bar in LA.”

    An Australian bar in LA. Talk about choice of venue. There are few ways more certain to get you molested than hanging out a bar full of Ozzie guys with the Santa Ana wind at their backs. That accent affords them quite a bit of latitude, perhaps not breast groping, but then again, that’s just Australian for: “I think you are cute and I would like to spend some time this evening getting to know you better.” Chalk it up to cultural differences. Unless of course it was just Chad from Brentwood, then yeah, you just got groped by a guy with a USC accent. Those are a dime a dozen.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Tasmin

      There are few ways more certain to get you molested than hanging out a bar full of Ozzie guys with the Santa Ana wind at their backs

      Yup, learned that the hard way. In fact, the story gets better. After the guy grabbed me, I slapped him hard across the face. Do you know what he did? He slapped me back across the face. Outraged and shocked, I turned to the bartender, who shrugged and said, “I’d leave if I were you.”

      In retrospect I wish I’d called the police, but this was in 1980 and they probably would have just laughed.

  • Richard Aubrey

    Susan.

    Richard

    I’m not sure what you’re getting at. I accepted a ride from a stranger, and he was generous in delivering me home. I thanked him.

    Do you feel that I failed him in some way?

    Yes. You failed him by expecting him to expect something. Presumably, you didn’t express your surprise out loud.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Yes. You failed him by expecting him to expect something. Presumably, you didn’t express your surprise out loud.

      Ah, I see. Of course I was extremely thankful and appreciative. However, I don’t think it was paranoid of me to feel that I was perhaps foolish climbing into a stranger’s car at 2 am on a LA freeway…In fact, as I recall, he was eager to reassure me that he just wanted to help.

  • Mike C

    “Eventually you start to ask yourself “why am I doing this when I might find a girl at a bar, sleep with her, then have a relationship come out of it”? And believe me, I have some friends who have relationships with girls they’ve met in exactly that fashion, and while some of the girls are idiotic bimbos, some are actually very smart, attractive and fun.”

    “No guy wants to properly date/court/invest in the woman who previously was a meetup/hookup girl.”

    In other words, men have absolutely no clue what they want either?

    I probably shouldn’t say no guy but most guys. That said, I’m not sure I am following your point here. I don’t think Zach and I are contradicting each other if that is what you are implying.

    The point is there are two different scripts to “get a girlfriend”/get a relationship from the guy’s perspective. Zach is saying why put in the higher upfront investment of time and resources to get to the finish line if you can get there just as easily with less investment and time. What I am suggesting is it is one way or the other. The two cannot peacefully coexist, certainly not for the same girl. Culturally, it is confusing for men because they are not sure which script to follow. Follow the wrong script and in one case you are a “douchebag” or maybe just “pretend asshole”, and in the other you are a “chump”. A guy like Bastiat Blogger can laugh off one situation like he described but some guys might get continuously played for chumps. I recognize women have their own conundrums as well such as the pace of sexual escalation. Unfortunately, when we as a society cast aside all the structural norms and rules regarding dating, we ended up with a maze with a lot of dead ends.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Mike C

      What I am suggesting is it is one way or the other. The two cannot peacefully coexist, certainly not for the same girl.

      Exactly. When you refuse to date a girl until after she’s had sex with you, well then you’re dating a woman who just had no-strings sex. There’s the rub. How many times have guys here said they test a woman but when they like her they want her to refuse sex? And that if she has sex without commitment, she goes onto the slut ladder instead of the relationship ladder?

      This isn’t an issue for men who are not very concerned about a woman’s sexual history, and Zach has said he is one of those. But it would be very foolish for women to roll the dice on a guy’s sharing that mentality.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Susan, yes I agree about the mutual emotional escalation. I think the lack of “proper dating” actually helped there. It felt more natural, like getting to know a person via seredipity rather than choosing a mate from a store (typical online dating). Every step along the way is more momentous and meaningful. Even just the first time you find out each other’s real names.

    To give an example, asking for someone’s phone number when you met that person first on a dating site is like, no big deal. Probably don’t even care that much; the phone call will be brief and for setting up the meeting. But when my husband asked me for my phone number, it was really exciting. We talked for hours that first phone call. Neither of us wanted to hang up, so we went to bed still with our cell phones and finally ended the calls when we were exhausted.

    Doing things backwards can be fun. :)

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Hope

      Neither of us wanted to hang up, so we went to bed still with our cell phones and finally ended the calls when we were exhausted.

      Awwww, that is precious. My 17 year old niece was with us over Christmas. She has a serious bf that is now a freshman in college, so they miss each other a lot. One afternoon, they stared at each other using Face Time for about 3 hours, saying little. They were just mooning over each other, it was the sweetest thing I’ve ever seen.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Zach,

    Why the hell did you go on a date with a woman who went on a feminist rant?

  • pennies

    @Zach — Thats doubly true here in NYC, where a lot of girls are used to going out with guys with money who will always pay.

    (Former) NYC dater here as well. I guess it depends on the crowd, though… No finance guys for me — academics, journalists, musicians, a film critic, an oceanographer. No one with major bucks.

    I’m sorry that someone said it was okay to split and then became secretly resentful. That’s not cool. Methinks if she liked you, she could have communicated that she wanted to experiment with a more traditional dating frame…

  • Damien Vulaume

    The most important strategy women have at their disposal when dating in their 20s is the extensive use of filters. You must ruthlessly filter out men who are not offering what you want. Which is a real date

    It should not even be explained…

    If you want a meaningful relationship, you must filter guys according to the degree of effort they put in. Garbage in, garbage out.

    Do you people there live on planet Mars?….

  • Jonathan

    @Susan

    @Jonathan
     
    I would phrase it differently. When people think the expected value of a connection is low, they don’t put much effort in.
     
    But doesn’t the level of effort reflect what the party wants? A man looking for casual sex might think the value of the connection is potentially high, however briefly. There are some men determined to avoid getting “stuck” with one chick, so rather than expending 100% of their effort on one woman, they may choose to spend 10% of that effort on 10 women. But that’s their maximum value equation.

    I meant the expected value of the connection is low if a high % of women flake or are going out with you mainly because it’s a free dinner for them. In this environment it makes sense for the man to cut his expenses regardless of whether he is looking for casual sex or true love.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      In this environment it makes sense for the man to cut his expenses regardless of whether he is looking for casual sex or true love.

      Gotcha and I agree. This post has nothing to do with money. I have said many times that I do not believe dating should be expensive, or even cost anything! I wrote a post highlighting the most popular dates in major cities, and a lot of them were free.

      The important thing is to give one’s time and effort. A man or woman not doing that is not interested.

      Delaying sex long enough to require and observe a male’s effort has been the #1 female filter since we first stood on two legs.

  • Mike C

    If you want a meaningful relationship, you must filter guys according to the degree of effort they put in. Garbage in, garbage out.

    Do you people there live on planet Mars?….

    Damien, I have no idea how it is in France, but here at least for *some* women when it comes to the tradeoff of amount of tingle generated versus degree of effort the guy puts in, the former trumps the latter quite handily. Quite perversely, they often seem negatively correlated. And there is that tricky calibration. The guy must show effort but NOT be “too eager” :) Sounds easy in theory, but can get a bit tricky in real world application

  • Mikey

    @Sassy6519

    “Um, dude……..I’m a young 20s woman who has been on plenty of dates. I’m not saying that there are not women out there who may flake at the prospect of a date. Women like that do exist. I just don’t believe that they are the majority.”

    I won’t add to the usual rant of solipsism and it’s use in argument here, but this statement doesn’t add anything. It wasn’t about you personally, I wouldn’t respond to your experience with guys with “I’m not like that so it’s not true.” Your belief about it is irrelevant, the correct experience for this would be to ask men, from the comments so far, the votes are in favor of what I’m saying so far.

    “I have been witness to many women, and I mean MANY women, who have been beside themselves with glee and anticipation at the prospect of a date with a guy they liked. I’ve seen it more times than I can count.”

    Mistake number one here. Attraction is already established, they wanted a date with guys they liked. There is a basis of knowing them/ liking them established already. We are talking about an initial approach an asking to a date. Even with physical attraction, you cannot say you “like” that person already. The point is, asking a girl out on a formal date is not the best method for guys to induce attraction. Dates are fine after the girl is invested and “likes” you.

    “The thought of rejecting someone simply because they asked to go on a date doesn’t compute for me. In my opinion, there has to be a legitimate reason why the date offer was rejected. I’m not saying that some women don’t have crazy/superficial reasons for rejecting date offers. I’m just not sure that women are rejecting the date offers simply because they are date offers.”

    Well some of these comments should be eye opening for you. Yes, asking a girl out as a first date is a bad tactic. Look at the other comments and stories here so far. For the vast majority of guys and the girls they are after it fails as a good option for them. One cannot recommend strategies for guys aimed at the special snowflake woman who wants a first date from a stranger and would respond positively to it.

    And yes it is a tactic, like I said before, I have with numerous girls received negative or no progress with a dating type track, yet hangout/ no date track yields results on the SAME women. After they are invested with the second track, dates would work fine, the point is order here, which is tactics.

    I think that’s a fundamental difference between the blue and red pill. The red pillers on both side admit there are tactics and strategies that work, while the blue pillers refuse to agree hanging on to the it’s never tactics its all about the person and if they were the “right one.” (Disclaimer, no this does not mean red pill means there are magic tactics to create attraction from nothing.)

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Mikey

      Your belief about it is irrelevant, the correct experience for this would be to ask men, from the comments so far, the votes are in favor of what I’m saying so far.

      That says something about the men on this thread, not men in general.

      Attraction is already established, they wanted a date with guys they liked.

      Obviously. What you’re talking about is how to get a woman to be attracted to you when you’re pretty sure she would turn you down. So you run some Game and see if you can pique her interest. Nothing wrong with that.

      But from a female POV, if you are attracted to a guy and he is not asking you out on dates, that’s a red flag.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    Theres a rather simple reason note to date.
    It doesn’t work. Period.

    Regardless of what should or should not be hangouts, meet ups etc. get a man girlfriend and/or just sex.

    Really not much else to say on the issue. Dating cannot be an alternative to hookup culture because, magic words, it doesn’t work. At least not in college.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Dating cannot be an alternative to hookup culture because, magic words, it doesn’t work. At least not in college.

      Well, I made that point in the post. Dating starts happening after college, during one’s 20s. I can see that dating among 20-somethings is alive and well.

      Most women mostly sit out the college hookup scene, as we’ve seen. They literally cannot wait to graduate in hopes of finding something better. The ones who want a relationship will freeze out the late night texters and players. Guys like Shani’s musician or Nick may get a shot, but they’re DQ’d at the first sign of assholery.

      There was one idiotic woman in the Times article who eye f*cked a bouncer, went home with him and began a weekly hookup that petered out after four months. No sh*t that isn’t dating. She did not require dates – if she had filtered properly, she would never have gotten involved with him. Nothing wrong with that if that is what she was going for, but her complaining to the New York Times indicates she thought she might get a relationship out of it. Stupid girl.

  • http://spootville.blogspot.com/ Tim

    It may not be nice of the guys to show minimal interest in dates, but aren’t we ignored if we attempt to show more interest?

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “She goes alone to join him in a bar at 11 pm with a bunch of his college buddies. What purpose does that serve? How well does that plan enable them to get to know one another? What does he expect when the bar closes?”

    Cause this is the mark of the woman truly deserving of a date as opposed to joining him in a bar at 11 pm with a bunch of his college buddies.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    The key point is young women have to develop a set code of behavior and stick to it, and be a little less prone to going with feelings in the moment.

    Speaking from experience, if you flipped the script even a little bit, be prepared to qualify yourself to an inch of your life.

  • Charlotte

    Hello Susan! This is Charlotte, the girl who started quite the debate on the “why you should date older guys” post.

    I have to say, I totally agree with your views on this article.

    Let me tell you a little story from this weekend. Proof that men right out of college have NO idea how to even approach dating.

    So a little back story on me: I’m 21, just graduated a semester early from school, but have been working full time in a field I love and living in NYC since August. Most of my friends that I hang out with are a little older, like 23-24, and I often go out with my cousins who go up to age 28. Most men I have met in the city are older, usually at least 24. I consider myself to be mature for my age and would probably do best dating someone who was anywhere from 24 – 27.

    Anywho, this weekend, several girlfriends and I went out. As soon as we walked into this place, I noticed this gorgeous guy. He was EXTREMELY tall, dark hair, etc. etc. A little too handsome, if you ask me, but you never know, they could be the diamond in the rough that has no idea how cute they are. Obviously, I was pretty wrong. Ha. Anyways, I keep looking at him, he’s looking at me, and eventually, his friend (designated wingman, obviously) comes over and starts talking to my friend and I, casually bringing him and a third friend into the conversation. We end up chatting, he is a writer like me, went to an Ivy League school, played a sport, blah blah blah. I’m not blown away by his personality, but I’m figuring, hey he’s cute and nice, I’ll keep chatting with him. Let’s call him Will.
    Long story short, these guys are going to another bar and invite my friends and I to come. We are waiting at this point for several of our guy friends to come meet us there, so we tell them maybe we will see them there later. The third guy in the convo, lets call him Jeff, gets one of my friends numbers and is texting her like “when are you coming, I’d love to buy you a drink” blah blah blah. So that friend is determined to go to this other bar, since she was interested in Jeff, so we head over there – 4 girls and 2 guys (1 is dating one of the girls).
    We arrive and as soon as we walk in, Jeff greets my friend is is obviously into her. I am curious to explore this bar, which turned out to be a very cool hole in the wall, so I’m kinda doing my own thing with one of my guy friends. Jeff comes up to me, with my friend, and is like “Will is wondering if you came”. Blah blah blah, Will comes up, and we start dancing, nothing sexual at all, just some silly spins and stuff like that. I can tell that he isn’t very drunk, as he is almost a bit awkward, and my guy friend comes over to ask me something and he basically RUNS away. He eventually comes back and continues talking to me. Then he invites me to go to the coat check with him. WEIRD. But I go because I hadn’t been to the upstairs part of the bar yet and was curious about it. So of course, once we get up there, I’m like “why in the world did you ask me to come to the coat check” and he says, “to hang out.” At this point, I’m thinking, that I am bored out of my mind be this guy. So he ends it like “I’m leaving, do you want to come with me?”

    I was appalled. Of course I declined. I have never had that happen since I left school, especially from someone who is out of college. But he is just one year out of college, and is probably used to getting girls to just come home with him from when he was at school and he was one of the cutest guys. Oh no, sorry buddy, it doesn’t work like that in the real world.

    I replied, “Uh no, sorry, I’m not going to come home with you.” And he got offended, saying “woah sorry if that was forward. WEll, have a nice night.”

    I was just so shocked by the fact that he thought he could get away with this. I am certain that I’m not the kinda girl you approach when looking for a one night stand. This poor kid is banking on his looks to bypass dating. Absolutely ridiculous.

    If it was an older guy, I know a) they wouldn’t have invited me home with them, even if that was their end goal only to sleep with me, and b) they would have taken my phone number and maybe at least made an effort to see me another time, even if their only hope was that that lead to sleeping with me.

    I’m sure I rambled on far too long with that story, but my point is: a lot of young men have NO idea how to date in the real world. Most girls don’t go home with random strangers, no matter how handsome you are. SORRY BUDDY.

    Well, one positive thing is that my friend really hit it off with Jeff, he turned out to be quite the charming gentleman. Instead of creeping on her, he graciously thanked her for conversation and gave her a kiss on the cheek goodnight. He lives in another city, but he texted her the next day, appreciative for the conversation and said that he would love to see her next time he’s in town. ONLY IF THIS LAME HANDSOME DUDE STAYS AWAY.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Charlotte

      Good to see you again!

      I’m sure I rambled on far too long with that story, but my point is: a lot of young men have NO idea how to date in the real world. Most girls don’t go home with random strangers, no matter how handsome you are. SORRY BUDDY.

      That is a great story, and not the least bit unusual. I hear variations on it all the time. It almost always involves guys who did OK hooking up in college, and understandably, they are reluctant to adapt. It doesn’t help that a lot of them don’t have great personalities – not an issue when you’re just hooking up after a party. His asking you to the coat check is an incredibly lame version of asking you to go to his room at the frat house.

      The other thing I hear a lot about guys like this is that they are still interested in getting hammered every weekend. They generally want to drink at bars in packs, even when they’re seeing someone.

      Instead of creeping on her, he graciously thanked her for conversation and gave her a kiss on the cheek goodnight. He lives in another city, but he texted her the next day, appreciative for the conversation and said that he would love to see her next time he’s in town. ONLY IF THIS LAME HANDSOME DUDE STAYS AWAY.

      Haha, well there you go. Your gf is interested in the guy who acted all chivalrous and courtshippy. Women like that behavior from men they find attractive. And before someone says apex fallacy, there’s no way an alpha type would have behaved like that.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “If they were dual ladder guys, and they did the date thing, expressing interest in seeing the woman again, why change the scene to shady at the second meeting? The woman who would make a great companion to explore a new city is now relegated to “fuck me or you’re gone” with no clue as to why.”

    Related to my previous post.

    Men care about congruency. Is she always girlfriend material.

    Agreeing to “Hey tits lets meet at 11:30 while I’m smashed and head back to my place” is not congruent with girlfriend behaviour.

    Know I’ve done a few things like that. Set up a situation in which the correct answer is to tell me to fuck off thereby proving she is actually a ‘good’ girl.

    My wife told me to fuck off minus the fuck off when I tried it on her.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Know I’ve done a few things like that. Set up a situation in which the correct answer is to tell me to fuck off thereby proving she is actually a ‘good’ girl.

      My wife told me to fuck off minus the fuck off when I tried it on her.

      But Julie did tell Nick to fuck off and his response was to block her messages.

      The difference is, you were filtering girlfriend behavior IN. Nick was filtering slut behavior IN and girlfriend behavior OUT.

  • Lokland

    @Madalena

    “I prefer a coffee first date myself. I actually tend to suggest it. Keep it light and simple, and there is room to cut it short if you really aren’t feeling it.”

    Genius.
    Meet me at X Coffee Pub (also known as X’s) at X time was every first date I had for the entirety of my time in that city.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Mike C
    women when it comes to the tradeoff of amount of tingle generated versus degree of effort the guy puts in, the former trumps the latter quite handily. Quite perversely, they often seem negatively correlated. And there is that tricky calibration. The guy must show effort but NOT be “too eager

    Knowing smile here….
    And beyond the cultural bondaries, I might as well ask you what do you want from a women before you die?

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    @ Charlotte

    I am certain that I’m not the kinda girl you approach when looking for a one night stand.

    Do you remember the part of the conversation where the players said they would zoom in on you like a cruise missile?

    I do not mean to be offensive, but you are coming here with quite a self-righteous attitude and you may not understand how you are projecting yourself to men.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @ADBG

      I do not mean to be offensive, but you are coming here with quite a self-righteous attitude and you may not understand how you are projecting yourself to men.

      Why do you object to Charlotte’s taking pride in not being slutty? She has every reason to be self-righteous as a woman who does not hook up with strangers and has sex in relationships. She was right to tell Tall Lame Guy that she was not going home with him, obvs. And it is ridiculous that he got into a huff in response. Like hitting on a woman while getting your coat is hot or appropriate.

      That guy is no doubt successful with slutty girls. So he’ll get more of that.

  • Lokland

    @Hope

    “Even today I looked up Diablo 3 information for quite a while. ”

    I went one step further. :)
    I went and DL’d the game and played for about an hour.
    Brought me back to late grade, early high school memories.

  • Charlotte

    @ A Definite Beta Guy

    I actually know that I’m not that kind of girl…in fact, most of my male friends have told me that I’m either “intimidating” or “have too high standards for guys and they can tell”. Both of which I’m trying to work on. I was dressed conservatively (long sleeve black floaty top, no cleavage, skinny jeans, boots) and was wearing natural makeup and my hair wavy. I am not an overly flirtacious or touchy sort of girl. In fact, I find myself to be pretty awkward at times. Also, the fact that this is the first time a guy has proposed this come home with me line to me also is proof that I don’t think I’m the type that men would expect that from. But who knows. I’m just taking that from my prior experiences on this “post modern scene”.

  • Infantry

    For me to invite a girl out for a proper ‘first date’ (eg dinner or some other costly investment), she would have to show genuine interest in me and I would have to be reasonably sure she wasn’t price discriminating. For a girl to get through that early screening I would have to have spent some time with her already. You can’t get this certainty from a 15 minute conversation at a party. She would have to be from the social circle, work or hobby group where I’ve had the opportunity to get to know her.

    This has been a rare occurence, but it happens occassionally. A girl can qualify for this (and have this as one of her own requirements), but she has to bring the value. If her value isn’t high enough, this will never happen.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Infantry

      A girl can qualify for this (and have this as one of her own requirements), but she has to bring the value. If her value isn’t high enough, this will never happen.

      That strikes me as fair and reasonable. Presumably you don’t ask a woman on a date, meaning wink wink nudge nudge that you’ll text her late night on the appointed evening.

      If a woman does not demonstrate value, she certainly shouldn’t expect a man to “buy in.”

      I don’t think a “proper” date need include a costly dinner. In fact, those dates tend to be stiff and formal. Much better to do something active and casual, IMHO. I think it’s much easier for guys to be attractive when they’re doing something, not just having the first date interview.

  • Lokland

    @Mikey

    “We are talking about an initial approach an asking to a date.”

    I’ll try and put this as nicely and simply as possible,

    Are you fucking retarded?

    Seriously,

    Hi I’m Lokland, whats your nam…nvm thats not important, how about tomorrow me and you meet at the coffee pub and walk around the park? (Jumps up and down, wagging tail, tongue lolling.)

    ALL GUYS: NEVER ASK FOR A DATE UPON FIRST MEETING EVER IN A MILLION YEARS.

    EVER.

    Like ever.

    Meet
    Phone Number
    Banter
    Ask Date
    etc.

    Unless your unicorn pretty she needs time to grow attraction.
    So actually the above only applies if your not Brad Pitt. So pretty much all of you.

  • Madelena

    @Charlotte

    Regarding your story, I found that if I was approached for a 1 night stand (or “keeping it casual”) it would be by very good looking men. They were quite upfront about it (no game playing) and I gather it’s because it was a successful strategy for them. Not all handsome men were like that, I’ve dated a few myself, by filtering like mad. But the fact that v good looking men have options that they choose to exercise makes me disinclined to go for them.
    I’ve also had less good looking men look for casual sex but they were not as upfront about it, on the whole. Still, filtering and vetting catches them out too.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Madelena

      Not all handsome men were like that, I’ve dated a few myself, by filtering like mad. But the fact that v good looking men have options that they choose to exercise makes me disinclined to go for them.

      This. I have a story. A girl I know recently met a guy at the gym. She’d noticed him looking at her a lot in recent months, but he never approached. Finally, they happened to be leaving at the same time and he introduced himself, they chatted. He suggested they trade numbers, which they did. The following weekend, he texted her at 10 and asked what she was doing. She was out with friends, so he asked if it was OK if he come join her with a few of his friends. She said sure, and they hung out in the group all night and had a great time. He confessed that he had wanted to meet her for ages, and that he was really glad he’d gotten the opportunity. He asked her on a date – nothing formal – he said he’d been craving chicken wings from this pub he used to go to in college. They went and had a great time again. He walked her home, kissed her goodnight and left.

      Now, it was after this real date that the girl decided to Google this guy, and when she did she almost had a heart attack. He is a Wilhelmina model. (He also has another career, which is what he shared with her.) When she asked him why he hadn’t told her, he said, “I’m looking for a girl who likes me for me. I figured I might be able to tell that if you didn’t find out right away.”

      The next weekend he introduced her to his family, saying, “It’s early days, I know that, but I like you a lot and I’ve told them about you and I want them to meet you.”

      I have no idea where this will go. The point is, this guy has demonstrated high value – in the eyes of this girl – by showing respect and practicing the Principle of Most Interest. She is very attracted to him, but she would have DQ’d him if he’d acted like a player.

      She is still on guard – having never actually, you know, seen a unicorn in real life.

  • Lokland

    @Mike C

    Beat me to the point on congruency, bastard :P

  • Mikey

    @Lokland

    “I’ll try and put this as nicely and simply as possible,

    Are you fucking retarded?”

    Did you even read my comment? Try some reading comprehension before you call people retarded. The point was asking for a first date IS a bad move.

    Clown.

  • Mike C

    Knowing smile here….
    And beyond the cultural bondaries, I might as well ask you what do you want from a women before you die?

    Her Devotion. I believe I have it. Love is obviously part of devotion, but I think devotion is something more and includes other things that might not be included in some people’s conception of love.

  • Mike C

    Beat me to the point on congruency, bastard

    Haha, that’s me….bastard. :)

  • Mike C

    Regarding your story, I found that if I was approached for a 1 night stand (or “keeping it casual”) it would be by very good looking men. They were quite upfront about it (no game playing) and I gather it’s because it was a successful strategy for them.

    To Charlotte’s point, the proposition may not have been specifically about assuming anything particular about her. FWIW, in my experience a girl willing to go with a ONS or even 2nd meeting sex doesn’t necessarily have a particular “look”. Some might have the “slutty” look you’d assume but some might look like a librarian or girl next door. I remember this one blogger who sported the librarian look who had racked up like 80 guys many of them ONSs.

    If a guy is unrestricted and thus has no qualms about a casual encounter and is good-looking, it often is the optimal strategy because it wastes the least amount of time. I won’t argue percentages…but at least in raw numbers there are enough women down for it to make it a viable strategy.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      If a guy is unrestricted and thus has no qualms about a casual encounter and is good-looking, it often is the optimal strategy because it wastes the least amount of time. I won’t argue percentages…but at least in raw numbers there are enough women down for it to make it a viable strategy.

      Absolutely. Women should therefore immediately think “Unrestricted”, player, cad, etc. when approached in this manner. It doesn’t matter if the guy is a cad or just a player who doesn’t lie to women. He’s a STR guy, and those guys make poor LTR prospects.

  • http://nexxtlevelup.com Nate

    I would caution against assigning any sort of ill-will or “douchebag”ness to dudes who use the meet up method instead of dates. As Markey and a few others have pointed out, most young dudes familiar with the landscape, whether in college or their early twenties, understand that a lot of girls balk at dates and that asking a girl out on one is a great way to get nowhere.

    If a girl wants a date with a dude instead of meeting up with him like the usual script, she needs to say that when he tells her to meet up with him at wherever. If the dude is interested and open to more than just a ONS or FB, he won’t have a problem with that. Most dudes are just following the script they learned/observed growing up- nothing more, nothing less- and an attempt by the girl to propose a date instead is great way to indicate they are interested while putting the ball back in his court. The meet up method is so pervasive in part because it offers a defense against flaking and against girls who want to play “see who is less interested”, so a girl saying outright (but pleasantly) that she would prefer a date can actually be refreshing.

    I’ve had a couple girls do this to me since I graduated, and I must say it worked in their favor.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Nate

      As Markey and a few others have pointed out, most young dudes familiar with the landscape, whether in college or their early twenties, understand that a lot of girls balk at dates and that asking a girl out on one is a great way to get nowhere.

      My beef is not with guys who want to hang out, it’s with guys who use the word date when making plans when what they really mean is “maybe I’ll see you out.”

      If a girl wants a date with a dude instead of meeting up with him like the usual script, she needs to say that when he tells her to meet up with him at wherever.

      I think women should be fine with meeting up in the early stages. Obviously, those meetups should not end in sex, IMO. But there’s nothing wrong with socializing in groups – it is the norm. However, if a guy wants more than sex he will seek more than sex. He will want alone time outside the din of a bar and the shenanigans of his buddies.

      If I had to quantify, I’d say meet up twice, be friendly over text, and then move on if he doesn’t seek a one-on-one hang that is distinctly not sex-related.

  • Damien Vulaume

    Mike C
    Her Devotion. I believe I have it. Love is obviously part of devotion, but I think devotion is something more and includes other things that might not be included in some people’s conception of love.

    “Other things”…. yes, but it depends what and how, long story..
    “Her devotion-love-part-of-devotion, blah-blah”, ok.
    What is there more to say? Then keep it, and nurture it, if that is your concept of love (and I am not cynical here, by this I mean “whatever works”), and, most of all, what makes the best long lasting balance betweeen the two of you is the best, as long as she’s willingly “following” that form of love……… You might be later surprised about her level of devotion, though…

  • http://www.4stargazer.wordpress.com Anacaona

    I might be wrong but this guy is having a worse coach for dating than anyone in the Manosphere: http://www.geekologie.com/2013/01/ahahahahaha-my-god-youre-doing-it-so-wro.php

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Ana

      The thing is, that guy is not bad looking! What on earth is he thinking?

  • Damien Vulaume

    Yes, he might, but in the end he looks pretty inoucuous…. How about one of the world’s leading buffoons, this one is not bad either. The smile says it all…

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lakshmi_Mittal

  • Mike C

    “Her devotion-love-part-of-devotion, ***blah-blah”, ok.***

    Hmmm….not sure I am following you here. Anyways, you asked me a direct question and I gave you a sincerely honest answer.

    You might be later surprised about her level of devotion, though…

    Well…in one sense perhaps one can never be absolutely certain of anything or anyone in this life. My thought is you can’t live daily worried about that stuff…you could literally drive yourself crazy.

  • Damien Vulaume

    you asked me a direct question and I gave you a sincerely honest answer(…)
    My thought is you can’t live daily worried about that stuff…you could literally drive yourself crazy.

    I didn’t mean to be neither snarky nor ironic. And if that was perceived that way by you, sorry… can’t be helped. On the other hand, I don’t think many people will beat me at the “honesty” game, especially in the US… And I always welcome and respect honest answers, especially yours right now. That was your own personal answer / vision on how men and women can keep on going together until the end of life together. Mine is slightly more blurred by “previous passions” and a current one with someone way too young for me, yet with no intention to “drive myself crazy”, although a thin line when you start to go all in with women. Long story as well.

  • Society’s Disposable Son

    I could spin a few yarns about the times the woman paying has been the end. One girl in particular I will never forget. We had quite the day, started off early morning-ish and saw a movie, then went to a car show, then hung out at the beach. When it came to get dinner we picked a cheap burger joint (I had been paying all day and payed for gas..at the time I was daily driving a 1968 Chevy Impala so I had burned through about $80 at that point). When we got there I pulled my wallet out and I only had $10 left. I had about a 40 mile roundtrip drive to get her home so I asked if she could pick up dinner so I could get gas. She had already offered to pay earlier not to mention her dad had given her money and actually said it was for us specifically (her dad thought highly of me at least..). Needless to say after the 20 minute drive home I logged on to my computer and found an email dumping me with a LJBF….

    Dating can really burn a person out.. I don’t know how Zach has the energy to go on so many dates (but I’m highly introverted). I haven’t been on a date since Sept. I just stopped contact with her due to entitlement issues. I’m feeling pretty apathetic about dating right now. The thought of trying to decipher someone’s motives, saying/doing the right things, planning the correct date, finding someone that is at least open minded enough to appreciate non-mainstream interests and being expected to pay the way is less than motivational. Top it all off with having to decipher eye contact/smile/subtle body language to have a chance at a successful approach and I’m getting exhausted just thinking about it all…

  • http://xanga.com johnny doe

    why not do an article about women who flake on a dates with guys who ask them out in a traditional manner? Do some research, see how often women of all ages do it, then come back and tell us why guys become all about casual and not trying to do formal courtship.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Johnny doe

      Do some research, see how often women of all ages do it, then come back and tell us why guys become all about casual and not trying to do formal courtship.

      How about you get me started with some relevant links to data about flaking? I came up empty with a quick search. I have some anecdotal data about flaking, but I’m afraid it applies to both sexes, so that’s not much help.

  • Maven3

    Susan, what are you describing in the best way to be LJBF and frustration.

    Traditional courtship died in this generation – we can discuss that here but the truth is that pretty girls do reward alpha assholes.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Traditional courtship died in this generation – we can discuss that here but the truth is that pretty girls do reward alpha assholes.

      No it didn’t. I see it all around me, the churches have weddings booked every weekend. People are falling in love and committing to one another. The local tot lot is filled with parents and toddlers.

      Someone is getting married, and it’s not alpha assholes. 80% of men and women* are going about their business and living their lives following a traditional courtship model.

      *those with a college education

  • Sai

    I just don’t understand why more people aren’t worried they could pick up a disease from taking things too fast.
    Also, if invited to meet up or hang out with somebody -that’s fine, friends do that. That’s the issue I have, though. If that’s how you always get together, how can you tell whether the other party is looking for friendship or something else?
    But mostly, it’s the potential for diseases that worries me.

  • Zach

    @Susan

    You wanted to know about places where there are more men…

    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/16/us/16women.html?pagewanted=1&_r=0

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Zach

      That photo of two single guys on the dance floor cracked me up. Yikes. That reminds me of the West Coast during the Gold Rush. Mail order brides and all that.

  • Ted D

    Mike C – @ 61 – Nailed it!

    Ladies – THIS is why price discrimination becomes a big deal for a guy. If he is wining and dining you and finds out you didn’t require it from other guys, consider that most men will DQ you on the spot. You get NO free pass on “but he was SOOOooo hot and I was SOooooo horny that it just happened!” because it is BS. What it really means to me is: you DO NOT have strong moral character, and you can’t be expected to follow the rules, even when they are your own.

    Now that being said, it is TOTALLY different if you have decided that casual isn’t for you and you are switching tracks. But then, the burden of proving that you are genuine about that change of heart is on you.

    Susan – “This is a question of character. Both sexes have every right to seek and demand character in a mate. In fact, I wish both sexes exercised this judgment more often.”

    Seeing as you recognize this for what it is: a test of character, can you now at least see why some of us men were upset over your “wedding hookup” scenario? Women need to realize that THIS is a huge issue for many men: congruence of action and words. You can’t claim to be a “monogamy/LTR girl” and have a history of hooking up.(even if it isn’t a huge number) It just IS NOT congruent, and a guy with any sense would see it as a huge red flag.

    Anne – “In other words, men have absolutely no clue what they want either?”

    I think the issue is that men are finding it increasingly difficult to find the “date/court” girl that wasn’t the “meetup/hookup” girl sometime in her past. It isn’t a matter of not knowing what they want, it is a matter of not being able to find it in many cases.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Ted

      Seeing as you recognize this for what it is: a test of character, can you now at least see why some of us men were upset over your “wedding hookup” scenario?

      No, because I don’t expect guys wanting a virgin to select women who hook up at weddings. I think that equilibrium is maintained when both parties have similar sexual histories, to be honest. The woman with N = 3 who makes it 4 at a destination wedding is still going to clear the bar for most guys. That is, if he even asks. I’ve noticed lately that there are more reports of guys not even wanting to know – Elise’s live-in bf has refused to even discuss sexual history.

  • Zach

    @Susan

    It’s hard to avoid cost in NYC. Even the “activity” dates can be expensive. Bowling for instance, is one of my go-tos. It’s fun, you can get drinks during it, girls are generally bad at it so you can tease them, and there’s tons of opportunity for physical contact. However, 3 games of bowling for 2 people, with shoes+a few drinks can run $150.

    Coffee is the only really cheap date out there, and I don’t do it because a) I don’t like coffee and b) some booze usually helps on a first date.

    In terms of how dual-track functions for guys, I find it generally has to do with attractiveness. There’s the “cute enough to sleep with” and the “cute enough to date” categories. Girls in category A maybe get a couple of dates, but after that they get the weekend meetup texts. Girls in category B generally get the full-on dates investment. The threshold for whom a guy will hook up with when he’s out at a bar and tipsy vs. when he’s sober on a weeknight at a restaurant is much lower.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Zach

      However, 3 games of bowling for 2 people, with shoes+a few drinks can run $150.

      Wow, that’s ridiculous. I agree that’s a winner, though. Here is the article I saw about popular dates:

      A romantic stroll down the High Line is the number one date among New Yorkers looking for love, according to a report.

      A walk through Central Park and a trip to the Metropolitan Museum of Art are close contenders. Those locations snagged second and third place respectively in HowAboutWe.com’s list of the best date spots in the city.

      “…They’re all great venues,” Ariana Anthony, a spokesperson for the Brooklyn-based site, told the Daily News in an e-mail. “I can’t say I’m surprised that New Yorkers love beautiful parks, expansive museums, beer-fueled brewery tours, or live music and bowling.”

      Williamsburg favorites Brooklyn Brewery and Brooklyn Bowl rounded out the top five list.

      HowAboutWe.com analyzed over one million date suggestions posted on their site between January 2010 and September 2012 to come up with the interesting tidbits about singles’ love lives, Anthony explained.

      Some of the other date suggestion data looks at what most New Yorkers like to eat, drink and do on their outings.

      The High Line beat out Central Park and the Metropolitan Museum of Art as the top date spot in New York, according to HowAboutWe.com.

      The winners range from the predictable (The most popular food to eat on a date is frozen yogurt) to the unexpected (The most popular date activity is playing board games.)

      HowAboutWe.com’s list, of course, isn’t limited to the Big Apple.

      The Santa Monica Pier tops the best date spots in Los Angeles, where the most popular dating activity is going to the beach and the most popular food to eat with a love interest is pizza.

      In Washington D.C., people often choose to eat cupcakes on dates and like to take companions to the National Mall or a Nationals baseball game.
      Tapas, meanwhile, wins as the most popular date food in Chicago, where singles like to go on dates at Millenium Park and the Art Institute of Chicago.

      Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/high-line-top-date-spot-new-york-city-report-article-1.1235964#ixzz2I9PbUpjY

      Girls in category A maybe get a couple of dates, but after that they get the weekend meetup texts. Girls in category B generally get the full-on dates investment.

      Then Category A girls need to lower their standards. Seriously. If you can get two dates with Zach and then he fizzles it, he’s out of your league. Of course, that is more than OK for the girl who just wants the hookup.

  • Zach

    @Susan

    In my experience, “meet-ups” are not even dates. They’re the equivalent of importing a new girl to the bar you’re at, one you know you have a very good chance of taking home. I’ve never known a guy to use a meet-up for anything except an attempt to take the girl home.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Zach

      I’ve never known a guy to use a meet-up for anything except an attempt to take the girl home.

      Really? So the meetup suggestion itself is a red flag? Obviously, if that’s true, then only guys looking for casual would even attempt it.

  • Zach

    @Maven3

    Not really. If you can’t get girls to hook up with you after dates, it’s because you have no game. Of the girls I’ve slept with since I graduated college, probably it’s probably 25/75 split between dates and bar hookups respectively. However, that’s only because on dates I filter aggressively for gf attributes, and only go on 3+ dates with girls I think have a shot (hence I’ve ditched many girls after date 1 or 2 who I likely could have slept with had I kept going). Also, the women I’ve slept with after dating are easily of a higher caliber in every sense than those I’ve met at bars. Better looking, smarter, better character, etc. And if you count the girls I haven’t slept with but have hooked up with after dates, that gap is even wider.

  • Infantry

    Susan, I wouldn’t ask a girl out on a ‘date’ and then change gears to try to make it a hookup like that guy did. When I was only interested in a hookup I made sure the girl knew what she was getting into (not in precise words, but by heavily implying my interests).

    As for ‘dates’, I keep things casual for the first date because of two reasons. One, as other guys have mentioned here, strong early investment scares women off (and I’ll get to why in a moment). Two, I want to avoid being chumped as I have been in the past. I prefer coffee/drinks first ‘dates’ because I have a lot of interesting stories and I know how to use rich descriptions. Date 3 I’m usually entertaining her at my house where I genuinely enjoy cooking for my guest. I don’t have a hard timeframe on getting intimate.

    Now as for your story of the model and the girl at the gym, it reminded me of a recent interview with Ryan Gosling. He said something along the lines of how he didn’t lift weights at the gym because see the point in big muscles and preferred gymnastics. His story may or may not be bullshit, but he could get away with saying this sort of thing that flies in the face of typical game theory because once you have a certain level of attractiveness (looks, prestige, power), the rules no longer apply to you.

    A girl wants the man she’s already qualified as ‘attractive’ to go all in with a heavy investment of expensive candlelit dinner or the like. His value is worn on his sleeve. Of course girls want the confident models of the world to ask them for dinner.

    The average guy needs to pass the barrage of congruency/fitness testing before the girl finds him attractive and going all out straight away is likely to either make her see him as needy or being a try hard.

    Its safer for everyone to avoid expensive, long or complicated dates until they’ve qualified each other (at least to some baseline). No girl wants to feel guilty or pressured about a date and no man with a modicum of game would want that either.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Infantry

      Date 3 I’m usually entertaining her at my house where I genuinely enjoy cooking for my guest. I don’t have a hard timeframe on getting intimate.

      You won me over right here. When I hear of a guy cooking for a girl, I say he’s probably a keeper. It’s a generous and thoughtful action requiring effort, and I assume you don’t do it if you don’t feel that a girl has potential.

      A girl wants the man she’s already qualified as ‘attractive’ to go all in with a heavy investment of expensive candlelit dinner or the like. His value is worn on his sleeve. Of course girls want the confident models of the world to ask them for dinner.

      The average guy needs to pass the barrage of congruency/fitness testing before the girl finds him attractive and going all out straight away is likely to either make her see him as needy or being a try hard.

      I think you’ve missed something here. Yes, he was attractive, but so is she. That’s implied, as a male model was too intimidated to approach her for four months. Their SMV is about equal, but she is not attracted to every man with high SMV, obviously. So he did have to win her over. Note that he has actually spent very little money thus far. He met her out, where they each bought a round for the group. He took her out for chicken wings, and he took her to his parents’ home. None of that suggested low value in her eyes.

      He was respectful of her time, and open about his level of interest. He has not pushed hard for sex. Yes, she already found him attractive, but his going all in was not the least bit off-putting to her – it didn’t make her less attracted. She is guarded, as I said – eagerness is a red flag, even from a hot guy, and she’s going to see how consistent and reliable he is, how emotionally stable, etc.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Lokland

    Meet
    Phone Number
    Banter
    Ask Date
    etc.

    DING DING DING!! We have a winner!!!

    @ Susan Walsh

    A date doesn’t have to cost anything. As I said in the post, its purpose is to signal an interest in getting to know another person better one on one. But it should require some effort. Asking a woman over to “watch a movie” at midnight is not a date. Asking her to cab over to your side of town when you’ve already had a few is not a date.

    There’s nothing wrong with socializing in groups, hanging out casually, etc. That is not dating. If a man doesn’t escalate alone time for a purpose other than sex, his interest is strictly sexual. Women need to understand that.

    Exactly.

  • Sassy6519

    Now as for your story of the model and the girl at the gym, it reminded me of a recent interview with Ryan Gosling. He said something along the lines of how he didn’t lift weights at the gym because see the point in big muscles and preferred gymnastics. His story may or may not be bullshit, but he could get away with saying this sort of thing that flies in the face of typical game theory because once you have a certain level of attractiveness (looks, prestige, power), the rules no longer apply to you.

    A girl wants the man she’s already qualified as ‘attractive’ to go all in with a heavy investment of expensive candlelit dinner or the like. His value is worn on his sleeve. Of course girls want the confident models of the world to ask them for dinner.

    The average guy needs to pass the barrage of congruency/fitness testing before the girl finds him attractive and going all out straight away is likely to either make her see him as needy or being a try hard.

    Its safer for everyone to avoid expensive, long or complicated dates until they’ve qualified each other (at least to some baseline). No girl wants to feel guilty or pressured about a date and no man with a modicum of game would want that either.

    This is what I was talking about earlier. Dates are not the problem. Being viewed as attractive enough to go on dates with is the problem that many men have.

    I’ve said it once, and I’ll say it again. I’ve seen women falling all over themselves to go on dates with men that they considered attractive. I’ve also seen women stuck in dead end “FWB” relationships with guys they are attracted to, desperately hoping that these guys will ask them out on proper dates instead. The dates are not the problem. I think a lot of men just have problems with presenting themselves in ways that spark attraction with women that they are attracted to.

  • Zach

    @Susan

    Eh, idk about lowering their standards. I’m particularly picky, since I’m not generally looking for casual sex. For instance, I was out on a 2nd date last week with a girl. She’s attractive, certainly attractive enough to hook up with on a regular basis. However, I wasn’t at all feeling it conversation or personality-wise. If I’d really wanted to just hook up with her, I would’ve kept amping up the tension, and then used that to try and get her to come home with me. However, I was so blase about it that I just let the conversation drift more into friend-territory. At the end of the date I told her about my roommate’s bday and that she should come, but it was a “if she comes, great, if not, who cares” thing. That doesn’t mean I’m way out of her league, it just means I wasn’t that into it. Some of my other friends, who really are heavily concentrated on getting the girl into bed, would have kept going with the tension and game-playing the whole date. I just don’t care enough anymore.

    And yes, meetup is a red flag 90% of the time. It’s extremely low-investment and effort, and falls into the “if she comes, great, if not, fine” category. Low-risk, high-reward. If she doesn’t come, no big deal. If she does, you’ve now got a girl there who’s obviously into you. It’s not a way to get to know her better, except physically. Now if the guy’s already been on 2-3 dates with the girl, that’s a different story.

  • http://bastiatblogger.blogspot.com/ Bastiat Blogger

    Re: men paying for dates. My opinion: the man should pay, even if the woman initiates. Yes, you will probably get chumped a few times, so you should aggressively pre-filter and not use a traditional courtship-style date as an early, pre-physicality exploratory meeting (unless you have the discretionary cash to throw at these problems and the ironic detachment to absorb the inevitable losses with good humor).

    These days, the courtship style dating is for a special girl in your life. Given the array of daytime/coffee dates, late-night IMing (often with photo sharing), and meet-ups and hook-ups that are available today, you probably already know that you are compatible on several dimensions (attraction, personality, lifestyle/interests, sexually, etc.) before you enter a more intense trad-date phase.

    Trad dating can also provide its own form of finishing-school-level test: a girl has an opportunity to stop you from endless cash outlays, to suggest less-expensive options, and to establish that she has the home econ/fiduciary responsibility qualities that separate a future wife and budget-conscious domestic partner from an adversarial good-time girl who is hell-bent on resource extraction. You are giving the more mercenary girl enough rope to hang herself.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @BB

      Trad dating can also provide its own form of finishing-school-level test: a girl has an opportunity to stop you from endless cash outlays, to suggest less-expensive options, and to establish that she has the home econ/fiduciary responsibility qualities that separate a future wife and budget-conscious domestic partner from an adversarial good-time girl who is hell-bent on resource extraction.

      No doubt this is why women who welcome that test want more traditional dating! At last, the ones who sat out the casual scene see potential reward. And from what I hear, there are a significant number of guys asking girls out on dates. No doubt a lot of them are the guys who didn’t hook up a lot in college, and now that they are working have a better opportunity to present themselves outside that highly scripted college culture.

  • Zach

    @BB

    “unless you have the discretionary cash to throw at these problems and the ironic detachment to absorb the inevitable losses with good humor”

    I fall into this category.

  • Ted D

    Susan – ” The woman with N = 3 who makes it 4 at a destination wedding is still going to clear the bar for most guys.”

    Perhaps, as long as their primary concern isn’t her level of congruence. For guys that are looking at congruence as a primary character trait? That one incident can be more than enough to cause pause for thought.

    “That is, if he even asks. I’ve noticed lately that there are more reports of guys not even wanting to know – Elise’s live-in bf has refused to even discuss sexual history.”

    I’d wager that there are two reasons for this:
    1. in general young guys care less about N because their own N is increasing easily.
    2. many guys use a don’t ask/don’t tell when it comes to previous sexual history. In some cases they are hiding their own past, and in some cases they simply DO NOT want to know about her past, because they know it will bother them.

    I know that pasts will bother me, but I also know that NOT knowing will bother me more. I’d rather grapple with the issue I can nail down than constantly worry and imagine it to be much worse than it is. But I know plenty of guys that would rather leave it unknown, because its easier to simply brush it under the rug without full knowledge.

    Don’t take men not asking about N to mean they don’t care. And I won’t take it as a sign that all men are too afraid to ask. Truth is, there are probably plenty of both going on. If the guy has high SMV, he probably doesn’t care. If he is lower SMV, it is more likely that he doesn’t want to know because he is afraid of what he will find.

  • Jonny

    Just like we talk about sex without love, we talk about traditional dating without marriage.

    Traditional dating should be about finding someone to court and then marry. Otherwise, why not hookup as that is what’s intended. A guy invests in the relationship with dinner and a movie because he wants to eventually marry the girl. However, since that was never his intention (perhaps a hookup), he decides to send a text instead.

    I do believe in the modern world however. I think more women are less serious about the marriage thing. That’s why I believe in a pre-evaluation of women with a coffee date. If I’m interested in her and think she is serious about a long term relationship that leads to marriage (not merely a live-in), then I’ll do the traditional date.

    Women are hard to figure out. That’s why it is best to treat women’s complaints lightly. She needs to show what she wants and not be a flake as they usually are.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Jonny

      That’s why I believe in a pre-evaluation of women with a coffee date. If I’m interested in her and think she is serious about a long term relationship that leads to marriage (not merely a live-in), then I’ll do the traditional date.

      I think this is a good strategy for both sexes. From a female POV, the mere fact that a guy is interested in getting to know you during daylight hours means he is probably not a player. The weekend daytime date can be awesome, even later on in the relationship.

  • Infantry

    @ Sassy

    The dates are not the problem. I think a lot of men just have problems with presenting themselves in ways that spark attraction with women that they are attracted to.

    That’s very.. diplomatic, but I agree with you.

    The trick is sparking it quickly enough in the small windows that open up for men every day. The majority of men will not be able to spark attraction in such a short space of time, only leaving the options of girls they meet in longer term environments (eg work, school, interest clubs).

    Bumping into a girl in line at the coffeeshop? Unless you project power, are handsome, or have tight game, forget about inviting her for anything that takes more than an hour and costs more than $20. Actually without one of those 3 she won’t talk to you anyway :)

    And we’re back to square one with the rules from SNL;
    Be Attractive, Be Handsome, Don’t be Unattractive.

  • J

    Not to say this is a license to be a douche and block girls who didn’t sleep with you like Nick,

    He did her a favor by blocking her, now she knows where he stands and what he was interested.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      He did her a favor by blocking her, now she knows where he stands and what he was interested.

      Exactly. She was actually grateful for such a clear signal. He didn’t want to waste his time, so he didn’t waste hers. And of course, he may just not have liked her all that much. He did wait a while to get in touch at all. Maybe he figured he’d try for sex the one time. Good for Julie for having none of that.

  • JP

    “I think you’ve missed something here. Yes, he was attractive, but so is she. That’s implied, as a male model was too intimidated to approach her for four months.”

    I was always too intimidated to approach any girl I was interested in from about 7th grade to about law school.

    Because the first catastrophic failure in 7th grade was completely devastating and was pain that I had no interested in repeating again.

    But my intimidation had absolutely nothing to do with my SMV and everything to do with profound prior embarrassment/pain.

  • J

    In talking to the high school and college kids I know, a frequent pattern is that kids hang out in groups and get to know each other and then begin to date. This strikes me as a healthy way to begin as well as being low cost, low commitment for both parties. It makes more sense to me than the notion that a guy meets a girl, spends big money on a fancy dinner and then expects her to put out.

  • Jab

    From way earlier in the thread…

    “Once a woman is out of college, she should be dating with an eye toward finding her future husband.”

    Why on earth wait until you are out of college? Isn’t this statement just advocating the “carousel then provider” model?

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Jab

      “Once a woman is out of college, she should be dating with an eye toward finding her future husband.”

      Why on earth wait until you are out of college? Isn’t this statement just advocating the “carousel then provider” model?

      Because there is no dating in college. At least not in the traditional sense. Even though hookup culture is not embraced by most students, there’s no real alternative script. People do get together as they get to know one another in the college environment, and some hookups to graduate to relationships. But that all happens without dating.

      I have no problem with encouraging women to enter LTRs in college with the kind of men they could see marrying, but the average age of marriage for a college graduate is 28 for women and 30 for men. I think about 20% of marriages occur between college sweethearts.

      As for the carousel to provider model, I don’t really buy that. I think women tend to like the same kinds of guys all along, they don’t sex it up with exciting alpha and then marry boring beta. Why would they? I will agree that it’s not very important if one’s college bf is not very bright or driven – that becomes a larger issue as people mature and think about settling down.

  • Russ in Texas

    I think Johnny#153 got the hole-in-one.

    If you’re looking for a marriage, you don’t date the same way you do if all you’re looking to do is grab a fistful of hair and bite your pillow.

    SMV vs DMV has GOT to be predicated on making sure you showed up at the right market in the first place.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      SMV vs DMV has GOT to be predicated on making sure you showed up at the right market in the first place.

      +1 to this and Jonny’s comment.

  • J

    First of all, you have to guess whether she means it. Even if youre good at picking up the signs, youre going to be wrong sometimes. Also, some girls who “mean it” dont really mean it.

    I can explain this phenomenon. Even the most feminist woman is going to experience a lot of ambivalence and cognitve dissonsnace around this issue. On the one hand, a feminist’s sense of fairness will tell her that she should split the bill. OTOH, splitting the bill goes against every instinct a woman has. Seeing how a man will handle/apportion resources is a primeval fitness test–I won’t use the term shit test here; there’s no shit involved, it’s a survival issue. A woman needs to see that in order to assess a man’s fitness for being part of a couple and provider for a family. I would rather have a poor man share an apple with me than than a multi-million fly me to Paris for dinner because I need to see generosity and unselfishness even more than I need to see wealth. If you insist a woman split the bill, you deprieve her of valuable information and yourself of an opportunity to DHV. It’s better to pick up the bill for coffee than to split the bill for dinner. Save dinner for women you know well, and pay for it. Then watch to see if there is reciprocity of some sort; this is the fitness test she needs to pass.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Lokland, cool. I’ve been getting back to the game. Last year when D3 first came out my husband and I both played the hell out of it. We have multiple max levels. They’ve since then done numerous patches and changes.

    Susan, just some anecdotal stuff. When I was in Chicago, the most common way I knew people got together was still via social circles (school, work, activities, and common interests). I knew very few couples who met through dating or bars. They almost always met via social circle first.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Hope

      Here’s the list of how people meet their spouses, in order of frequency:

      school
      work
      friends and family
      random encounters

      Given that online dating produces 17% of marriages, I’m not sure where that fits in, but obviously belongs on the list.

  • Sassy6519

    @ J

    I can explain this phenomenon. Even the most feminist woman is going to experience a lot of ambivalence and cognitve dissonsnace around this issue. On the one hand, a feminist’s sense of fairness will tell her that she should split the bill. OTOH, splitting the bill goes against every instinct a woman has. Seeing how a man will handle/apportion resources is a primeval fitness test–I won’t use the term shit test here; there’s no shit involved, it’s a survival issue. A woman needs to see that in order to assess a man’s fitness for being part of a couple and provider for a family. I would rather have a poor man share an apple with me than than a multi-million fly me to Paris for dinner because I need to see generosity and unselfishness even more than I need to see wealth. If you insist a woman split the bill, you deprieve her of valuable information and yourself of an opportunity to DHV. It’s better to pick up the bill for coffee than to split the bill for dinner. Save dinner for women you know well, and pay for it. Then watch to see if there is reciprocity of some sort; this is the fitness test she needs to pass.

    That’s actually a really great summary of the “paying” issue.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      That’s actually a really great summary of the “paying” issue.

      Yes, J, that’s the best explanation I’ve ever seen. Clipped for future use!

  • J

    It can be very difficult for women to discern who’s pretending to not care and who really doesn’t give a shit. That’s the problem. If we believe that there are a lot of potential mates out there for any one of us, then I think it’s good strategy for both sexes to invest resources with those who display interest and mutual investment.

    Exactly.

    I think a real problem for young women is parsing out who actually gives a shit. It’s genuinely confusing for them because, although you don’t want a man who only wants sex, you also don’t want a man who doesn’t want any sex. And, since virtually all straight men are going to want sex, wanting sex can not be used as a filter. That’s why a woman needs to see other forms of investment first.

  • J

    Ladies – THIS is why price discrimination becomes a big deal for a guy. If he is wining and dining you and finds out you didn’t require it from other guys, consider that most men will DQ you on the spot. You get NO free pass on “but he was SOOOooo hot and I was SOooooo horny that it just happened!” because it is BS. What it really means to me is: you DO NOT have strong moral character, and you can’t be expected to follow the rules, even when they are your own.

    Yet, I would guess that the majority of young women today have an experience like this that they recall, not as 5 wonderful minutes of alpha, but as a bad and humiliating experience they don’t care to repeat. Should they be DQ’ed for the rest of their lives? Do they have to put out for the next guy who invests the price a dinner as punishment for one mistake that hurt them more than it hurts anyone else?

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Yet, I would guess that the majority of young women today have an experience like this that they recall, not as 5 wonderful minutes of alpha, but as a bad and humiliating experience they don’t care to repeat.

      This is the tricky thing about asking someone whether all the sex they had was in relationships. A woman can cross her fingers, have sex very early, and wind up in relationships. She wasn’t any less slutty, she just happened to get slutty with a guy looking for a gf. Another woman might be determined to have sex only in relationships, and be of the belief that the cad in her bed is going to be coming home with her for winter break to meet the parents.

      This is the problem with the 5 minutes of alpha notion. It only applies to women going for casual sex with alphas. The woman who winds up feeling humiliated and used will hardly look back fondly on that experience or that man.

  • Zach

    @J

    “In talking to the high school and college kids I know, a frequent pattern is that kids hang out in groups and get to know each other and then begin to date. This strikes me as a healthy way to begin as well as being low cost, low commitment for both parties. It makes more sense to me than the notion that a guy meets a girl, spends big money on a fancy dinner and then expects her to put out.”

    Yes, this happens, but is not a workable strategy outside of college, where everyone lives further away from each other and has jobs which occupy a lot of time. Also, at least from what I’ve seen, the circle of friends tends to be small enough that after enough time everyone has dated someone in the circle, and there are no more options left. At least in college, my circle of friends was wildly incestuous (ie there were a lot of girls that 3+ of us had hooked up with). That’s a history that no one wants to deal with.

  • J

    I’ve had a man say to me at the end of a first date that I thought had gone well, “you can suck my dick if you want.”

    The proper response to that, said just before you slam the door in his face, is “And you can suck mine.”

    Once at a party, I was chatted up by a foreign guy who kept dropping a foreign term into our conversation where a person might use “dear” or “honey.” As friend of his looked with a smirk on his face, it began to occur to me that the word more likely meant “bitch” or “whore.” I was angry, but I played along until the guy made his move. Then I smiled sweetly, decline his advance, and explained that there were quite probably women at the party who would be impressed by his ability to speak another language, but I strongly suspected that I was being called a dirty name and that I wasn’t impressed, except by his childishness. Then I told him to “Fuck off.” His buddy LHAO’ed.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @J

      I’ve had a man say to me at the end of a first date that I thought had gone well, “you can suck my dick if you want.”

      The proper response to that, said just before you slam the door in his face, is “And you can suck mine.”

      I think I said something like, “Are you under the impression that you’re offering me a treat? Like raspberry sorbet or something? No thanks.”

  • Jonny

    “On the one hand, a feminist’s sense of fairness will tell her that she should split the bill. OTOH, splitting the bill goes against every instinct a woman has.”

    My instinct is if the woman is aggressive and insists on paying, I’ll let her. I won’t insist on her paying, but there are some men who will. It is likely the relationship will digress and not become romantic if it go dutch too quickly. The man should pay for the initial 3 dates. The woman can pay later especially if the date is expensive or it involves traveling.

    Usually, it is a bad sign for the guy to insist on an expensive date that he can’t afford. It is also a bad sign if the woman orders the lobster without considering whether the guy can afford it. Play it safe, insist on a inexpensive date. It is possible to eat cheaper at a nice establishment, but you should avoid the high end or the low end.

    Anyways, I find it very difficult to eat on dates. You’re nervous and probably not hungry. Why not just get appetizers and dessert? Get some free entertainment. Have short dates. It is best to keep the dates short to build interest as you learn more about them. Or bail early as that is the best alternative.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Anyways, I find it very difficult to eat on dates. You’re nervous and probably not hungry. Why not just get appetizers and dessert?

      That’s a good idea. I know that one very popular date where I live is going for tapas. It’s an adventure to order and share all those little plates. The meal itself is entertainment. In fact, we now see other ethnic cuisines offering the tapas style of menu. Of course, dim sum is fun for brunch.

  • Zach

    Also @J

    The “friend group” dating strategy places very, very tight limits on your universe of potential matches. It’s not an effective strategy to hope that you might meet your next LTR from the same group of 15-20 people you hang out with regularly.

  • Tasmin

    @Susan
    “…it’s not unusual for guys to send out mass texts, or at least texts to more than one girl at once.”

    Really? I’ve got to update my strategy.
    Even so, that says something about the women who are in these guys phones and responding to their texts, doesn’t it? These mass texts mean nothing if not for the fact that there are women willing to receive and respond to them AND take action based upon such impersonal correspondence.

    And this ignores the question: was he a DBag because he sent the same text to two women or was he a DBag long before that, when he was her BF – or that attractive guy at the bar? Why does she even keep his number? I’m sure there are all kinds of really good reasons, but plate-spinning, orbiting, FWB, FBuddies, “friends” as exes, whatever, only happens when both people participate; they both have to allow it to happen. Being a victim of a Dbag is much more convenient than examining one’s own choices.

    I’m not picking on Charlotte specifically, but I think it is worth noting that in her story that while tall and handsome – which is 2/3 of the way there – he was not dominant, confident, or socially savvy. E.g. he had a wingman negotiate for him, he got “scared” away by her man-friend (she should read the posts on hanging out in groups with guys), and he was sober – unfunny and/or reserved. She read that straight away and essentially DQ’d him – or at least put him well down the ladder in terms of actual attraction.

    Had he navigated the situation better, blew off her male orbiters (and yes, I don’t care if you and he are “just friends”, I’m going to assume that he has either already banged you or wants to bang you), took control, and appeared more comfortable in that role, her story may have still ended with a declined invitation to his place, but it would have been a much different story.

    And FWIW, the tone of her story does not paint her in such an appealing light herself. “This poor kid is banking on his looks to bypass dating.” Really, “poor kid”? Wash out the entitlement and the judgmental stuff and the story would read much better. I appreciate that a 22 y/o isn’t into ONS, but that doesn’t make her better than him – or better than the hordes of other young women who engage in ONS, just as I am not better than all those 30-something versions of her who might have been “banking on their looks” to extract all kinds of attention, opportunity, male approaches, effort, resources, etc. through their 20′s – or the men who they had ONS with in the past or the men who have ONS on a regular basis, right?

    We keep flipping the script. So now guys like me who don’t press you into the coat closet for a makeout then ask you for a nightcap at my place with a wry smile are the good ones? Please. His only failing was that he wasn’t attractive enough to her to pull off that behavior.

    Its that kind of disdain, that attitude that young women acquire toward their male peers (e.g. they are not living up to my expectations) that makes it that much more difficult to bridge the adversarial gender gaps in the SMP. Not picking on her, but her tone says a lot to me. Maybe he didn’t get pissy because she didn’t go home with him, perhaps it was because she allowed him to play out the script, continue to pursue, all while she had no intention of taking it further – be it a “real date” or a ONS (unless she dates men she isn’t attracted to beyond physical.) Maybe he just wanted a nightcap at his place to have more one-on-one time outside of this group of man-friends and bouncing-bar scene yet when the moment came, he sensed her recoil – her disgust, which may have been about the offer itself, but I’m guessing it had just as much to do with her disgust over his beta-ish behavior. Either way the offer was coming from a man she was not actually attracted to and that is an important factor, both in terms of her perspective and his. Guys can be intuitive too.

    In the SMP attractive guys can take the ONS tack because there are plenty of women just like her that rationalize the ONS, either as fun-having or as a gateway into something more. Maybe he is actually a relationship guy but the market that comes to him typically requires him to press for the close and rewards him accordingly – or he might not even have to with all of the empowered women out there. In any case, lets say she declines the invite, but IS actually attracted to him and takes his number. They trade texts during the week, maybe meet for a cuppa, maybe not, then the group collides the next weekend and she is at his place in the end. Much better right? Not a ONS; the beginning of something else. Or maybe it is after three cuppa “dates”, even better, honor fully intact.

    Or what if he used to ONS but now he is all about finding a GF so he presses for a makeout but doesn’t invite her home. What a gentlemen, right? Its about perspective. She can’t really say this situation is about the lack of dating skill, because the situation is not in any way set up to be about dating. She was in a hookup scripted situation and she was playing a role. Sure a role she may not want, but then which player in that play is the one who doesn’t “get it”?

    So we have a woman that finds a guy boring, unattractive, and awkward, but she hangs out with him because she enjoys the conversation(?) and attention(?) and “you never know” yet knows full well that the eye exchange and maneuvering leading up to that indicates that he is interested in her and thus must also know (because she is a dating expert) that her continued presence, conversing, and following his lead are de facto IOI’s and in that kind of setting/situation certainly don’t preclude an ending that involves some alone time, yet she continues down the rabbit hole. You want to know what a “real” date is like for a lot of men, it is like this.

    The story is interesting not because he asked her home – how dare he! but because it shows how women’s actions are so often incongruent with their thoughts/feelings, true level of attraction, e.g. a boorish, awkward, even shy or WEIRD guy is continually engaged because it is better than what? Because he is physically attractive? All with little regard for what message(s) her continued investment might be sending to him, all in a framework that is highly conducive to the hookup culture: groups texting, meeting up, physical attention, angling for alone time, wingman brokering, etc.

    Summing it up as “young men don’t know how to date” is just one more version of “where are all the good men?”. If young men choose not to “date”, it because young women do not require it. When those guys actually want a woman who requires it, they will progress accordingly. Until women are willing to “next” the most attractive men in the pursuit of what they really want in terms of “dating” or “sex/intimacy” it is all lip service and cake-eating.

    Dating involves two people, yet the perspective is always the same: something women want that men are not delivering on cue. First show me real evidence that young women have any idea how to be dated, and then show me the many ways in which they manifest and communicate the desire to BE DATED within the SMP and then show me how young men – who are motivated in all kinds of ways to appeal to women’s desires, are failing to do deliver.

    Its not about guys failing to date, its about the men women find most attractive not needing to adhere to the dating protocols in order to get sex from other attractive women. If those guys are really attracted to you and you establish the protocols which are consistent in voice and action, there will be dates. It is still about the low price of sex. If the bar for sex is low, what room is there for “real” dating?

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Tasmin

      These mass texts mean nothing if not for the fact that there are women willing to receive and respond to them AND take action based upon such impersonal correspondence.

      Well, they don’t know. It’s like a BCC – each woman believes the text was sent only to them. But yes, I’m sure there are plenty of women who wouldn’t care – there are plenty of women responding to booty calls, and it’s reasonable to assume those are not “special and exclusive” invitations.

      Being a victim of a Dbag is much more convenient than examining one’s own choices.

      I do fault her for running over there – she did not respect herself. I believe he was a good bf for a couple of years, but he broke up with her, citing “confusion” about an ex who kept reaching out to him. This ex was in another state, so Kristen was truly flabbergasted when a third party came on the scene. My guess is that he took the opportunity to be a douche, perhaps that was his worst self, IDK. I agree that if she’s honest, there were signs or previous incidents.

      If young men choose not to “date”, it because young women do not require it. When those guys actually want a woman who requires it, they will progress accordingly. Until women are willing to “next” the most attractive men in the pursuit of what they really want in terms of “dating” or “sex/intimacy” it is all lip service and cake-eating.

      I totally agree. The young women I know have had significant success by doing just that. Once you clear away the dbags, there are some interesting and physically attractive men who are interested in dating.

      Its not about guys failing to date, its about the men women find most attractive not needing to adhere to the dating protocols in order to get sex from other attractive women. If those guys are really attracted to you and you establish the protocols which are consistent in voice and action, there will be dates. It is still about the low price of sex. If the bar for sex is low, what room is there for “real” dating?

      But people are dating, that’s the point. There are two groups, and they probably fit quite neatly into STR/LTR, and unrestricted/restricted. The problem arises when an unrestricted type comes on strong with a restricted type. Yes, a woman who is very sexually selective is going to be offended when a guy drags her into the wet wool and suggests they go home and fuck. It’s really not reasonable to ask someone to go have sex if they haven’t been sending out the IOIs that make that a likely occurrence. That goes for both sexes, though for obvious reasons a guy is unlikely to be offended, even if he’s not DTF.

  • OffTheCuff

    J: “Yet, I would guess that the majority of young women today have an experience like this that they recall, not as 5 wonderful minutes of alpha, but as a bad and humiliating experience they don’t care to repeat. Should they be DQ’ed for the rest of their lives?”

    Not in this specific case, mistakes happen.

    However if it happens more than a couple of times, it’s not really a mistake, but a preference… tears and words to the contrary.

    If it’s still happening, or she reserves the right to in the future… it definitely isn’t.

    The key is 1) looking back on it as a bad thing and 2) stopping. You know, that whole repentance thing. Looking back and thinking it as “the one that got away” doesn’t count, neither does “this made what I am today”, nor “I don’t regret anything I’ve done”, or even “I used to a be bad girl back then ;) (TM)”.

    Funny, because when I see it mentioned, it’s rarely in the context of regret. Perhaps that’s because if there’s true regret, they shut up about it… but from our perspective it sure looks like them having their cake and eating it too.

    This is one of those things that men silently observe. Naughty past without a hint of contrition? Ladder bump on aisle 2.

    J: “Do they have to put out for the next guy who invests the price a dinner as punishment for one mistake that hurt them more than it hurts anyone else?”

    This is a ridiculous statement.

  • J

    My instinct is if the woman is aggressive and insists on paying,

    If I were a guy, I’d preface accepting her paying with, “Since you insist..’ and immediately make some sort of reciprocal offer like, “OK, I’ll get the movie ticket.”

    It is likely the relationship will digress and not become romantic if it go dutch too quickly.

    Predictably so.

    Usually, it is a bad sign for the guy to insist on an expensive date that he can’t afford.

    Yes, it shows both inseurity and poor judgement. The only thing that could make it worse is having to ask her for money.

    It is also a bad sign if the woman orders the lobster without considering whether the guy can afford it.

    A lady, dare I use an outmoded concept, orders of the middle of the menu.

    (Funny story: DH and I went to one of the best place in town to celebrate an anniversary. I reflexively ordered a mid-range meal. DH laughed his ass off and reminded me that we’d been together for 25 years and that he makes a nice living. Then he order me a lobster.)

    Play it safe, insist on a inexpensive date. It is possible to eat cheaper at a nice establishment, but you should avoid the high end or the low end.

    Good advice for women is “You be the one who insists on an inexpensive date.” It impresses men in the same way that pushing for a OS impresses women.

  • J

    Trad dating can also provide its own form of finishing-school-level test: a girl has an opportunity to stop you from endless cash outlays, to suggest less-expensive options, and to establish that she has the home econ/fiduciary responsibility qualities that separate a future wife and budget-conscious domestic partner from an adversarial good-time girl who is hell-bent on resource extraction. You are giving the more mercenary girl enough rope to hang herself.

    THIS is great advice for young men.

  • Zach

    @Tasmin

    Never heard of mass texts before??? You are behind the curve…I sent them out every so often, and I know one friend who got so drunk he texted 25 girls (some of whom he hadn’t seen or talked to in over a year) at once.

  • J

    The “friend group” dating strategy places very, very tight limits on your universe of potential matches. It’s not an effective strategy to hope that you might meet your next LTR from the same group of 15-20 people you hang out with regularly.

    I’ve seen some studies that say the best way to met a future spouse is through a friend of a friend. Malcolm Gladstone said something similar about the value of having friends is that friends give you a broad circle of acquinatances and a big set of social connections. It’s not so much that you’ll strike gold among the same 15-20 people, but that you’ll meet their pre-vetted friends.

    I met DH because he was an acquintance of my BFF’s coworker.

  • Jerry

    This discussion reminds me of a conversation I recently had with a young friend. He’s in his early 20s. I’m in my late 40s. We both work out at the Y together.

    One day he mentioned that he was very frustrated because he had taken this girl out on a date (dinner, I think) the previous weekend, and he had not gotten any sex out of the deal. Apparently, this was new to him, and a shock. So he decided that before committing to taking anyone out on a date, was to openly ask her “are you down for sex ?” after the date. I actually watched him text this to a few women. One said yes, another said no. When he got the “no” response, he immediately texted back “date cancelled” and that was that. “I’m not going to spend $35 on dinner unless I’m going to get sex afterwards!” he told me.

    I am still incredulous. Just shows the generation gap, I suppose. While part of me admires the shear blunt directness of this young generation, another part of me feels sad that this young man is not learning any manners. He was incredulous when I explained to him that back in my day, we just didn’t expect sex.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Jerry

      So he decided that before committing to taking anyone out on a date, was to openly ask her “are you down for sex ?” after the date. I actually watched him text this to a few women. One said yes, another said no. When he got the “no” response, he immediately texted back “date cancelled” and that was that. “I’m not going to spend $35 on dinner unless I’m going to get sex afterwards!” he told me.

      WHAT A DICK! An honest dick, but a dick nonetheless. He did her a favor.

      Talk about entitlement. Dinner is the price of sex. Wow. He’s going to make some woman very miserable someday.

  • http://www.rosehope.com Hope

    Susan, I think online dating can widen one’s social circle if two people get to know each other for a while. One of the more memorable cases I know was this pretty, tall and long blond-haired girl who met her husband from playing an online shooter. I think it probably falls somewhere between random encounter, hobby group and social circle.

    Zach, I know many cases of guys who were doing the online dating thing with lackluster results, then got introduced to a distant friend of a friend, a sister of an acquaintance, or the daughter of an old neighbor. One guy got married to the sister of a guy who went to his church. Another guy is with the girl whose family lived next to his. A “social circle” has many concentric circles. The outer circles hold the most potential.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      A “social circle” has many concentric circles. The outer circles hold the most potential.

      Exactly. It’s the same concept as networking in your career.

  • Tasmin

    @Zach
    Of course I’ve heard of them and seen them in action. But that is not the same as being common. IME that tactic is employed nearly exclusively by cads/players or at least men who are certainly not looking to go out on a “real” date. It is tending the fields for all that has been seeded. And your examples are in-line. It is not normal behavior and the participation texting as a primary (or singular) mode of communication puts one in the hookup side of the equation. Of course there exceptions and tending the fields could in fact be looking for an eventual GF, but I’d put all that in the same category as the “crossing the fingers” prior to sex first ask questions later approach to mate-finding.

  • Damien Vulaume

    SMV vs DMV has GOT to be predicated on making sure you showed up at the right market in the first place.

    Absolutely. And I suspect some of the biggest red pill chewers, those who, on both sides, are still tasting the bitter taste of it, are the ones who failed to understand that (among other things) early on…

    Regarding the post, one of the overlooked aspects of the “broken” modern dating is, in my opinion, here:

    Referring to the use of technology, especially texting, to facilitate dating, Williams says:

    In the context of dating, it removes much of the need for charm; it’s more like dropping a line in the water and hoping for a nibble.

    A plague just as common in Europe, and which disrupts more often than not the normally healthier process of getting yourself together and phone/talking to someone before meeting. I guess everybody here could tell countles anecdotes about misunderstandings based on phone text messages alone. This immediate virtual way of communicating has become one of the more worrying aspects about “flawed” human interaction, and of course it makes it worse when it comes to men/women. And I’m not even talking about the FB disease…

    @Susan
    I gave a read to your American guy/Melvil Post. Very interesting, although maybe a bit “intellectualized” at times. Also the fact that those fraternities are extremely important and play a defining role in some cultures, where as they are virtually non existent in others is also something open for a looonng and fascinating debate.
    I will need more time than I have now to try to answer it in a detailed and honest way soon.
    As an aside, you may not know it, but this Poupaud is a BIG TIME narcissist :-)

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Damien

      As an aside, you may not know it, but this Poupaud is a BIG TIME narcissist

      Bah, that is a disappointment. I have only seen him in that one film, and he played a real sweetheart. I can’t say I’m surprised though – very few celebs escape that fate.

  • J

    @Sassy

    Thanks for the compliment.

    @SW

    Thanks for the compliment. You are welcome to use the quote.

    Funny comeback to the guy who offered you his dick.

    What a wonderful world this would be if they really made of sorbet and testicles were made of shortbread. Of course, the rivers would flow hot cocoa in such a world and lobsters would grow on trees next to drawn butter bushes. I, of course, would pee champagne.

    Of course, dim sum is fun for brunch.

    Boston has a great Chinatown.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @J

      What a wonderful world this would be if they really made of sorbet and testicles were made of shortbread. Of course, the rivers would flow hot cocoa in such a world and lobsters would grow on trees next to drawn butter bushes. I, of course, would pee champagne.

      I love it, this is sort of a post Sex Rev update to the Big Rock Candy Mountain.

  • nokster

    this whole dating thing is too confusing for me. the casual daters are getting so good as masquerading the nothing they are offering as courtship/dating.

    especially as the guys get older , into their 30s and consider themselves “good guys” a booty call straight up aint gonna cut it anymore. in your 20s it may seem okay to be an actual cow to women but 30 somethings and older want to appear more refined although they are every bit as uncommitted as they were in their teens. they genuinely believe that they are nice guys but who are just not able to be emotionally available but still want to treat women with respect and niceness(also as they try date older women we are less likely to respond to booty texts) cos they are oh so nice. i have now learned that it is good if these men instead just be outright disrescpectful so everybody knows what is up.

    i spent three months with a nice guy who called me , asked me out , took me on proper dates, introduced me to friends and when we had a conversation two months into things he said he wanted to be upfront was not looking to rush into anything serious and given that i had only known him for two months and believe that taking it slow is the best route i eagerly told him to take that worried look off his face cos neither was i , it was just two months in! i had no ridiculous notion that we were gonna get married. we continued on in slow, adult-like dates and meeting up and i introduced him to my friends and then all of a sudden he disappeared on me for a week or so.

    turns out what he meant by “not rushing into anything serious” was that this was a casual hook up and that he could sleep with other women ( he hadn’t yet ) and i was being unreasonable for being upset at his disappearance cos he had already been upfront with me. i couldn’t even be angry at him cos he honestly had treated me really nice the whole time til then and i didn’t know i had been wasting months of my life .

    ahhh, i don’t know what to do anymore? was i a complete sucker for interpreting “let’s not rush” to mean we were going somewhere only slowly and to interpret being asked out on dates, and included in his life as actual interest? it seems a bit premature and aggressive and a wee bit desperate to explicitly demand from someone you just met what their future intentions are . i would be really overwhelmed if i started seeing someone and they asked me if i was planning to become their gf at some point, the point of dating for a couple of months is to decide that. so to tell someone you’ GIVE UP. please give me the booty call at midnight text guys any day of the week they are more honest and you know exactly what you are getting into, so sick of “nice guy” commitment-phobes confusing the shit out of me.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @nokster

      ahhh, i don’t know what to do anymore? was i a complete sucker for interpreting “let’s not rush” to mean we were going somewhere only slowly and to interpret being asked out on dates, and included in his life as actual interest? it seems a bit premature and aggressive and a wee bit desperate to explicitly demand from someone you just met what their future intentions are.

      Yes, there are a lot of people looking for the technical loopholes – Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell is the go-to strategy for players who are running “nice guy game.” You’re right, it is awkward and aggressive to parse the language and require an oath so you know exactly what page you’re on with someone. I think the only thing you can do is say, “What exactly do you mean by that? I want to make sure I understand what you’re saying. Can you be more specific?” It’s about the most gracious way of dragging the truth out of someone I can think of, and you need to do it so that you don’t keep wasting time with asshats.

  • J

    @Ana

    I love this comment at your linked page:

    “You know, generally I have a hard time feeling bad for rich people, but good lord — this poor bastard. I wouldn’t trade places with him for anything, and that says a lot because my cable and internet are supposed to be cut off by the end of the day for not paying the bill. Then what will I do for entertainment? SPOILER: hunt and kill bugs around the house. And I still wouldn’t want to be that guy. Just marinate on that for a second.”

    If anything says, “Please use and take advantage of me,” it’s that shirt. Poor, dumb bastard.

  • Mike C

    Yet, I would guess that the majority of young women today have an experience like this that they recall, not as 5 wonderful minutes of alpha, but as a bad and humiliating experience they don’t care to repeat. ***Should they be DQ’ed for the rest of their lives? Do they have to put out for the next guy who invests the price a dinner as punishment for one mistake that hurt them more than it hurts anyone else?****

    Well…I think the issue is there is a distinction to be made between someone who made a one-time “mistake” versus a sustained, repeated pattern of behavior over some meaningful duration of time.

  • Mike C

    Tasmin,

    Spot on comment. You nailed a number of salient points there. FWIW, I thought some of the same things reading Charlotte’s comment describing the unfolding of events, but didn’t want to go there since I’m now in the “bad guy” camp so any criticism or alternative view would be discounted. You quite effectively nail the minefield that a guy has to walk through having no idea where the mines are at. The fact is guys are the actors while the women are the judgers evaluating his performance. Since none of us are mind readers, you really have no idea with any single woman which “script” is the right one to perform, and if you get it wrong, you will be judged harshly.

    Re the mass texting…even back in 2005/2006 I can’t say that I can recall guys using this….even more playerish/cad types. I guess it kind of shows how quickly things have progressed to the point where for some guys women are completely fungible and commoditized.

  • Tasmin

    On that note, part of the challenge of the dating vs hooking up nonsense is about how we choose to communicate. Communication is part of how we invest and minimizing that should say something about what we should expect in return. Both men and women are firing texts around and juggling their “where U at” options, exes, randoms, and hopefuls constantly. Most of them are addicted to their phones, texting, FBing, just checking in, checking in, etc. and may not be sending out the same text at the same time to two different people, but are doing things that are closer to that than they would like to admit.

    At any given bar/restaurant/club a great many are pinging into the depths with their whisky-sour sonar, all attempting to find the optimal end to their evening, whatever that might be. Its a game that you can easily see being played out as the dim-blue faces blink on and off like iridescent jellies all searching for a better version of what they are doing or who they are with at the moment.

    This is all a game that requires the choice to decide to play and a fairly precise set of scripted behaviors to keep it going. Few people take the risk of stepping out of it. More people need to. Sure, two (or more) of the same texts at once is low, but when the bar is already so low, there is little to keep such behaviors from becoming feasibly normal – and THAT is the problem: communication is being rendered to remove most of the humanity from it, yet it is readily consumed, even coveted. It can be everywhere and yet nowhere. Is it a wonder that FOMO and FB/texting have risen in tandem? Fine if you want to play that way, but don’t expect that way to produce more real dates than hookup scenarios.

    Just the other night I was out in a group and two of the four women were playing the ‘look at what he said’ – ‘what should I say’ game on their phones. Both were single and in the company of two single men (I was one). Both with at least one man on the other end and with whom they were “not dating”, you know “just hanging out.” Both were attempting to coordinate an intersect point later on. They were quite attractive. But that behavior is a red flag to me. It is evidence of a low bar. Now if those women eventually complain about the lack of “real” men approaching with “real” dates, I’d have to laugh. Its all just so silly.

    Women that demand courtship, largely receive it, even within an SMP that has greatly undermined the motivation and increased the risk/cost for the men to uphold it. And about the men who refuse, the ones that ask you if you are down for sex before they will take you to dinner, is any woman really missing out by nexting guys like that? A guy that is asking you to kiss the ring, to demonstrate that your intimacy is equivalent to the price of a steak.

    The same goes for the text-spamming and the like. If women want to screen better for that shit, they need to set the bar. If you never want to be on the receiving end of a mass text, know the sender before you play text games.

    And make it a practice to pick up the phone and have a real conversation once in a while, particularly to make plans. Men who are really interested in “dating” you will take your call and have a conversation. Doesn’t have to be mind-bending hour-long discussion, but that is the point: how long does it really take? If you aren’t willing to spend the time to talk – not worth the investment, then you are getting what you pay for on the other end.

    I always call. If we can’t make time for a conversation – especially one that involves coordinating how we might spend time together, there is no future for “us”. The texting comes later, develops over time. I want us to develop “our” language, “our” words, our way to exchange thoughts before I then distill them down. If you treat communication like chumming the water, you have no right to complain about the sharks.

    “Where U at?” is how pimps track their inventory. Respond accordingly ladies. Just don’t act surprised when those guys say “bitch better have my money”. Because they eventually will; it all comes from the same place.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Tasmin

      At any given bar/restaurant/club a great many are pinging into the depths with their whisky-sour sonar, all attempting to find the optimal end to their evening, whatever that might be. Its a game that you can easily see being played out as the dim-blue faces blink on and off like iridescent jellies all searching for a better version of what they are doing or who they are with at the moment.

      It’s paragraphs like this that make me want to urge you to keep writing, just keep talking. It’s a thing of wit and beauty.

      Women that demand courtship, largely receive it, even within an SMP that has greatly undermined the motivation and increased the risk/cost for the men to uphold it.

      That is my present observation, and I’m frankly overwhelmed with relief. For four years I’ve been telling college women, “It will be better after college. You’ll see.” In college one cannot demand courtship, but in the real world, courtship happens, and not only do men cooperate, I think many are delighted to comply if the request is from someone of high relationship value.

      I always call. If we can’t make time for a conversation – especially one that involves coordinating how we might spend time together, there is no future for “us”. The texting comes later, develops over time. I want us to develop “our” language, “our” words, our way to exchange thoughts before I then distill them down. If you treat communication like chumming the water, you have no right to complain about the sharks.

      This is a serious problem, and not just for one type of young person. Texting is ubiquitous to the point that young people tell me they are not comfortable having phone conversations. I’ve seen couples fight over text, make up over text, and endlessly misunderstand and misinterpret texts.

      Texting is bad, bad, bad. It should be limited to messages like, “I’m downstairs” or “At the restaurant, the wait is half an hour.”

  • Damien Vulaume

    If anything says, “Please use and take advantage of me,” it’s that shirt. Poor, dumb bastard.

    Haha, yes, well put.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “The difference is, you were filtering girlfriend behavior IN. Nick was filtering slut behavior IN and girlfriend behavior OUT.”

    Much as I know this sucks to hear.
    Feature not bug.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Lokland

      Much as I know this sucks to hear.
      Feature not bug.

      Agree 100%.

  • J

    However if it happens more than a couple of times, it’s not really a mistake, but a preference… tears and words to the contrary.

    If it’s still happening, or she reserves the right to in the future… it definitely isn’t.

    The key is 1) looking back on it as a bad thing and 2) stopping. You know, that whole repentance thing.

    Yes, of course. My point to Ted was that if a man is looking for a woman who, in this crazy SMP, has never made a mistake, he isn’t going to find her–unless of course he’s a Hasidic Jew. I’d include the Amish as well except that those hot Amish babes get around during Rumspringa.

  • Lokland

    Also, she didn’t tell him to fuck off. She willingly went to the bar and then said no.

    Act like slut by accepting booty call then pull back and be a cocktease.

    The correct girlfriend response would have been saying no to the bar period.
    The correct slut response would have been to sleep with him.
    The ‘I’m a PITA’ response was what she did.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Lokland

      Act like slut by accepting booty call then pull back and be a cocktease.

      The correct girlfriend response would have been saying no to the bar period.

      She had no idea he was trying to booty call her. I didn’t either – he was in her neighborhood, and said, “Hey I’m down the street, come join me for a drink.” But I take your point – he made almost no effort to see her. Saying he wanted to date her doesn’t count, when the date never happened.

      Women need to look at what men do, not what they say.

  • Damien Vulaume

    Is it a wonder that FOMO and FB/texting have risen in tandem? Fine if you want to play that way, but don’t expect that way to produce more real dates than hookup scenarios.

    +1

  • J

    Typo: In “It impresses men in the same way that pushing for a OS impresses women.” OS =ONS

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “She is still on guard – having never actually, you know, seen a unicorn in real life.”

    Question,
    Do you think the response would have been the same if he had not been a model?

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Lokland

      Do you think the response would have been the same if he had not been a model?

      I think his being a model is actually a strike against him. She is more guarded as a result. What are the chances this guy can be monogamous? He seems eager to prove he is the exception, but as I said, she is concerned that he is too good to be true. His introducing her to his family was a smart move – it was clear they have good values, including humility, so that was reassuring.

  • J

    This is the problem with the 5 minutes of alpha notion. It only applies to women going for casual sex with alphas. The woman who winds up feeling humiliated and used will hardly look back fondly on that experience or that man.

    This line of discussion reminds me of that poor college freshman girl (Amanda?) who wrote in about having naively blown a cad in the hopes it would lead to a relationship. She felt like hell about, knew that she had made a mistake, and half of the guys jumped all over as though she needed to be told that she screwed up. SHe KNEW she screwed up; she wrote in because she didnt know what to do about it.

    It’s like the joke about the difference between a slut and a whore. One has sex with everyone; the other with everyone but you. It’s resentment.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “A woman can cross her fingers, have sex very early, and wind up in relationships. She wasn’t any less slutty, she just happened to get slutty with a guy looking for a gf.”

    I’d hate to point out the obvious but theres also a significant degree of skill involved. Some cultures teach that very well.

    Also, I’ve been thinking about it. N is less of a big deal than congruency. I can think of a woman with an N of 10 maintaining the same pattern and not feel viscerally repulsed. I can think of a woman with N=2 with one ONS, one dating LTR and feel my entire body flood with angered adrenaline (assuming I am the LTR).

    Interesting.

  • Lokland

    @J

    “I’ve seen some studies that say the best way to met a future spouse is through a friend of a friend.”

    This would describe how 95% of the people I know in relationships met.
    Including me and my wife.

    The friend group meetup is not limited to 15-20 ppl like someone suggested though.
    Typically a friend group can meet up with another friend group and spend the night partying or something. That would more accurately describe the situation in which I met my wife.

    My best buddy (uber alpha, N>20) met his fiancé back in undergrad in year 2!!!! and he waited 6 months to have sex with her cause he wanted it to be special!!??!!!

    Theres lots of types but I suspect principle of most interest works better for guys who are already hot and preselected.

  • J

    Theres lots of types but I suspect principle of most interest works better for guys who are already hot and preselected.

    That’s the beauty of a friend group. You may or not find someone who is hot, but friends don’t generally let cads and sluts date friends.

    It strikes me that this is a horrible strategy for people who just want to get laid. Screwing and quicly breaking up can alienate the whole group.

  • Lokland

    @J

    “It strikes me that this is a horrible strategy for people who just want to get laid. Screwing and quicly breaking up can alienate the whole group.”

    Interesting. Me and my wife have friend groups going back to early childhood.
    Not shitting where you eat isn’t really something difficult to comprehend.

  • Charlotte

    Tasmin,
    I really appreciate your observations. I can be very judgemental of men, and I have to say, maybe I did sort of have more interest in him than it came across in that story. He did not bore me to tears at the first bar, in fact, I thought we may have some things in common, so that and the fact that he was handsome were why I decided to talk to him more. I did not think I was leading him on, because perhaps it was an uncomfortable situation for him as well – maybe he doesn’t typically meet girls on nights out (although I seriously doubt it). I would have given him a second chance if he asked me to meet up for coffee, had he gotten my number instead of asking for me to go home with him.

    I think the reason it came across as so condescending is that I felt hurt that someone did not see me as valuable, or dateable. They saw me as someone they would propose a ONS to. Which hurt. So perhaps I seemed to be very harsh in my judgement when telling this story because looking back at the situation, I felt rejected as a serious candidate.

    Again, I don’t know his true intentions. I don’t even know the guy. Maybe he was wonderful and was only shy/awkward because he was not used to the situation. But considering he had the confidence to ask me to stay over, that is a red flag. Plus, his friend “Jeff”, the one my friend was talking to, even said to her, “I know he’s a good looking guy but his personality isn’t all that great”. I’m not sure if that was kind of a jealousy thing, or whatever, but regardless, that stands out to me as well.

    I also want to touch on another subject brought up in this thread, in how you meet girls and how you value them. I work in a completely female-dominated industry (cosmetics) with long hours. I workout in the morning before work at an exercise class that is again, female-dominated. I did go to a gym in my neighborhood for a while but let’s just say that most of the men that live near me are gay, it is downtown Manhattan. I have cousins that are close in age, and I go out with them quite a bit to parties and meet their friends, but they are the first to say that they would never want me dating them because they are “slobs, jerks, drunks…etc.”. So really the only way for me to meet new guys is out at bars. I myself am not a big drinker, I typically will drink two glasses of wine over the course of a night, but I’m happy to go out with a group or a friend or two. I, without fail, do meet new men every weekend, but most of the time, we don’t end up having enough attraction to talk for a very long time, or if they do end up getting my number, nothing really comes of it. Per the suggestion of this website, I joined OKCupid and I have gotten messages, I’ve responded to I’d say about 10% of them – the guys I thought seemed interesting and attractive. I went out with one and it was beyond failure – the guy was so cocky and obviously on the website only to meet women to sleep with. There have been a few others that want to go out sometime, but I’m not really even comfortable with the whole thing.

    Basically, my question is, in my situation, WHERE AM I GOING TO MEET MEN that value me?! Per this thread, clearly not in bars. I know that January is a terrible time for meeting new people in NYC anyways because people seem to be stuck indoors, but I would love to enjoy someone’s company to explore the city with. I have made several new friends from work (all girls) and they seem to have similar issues meeting quality gentlemen, as do most of my other girlfriends. Please help.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      I think the reason it came across as so condescending is that I felt hurt that someone did not see me as valuable, or dateable. They saw me as someone they would propose a ONS to. Which hurt. So perhaps I seemed to be very harsh in my judgement when telling this story because looking back at the situation, I felt rejected as a serious candidate.

      There’s a valuable insight into the way women think, right there. Early sexual escalation means you’re not good enough for anything more than a ONS.

  • JP

    “Basically, my question is, in my situation, WHERE AM I GOING TO MEET MEN that value me?! Per this thread, clearly not in bars. I know that January is a terrible time for meeting new people in NYC anyways because people seem to be stuck indoors, but I would love to enjoy someone’s company to explore the city with. I have made several new friends from work (all girls) and they seem to have similar issues meeting quality gentlemen, as do most of my other girlfriends. Please help.”

    I suspect that part of your problem is that you are in NYC.

    Try figuring out where overworked fourth year BigLaw associates hang out.

    They’re probably burnt out enough that they don’t have the energy to be cocky anymore.

  • Tasmin

    The sad part is that the SMP tends to dovetail people into this:
    “please give me the booty call at midnight text guys any day of the week they are more honest and you know exactly what you are getting into, so sick of “nice guy” commitment-phobes confusing the shit out of me.”

    We’ve seen it before, where it is all so “hard” that the bar is willingly lowered. All I want is “straightforward” and “honest” so I can make a clean and less risky exchange. This is part of why “dating” can so easily become “DTF?”.

    @Nokster
    It is your responsibility to establish your desires and expectations and communicate them accordingly. You have to actively engage in shaping the relationship. If you find that you are “interpreting” what he meant you are not making clear statements of your own intentions nor clarifying his. I understand why: we don’t want to seem pressuring or needy. But which is worse: establishing your ground at the risk of being too much of something or finding out 3 months in that you were not enough of something else to merit the investment you desired?

    I know it can be a hurtful, time-consuming mess out there but I hardly think that trading all that you desire for the convenience of clarity and simplicity is going to make you much happier. The lesson is not that you need to invest less and expect less, it is that you need to invest more – if only in your own ability to establish and communicate what you want/need – and then calibrate to the man and situation in question. Us men have a whole load of that stuff to carry too. You are not alone in this effort.

    Thats why I get on my soapbox about communication. Everyone wants it immediate, easy, and at minimal cost/risk. They want it to be always on – available, but also deniable, arms-length so they can continue to rationalize a variety of outcomes, be it after the fact or even preemptively. But then they also want to be able to flip the switch and have the depth and quality that only face-to-face conversations with eye contact are capable of delivering. Even then that is no guaranty, but then if you need guarantees you are probably better off in the transactional situations that you describe. There is no safe harbor, but there is a tight ship with a solid hull, good navigating, knowing your draft, and being able to read the wind. There is no guaranty that you will never encounter pirates, but we can do a lot by steering clear of known pirate waters, setting a proper course, and taking our best tack. Eyes open. Man, I want to go sailing. Its so cold here.

  • J

    Interesting. Me and my wife have friend groups going back to early childhood.
    Not shitting where you eat isn’t really something difficult to comprehend

    LOL. Sadly, you’d be surprised. DH and I have both have friendships that date back over 40 years. A lot of people find that unusual.

  • Ted D

    J – “Should they be DQ’ed for the rest of their lives? Do they have to put out for the next guy who invests the price a dinner as punishment for one mistake that hurt them more than it hurts anyone else?”

    OTC answered this well, but no that isn’t my intent. But let me ask you, would the woman hooking up at a wedding see it as a mistake later? If not, then she isn’t congruent if she claims to be a “relationship” girl.

    And I’m with Lokland – I will no longer say that N is the factor, it is as I’ve always said HOW she got that N. If her N is high and she claims to be a “relationship” girl, then she better be bringing something to prove she is serious. My wife’s N is higher than mine, and her behavior during her late teens and early 20′s does not appear to be congruent with a woman claiming to be serious about relationships/monogamy. However, from the age of 22 on, her history tells a story of a woman that went out of her way to remain faithful to a man that did not reciprocate it. If I based my judgment of her fitness as a wife solely on her N she would have lost. Her evidence for that change of heart she claimed to have supported it though. Had I met her fresh off her earlier escapades, I probably would not have believed her when she claimed to be serious and committed to me and marriage.

    And FWIW she doesn’t openly regret her past behavior although she fully admits it was bad for her and very irresponsible. I still see that as a congruence issue, because to me learning something you did was wrong should automatically cause you to regret it. But, there are many reasons a person may not do so, and many have to do with admitting to yourself just how terribly you viewed and treated yourself in the past. It is one thing to say “I made a mistake” and an entirely different thing to internalize the fact that the mistake affected more than yourself.

    It isn’t necessarily that women make mistakes that is the problem. It’s that they often won’t admit it and certainly don’t seem to show any remorse and/or regret that tends to rile me up. And our society by and large allows them to completely sidestep that important and crucial part of learning from your mistakes. To be fair, young men are getting that same pass in different ways.

  • http://7thseriesgongshow.blogspot.com Mr. Nervous Toes

    Perhaps Zach and Charlotte should get together.

    ::runs away stealthily::

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Perhaps Zach and Charlotte should get together.

      ::runs away stealthily::

      I laughed out loud, but this is not a bad suggestion.

  • JP

    “She felt like hell about, knew that she had made a mistake, and half of the guys jumped all over as though she needed to be told that she screwed up. SHe KNEW she screwed up; she wrote in because she didnt know what to do about it.”

    I think that your reaction in these situations depends on what you think about sex, in general.

    Back when I was 18-ish, I would completely rip into friends, in person, because they engaged in pre-marital sex. In stable relationships.

    At the time, I still thought that it was a profoundly evil act that needed some sort of punishment. Kind of like my attitude toward swearing.

    In hindsight, it’s not hard for me to see why I was not very popular at parties.

  • Damien Vulaume

    I’d hate to point out the obvious but theres also a significant degree of skill involved. Some cultures teach that very well.

    Yesss. Why was it that, while on the one hand i was just a “normal” guy in France in my spring chicken years, I yet turned out to be nearly a wolf in the sheep yard in the US?
    Regarding French girls, they make mistakes as anywhere else, and deceived just as often, but on the whole they are SO MUCH more discerning and feminine. I was struck by Peenies’ link to that article about hooking up in New York… Jesus Christ. Any guy acting like that in France or much anywhere else in western Europe would be written off from the start, with no chance of coming near any kind of female interest before undergoing some kind of self examination and therapy.
    What I’m getting at is something bigger than just the fact that the western (especially US) cacophonic MDH is out of tune, i/e, cultural values, what are our societies most driven by, its priorities, etc.

  • JP

    “LOL. Sadly, you’d be surprised. DH and I have both have friendships that date back over 40 years. A lot of people find that unusual.”

    The only friends I really have are people who I met before going to college.

    The people I met in college were basically insane.

    Life is funny.

  • http://7thseriesgongshow.blogspot.com Mr. Nervous Toes

    Charlotte,

    Susan has already written advice on where to look for men:

    http://www.hookingupsmart.com/2011/02/14/hookinguprealities/57-ways-to-meet-the-love-of-your-life/

    You come across as if you have the expectation of sitting around doing nothing and have gorgeous suitors approach and woo you. You live in New York City. The fact that you can’t think of anything fun to do where you might meet men, doesn’t speak highly.

  • Jimmy Hendricks

    I think there’s a big thing most girls don’t realize… Most guys don’t really enjoy pre-commitment dating, they just see it as something they have to do to get what they want.

    Even Zach, a guy who’s very successful and seems to enjoy dating more than most guys, says he’s burnt out and tired of it.

    Now that more guys are realizing that its effectiveness is questionable at best, and realizing that they don’t actually have to do it to get what they want… the result is pretty predictable.

  • nokster

    @tasmin

    i get you about communication i agree it’s important but i guess my trouble is that in the early phases of dating you are basically deciding IF you want to enter into a relationship or not so in a way you can’t honestly communicate that you want one when you aren’t yet sure yourself.

    all you can do is communicate what you expect at a certain stage in your dating NOT relationship cos at two months it really isn’t that yet which is what i did. however, as in any communication just because you communicate doesn’t mean you are understood. as far as he was concerned he had communicated that he was in a casual relationship but what i understood was something different and because it didn’t feel like a casual relationship ( i was going on dates, he was investing time, i was meeting friends…) i was not confused by his communication because for me a casual relationship is text/hang out/ . and when i communicated to him that i expected care/respect/trust he was able to honestly communicate that he was giving me those things i never felt not cared for , not respected or not trusted. what i could not EXPECT from him at that stage was commitment because we had only known each other two months but he was deceitful ( or maybe not) because he knew he would never be able to give that not a case of he tried and found he couldn’t. conversely , HE also could not expect commitment from ME at that stage as we were doing the leg work of getting to know each other, ( emotionally not that i was dating/sleeping with other people) because i was still getting to know him but i was open to it and i thought he was because he was doing all the “dating” things. i don’t think he purposefully meant to deceive but communication won’t work if two people have fundamentally different ideas about what the terms in the communication mean and i can’t read anyone’s mind to know what they understand booty call /relationship/commitment to mean. we could have “communicated” for months and years and we still would have had this misunderstanding. i know now to get super grade school anal about it and ask ? what do you mean by every single word you just used in that sentence…

    p.s. the whole “bring on the booty call texters” was more exasperation induced hyperbole than anything real. i am looking for a relationship, i haven’t actually given up though i feel like it sometimes.

  • BroHamlet

    @Lokland, Susan and J
    Lokland said: “Also, I’ve been thinking about it. N is less of a big deal than congruency. I can think of a woman with an N of 10 maintaining the same pattern and not feel viscerally repulsed. I can think of a woman with N=2 with one ONS, one dating LTR and feel my entire body flood with angered adrenaline (assuming I am the LTR).”

    I agree to a point. Although I’m very non-judgmental; let’s face it, if you date attractive people, theyre going to have some history to them unless theyre super conservative. It’s a girl’s understanding or lack thereof, of her own intentions that makes me either able to forgive some indiscretions and invest, or not. If you are going to require me to follow a dating script, I’d better not get the sense that you are doing it just to feel better about yourself or out of some need to feel like you’re “doing it right” so you can tell other people “we’re dating”. This “congruency” is exactly the same thing that girls require of us as guys- if you are trying to pull a girl just to feel like you’re worth something, girls can sense it, and you’re out of luck. And no, I’m not talking about desperation, I’m talking about the subtle things she picks up on that tell her that you’re doing this “just because”.

    Guys have exactly that same filter for women re: price discrimination. Rest assured that many of us know that you have raised and lowered the price at some point. I can’t speak for all of the guys here, but I am more concerned with WHY. If your price factors are based on superficial rules that have changed a lot in the past or that I sense you will change in the future, I’ll walk. But if you have a level of emotional honesty with yourself about your past and your script doesn’t end with the justification “just because”, I’m ok with that. And if you try to fake it, just like a guy who “fakes it before he makes it, you are building a house of cards.

    My $0.02

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @BroHamlet

      Rest assured that many of us know that you have raised and lowered the price at some point.

      I appreciate your view of the price discrimination issue – which requires context.

      Personally, I want to encourage women to change their behavior if it is not congruent with their own natures. (The ever present incongruent hookup, I think you called it.) We know that many women in college feel pressure to hook up and engage in physical intimacy before emotional intimacy is present. At some point they say “no more.” I’ve known quite a few young women at this point who have done that, often after being burned by a cad or two. Others play the game for longer – very typical in the Greek scene.

      Those women have every right to change the “price” of sex. Mary Magdalene changed the price of sex. A guy can ask, and I believe a woman should be honest, but I reject any cries of “Foul! No fair!” It is fair for a woman to withhold sex for any reason she chooses (before marriage). If a guy does not want to wait – if he prefers the freshman girl who banged jocks, or prefers that she has no past, he can say so. But she has not done anything wrong or inappropriate.

  • http://7thseriesgongshow.blogspot.com Mr. Nervous Toes

    nokster:

    I think what probably happened is you got ‘soft-dumped’ He enjoyed the sex, but you didn’t strike him as a long-term prospect for girlfriend or more. Hence he tried to turn you into a friend with benefits. If you think about it that light — he dumped you — you should find it easier to understand why he acted the way he did.

    BTW, in my opinion the combination of non-existent capitalization and run-on sentences makes it hard to take you seriously. That giant paragraph in @219 has only five sentences in it. Please make an effort to write clearly — it will enhance the dialogue that goes on here.

  • Tasmin

    Charlotte:
    I totally get it, which is why I was trying not to be too personal about your story. But yeah, I did pick up on the tone. Ironically, I’m typically one of the last guys to defend a dude looking for a ONS – if indeed that was the case.

    I’d love to give you great advice. But realistically I’m old fashioned (thats what ok cupid told me) and am on the other side of the fence wondering the exact same thing. I used to work in a male-dominated field and now either work from home (alone) or in a shared office with six other (mostly married) guys. In general I’d say continue to explore ways to do the things you enjoy and continue to be open to new things to do. Get out of your comfort zone, neighborhood, etc. and make it a priority to get out of the house and do something (preferably different) every week.

    When you do go out to a bar, go with a GF you enjoy and not a group with other men, pick a place you like – one that is conducive to conversation, and start working on your own IOI and approaching.

    Look into the art community, local music scene, theater/comedy, and other more nerdy things like historical, architectural, environmental groups/clubs/events. Focus on the free stuff. Take advantage of the fact that people flock to that stinky little island to make something happen and seek out those places where those things get started. A friend of mine recommended Meetup, though I don’t find it to be very useful I still use it for ideas and potential activities.

    When in doubt volunteer. I know time is limited, but giving just a little to others will make you more attractive, put you in the company of people that for at least an hour a week are thinking of other people, and will get you out of your own head.
    Things I do to branch out:
    I teach at-risk kids art as part of an after-school program. I’ve met social workers, teachers, non-profit executives, and professional women who volunteer.
    I attend 2x month lectures and discussions on scientific matters at a brewpub (free). I’ve met professors, PhD candidates, writers, and beer lovers and discussed everything from cloning, to time travel, to global warming.
    I go to random art openings (and do my best to converse with the artist)
    I do a weekly running club (4 miles and a pint of ale). Very chill.
    I volunteer at a consultancy for non-profits (a lot of women)
    I am a member of a local writers guild.
    I work a few hours a week at a yoga studio.
    I help out at a friends restaurant and attend her cooking classes
    I volunteer at film, beer, cultural, and other community events to get behind the scenes (and in for free). I find that to be much better than being on the consumer end.

    Essentially, change your perspective around to that of producing, taking action, doing and less so about consuming, receiving, reacting, etc. Hopefully that puts you on intersect with like minds in new places and avoids those scenarios that are counterproductive to your goals.

    As for online. I can’t say much. For most men (especially under 6’0 and $50k) its worse than the bars. Take it with a grain. But also don’t be afraid to get proactive. Send a few messages out, don’t just respond. And filter like hell. I know its hard when there are categories like: “short-term dating”. I have no idea what that even means. That is where we are in the SMP: even the labels designed to sort it all out make no sense.

    My other advice is get out of NY and head west. Dudes galore out here. I’m sure things will sort out for you fairly quickly. You’re way ahead of most of your peers.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      I am a member of a local writers guild.

      Excellent. That answers a question I’ve had for a very long time.

  • Jimmy Hendricks

    @J

    My point to Ted was that if a man is looking for a woman who, in this crazy SMP, has never made a mistake, he isn’t going to find her–unless of course he’s a Hasidic Jew.

    Talk about setting the bar low.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “She had no idea he was trying to booty call her. I didn’t either – he was in her neighborhood, and said”

    Most of my point.
    I’m saying that I specifically have (actually have done exactly this) to test a women’s girlfriend potential.
    Some have succeeded, most failed.

    I specifically, actually, consciously tested whether or not a woman would show up to a bar at 11pm-1am to see if they were girlfriend material.

    She gave the wrong answer.

    Note: Skimmed the article so not sure whether he did or not but it does not sound like it.

  • OffTheCuff

    Char: “I think the reason it came across as so condescending is that I felt hurt that someone did not see me as valuable, or dateable. They saw me as someone they would propose a ONS to. ”

    You’re assuming that the proposal for intimacy always means you’re not dateable, which is incorrect. You can always date after, and it’s the sharp guys who realize this and use it as a tactic.

    Technically, men almost never proposes a ONS – because it only becomes one after the fact. He’d have to say “let’s have sex and never see each other again”. Physical intimacy on the first date doesn’t mean ONS because there might be more.

    I’m beginning to think “concealed commitment” is a man’s most powerful mating tactic, and is as powerful as women’s concealed attraction/ovulation.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @OTC

      You’re assuming that the proposal for intimacy always means you’re not dateable, which is incorrect. You can always date after, and it’s the sharp guys who realize this and use it as a tactic.

      That runs counter to almost every guy’s input at HUS. ONS = slut ladder. No exceptions.

      There are exceptions in the real world, but I think they mostly happen between promiscuous types.

  • Damien Vulaume

    Women need to look at what men do, not what they say.

    Right on. And the other way around though…. that is why I never understood the mistakes both men and women do, like doing the “irreparable” too early on: Getting married without knowing/having spent enough time together, having children, etc.

  • Russ in Texas

    I’m not keeping up very well right now, but regarding going Dutch — never. I consider it an immediate DLV; it’s rude to the waiter and demonstrates “mine vs yours” mindset that made perfect sense to the Boomer generation but I don’t see as very workable in mine.

    Much better is simply picking up the check, and if there’s any balk, then “hey, you can pick up next time.” (insert filters, outcomes, DH-and-DL-Vees, etcetera, here)

  • Sara

    Single women need to stop putting out. No sex without monogamy. In the meantime, married women need to shag their husbands senseless. If women would only do this, the PUA culture would grind to a halt and women would be seen as relationship worthy again. Unfortunately, people are more interested in instant gratification than doing what is right in the long term.

  • JP

    ” And the other way around though…. that is why I never understood the mistakes both men and women do, like doing the “irreparable” too early on: Getting married without knowing/having spent enough time together, having children, etc.”

    Because they are Necessary to achieve Basic Success In Life.

    (1) High School – check
    (2) College – check
    (3) Job – check
    (4) Marriage – check
    (5) Children – check

    After you get to that point, you are completely exhausted, having endured a marathon. Best to get the necessary things out of the way early.

    Kind of like general education requirements in college. Gotta get them done and move on.

    At that point, you *finally* have a chance to sit back and think “what do I want to do with my life?”

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “Do you think the response would have been the same if he had not been a model?

    I think his being a model is actually a strike against him. She is more guarded as a result. What are the chances this guy can be monogamous? He seems eager to prove he is the exception, but as I said, she is concerned that he is too good to be true. His introducing her to his family was a smart move – it was clear they have good values, including humility, so that was reassuring.”

    This doesn’t answer my question. Not directly at least which won’t satisfy my curiosity.

    Do you believe an average guy pulling off the same behaviours would receive the same result/effect?

    I’ll provide my view and explanation after I get an answer to this question.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Lokland

      Do you believe an average guy pulling off the same behaviours would receive the same result/effect?

      Sorry, I was not clear on what you were asking.

      I think it’s largely about relative SMV. A male 5 behaving this way toward a female 4 or 5 would receive the same result. A male 9 in this case is demonstrating high value to a female 9.

      However, there is a difference, and this goes back to the 7 Reasons Women Don’t like Eager Guys post. The female 5 and the female 9 both know that the male 9 has options. His early commitment does not have the vibe of desperation. The female 5 may be attracted to the male 5 but be less certain of his options. So more attractive men will always have preselection (assumed) working in their favor.

      But there are still reasons that women may be suspicious of even the hottest men if they are eager:

      1. Emotional promiscuity
      2. Fickle and impulsive? Will he want someone new in 3 months?
      3. Buyer’s remorse? Will he still like me when he knows me well?

      FTR, studies have shown that 5s find 5s attractive – true for both sexes. The parties are aware of society’s standards of beauty, of course, but they focus on other qualities more, and the sexual attraction is real. Dan Ariely has studied this in some depth.

  • Tasmin

    @Susan
    “But people are dating, that’s the point. There are two groups, and they probably fit quite neatly into STR/LTR, and unrestricted/restricted. The problem arises when an unrestricted type comes on strong with a restricted type. Yes, a woman who is very sexually selective is going to be offended when a guy drags her into the wet wool and suggests they go home and fuck. It’s really not reasonable to ask someone to go have sex if they haven’t been sending out the IOIs that make that a likely occurrence.”

    Yes. But apparently those two groups converge (our of ease, convenience or minimizing risk) and diverge at different points and it does become muddled.

    My point is that it is our responsibility to establish communication patterns that support our beliefs and goals, select venues and choose to enter into situations that are conducive to upholding those goals, and to hold our bar up, even if that means “losing” an opportunity to get some approximation of our goal (attention, dinner) or minimizing our perceived options in order to invest in ways that are representative of those things we seek.

    When people continue to engage in communication styles, approaches, and behaviors that are utilized almost exclusively by one side of the fence – but expect different results, it is hardly the fault of the person on the other end of the deal asking for a ONS.

    We’re on the same page. I guess I don’t see the value in collecting – or being collected as a # in a phone for anything beyond hooking up. If I’ve had your number for 3 months and only traded the occasional texts or “meet up?” with you, then by participating you are telling me you are ok with that and being ok with “that” is much closer to ONS than taking you to the botanic gardens for the afternoon. I am interested/attracted to you, but the only reason I haven’t asked you on a proper date is because I am waiting for the perfect time. (?)

    Sure, maybe I’m afraid of DLV by actually asking you on a date (or so the young guys say). Ok fine, then I’m placing a higher value on my image or ego than on the outcome I supposedly wish to achieve – with you. And you are supporting that by not indicating that you want/expect me to ask you on a proper date and thus minimizing your own risk of rejection in favor of a path of approximations and proxies.

    People want to play both sides of this as it suits them, but also want to control for the outcome of their choosing. Thats bullshit IMO. Its not as simple as unrestricted vs restricted because people are co-opting scripts across party lines in order to gain an advantage or protect their downside. Thats fine, but again, don’t whine that the outcome doesn’t fit that image in your head. We are party to those outcomes. Own it.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Tasmin

      My point is that it is our responsibility to establish communication patterns that support our beliefs and goals, select venues and choose to enter into situations that are conducive to upholding those goals, and to hold our bar up, even if that means “losing” an opportunity to get some approximation of our goal (attention, dinner) or minimizing our perceived options in order to invest in ways that are representative of those things we seek.

      Well said, and wise. I would point out that you are twice the age and I’m nearly three times the age of some of these younguns stumbling around in the dark wondering why things are not working out.

      Also, they’ve had poor preparation in communicating with the opposite sex, for the many reasons we’ve discussed here.

      We are party to those outcomes. Own it.

      Yes. One thing I do with the women close to me is a sort of post-mortem when things go south with guys. I’ll ask what they learned – some are introspective and have already figured it out. If they don’t know, I’ll ask what they might do differently next time. Without fail, they wind up identifying and taking responsibility for their own actions. Often that can be something like naivete or denial when it came to red flags. OK, that’s your mulligan. Now you know it’s not supposed to feel like that. If you are feeling disrespected or wondering if he likes you, cut your losses and move on.

      We all get to make mistakes, but women who willingly make the same ones again and again (like the chick who went home with the bouncer) certainly have no right to blame others. They hide by criticizing the male.

  • Damien Vulaume

    Because they are Necessary to achieve Basic Success In Life.

    (1) High School – check
    (2) College – check
    (3) Job – check
    (4) Marriage – check
    (5) Children – check

    Yes JP, I saw that pattern there, and it was one of the reasons why I never seriously thought about getting some kind of life there in the first place, although there were many positive things on the other hand…
    In other words, the core values of the “American system” made me run away as fast as I could.

  • JP

    “In other words, the core values of the “American system” made me run away as fast as I could. ”

    What specific core values didn’t you like?

    I’m actually curious.

  • JP

    “A male 5 behaving this way toward a female 4 or 5 would receive the same result. A male 9 in this case is demonstrating high value to a female 9.”

    I’m still trying to figure out how this SMV system even works in practice.

    For example, if you are a male 5 and the the level at which you find a woman attractive enough is a female 8, it’s not like you talk yourself into dating a female 5 and *enjoy* the experience.

    You can’t really change who you are attracted to, in that sense.

    Which is why this entire SMV thingy is confusing to me.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      You can’t really change who you are attracted to, in that sense.

      You may find this post interesting:

      Attraction IS a Choice

  • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

    @Sara

    I rescued your comment from the spam filter. I have no idea why it was there, so I whitelisted you. You should have no further trouble.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    Just two point out
    this “I think it’s largely about relative SMV. A male 5 behaving this way toward a female 4 or 5 would receive the same result.”
    does not gel with
    this “The female 5 and the female 9 both know that the male 9 has options. His early commitment does not have the vibe of desperation. ”

    It cannot be both.
    Either the male 5 introduces female 5 to his family on date 3 and it works or it does not.

    Since the male 9 requires comfort traits it makes sense to hit hard and early with beta traits. The male 5 cannot afford comfort traits (ie. traditional dating) in the same form as the male 9 because as you said it screams desperation, even to the female 5.

    So no the net effect is not relative when SMV is adjusted for.

    Which is too bad because it means that in college only pretty girls get to date (and don’t because their peers won’t) whilst lower ranks have to deal with an initial period of fuzzy, unsureness because they won’t.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Lokland

      Either the male 5 introduces female 5 to his family on date 3 and it works or it does not.

      Sometimes it does work. This is called assortative mating, and it is still the norm.

      Since the male 9 requires comfort traits it makes sense to hit hard and early with beta traits.

      I don’t agree. Aren’t the “top men” the alphas? This model is not alpha – he’s a big mush. His body is alpha, his face is alpha, but he wants a “good girl who likes me for me.”

      The male 5 cannot afford comfort traits (ie. traditional dating) in the same form as the male 9 because as you said it screams desperation, even to the female 5.

      This is where Ariely’s “sour grapes” strategy kicks in. The female 5 says her male 5 is terrific, I’m so lucky! She knows that no male model is going to introduce himself at the gym. She’s pricing herself fairly on the market. Most people actually figure out how to do this.

      Obviously, beautiful people have it easier in mating in many ways. Not in all ways – note the fear said model has of being objectified by women. They also get better jobs, get paid more, etc. Life isn’t fair.

  • Cooper

    I feel kinda distant from this topic, cause I find the concept of responding to late impromptu meet-ups incomprehensible.

    That being said, setting up traditional dates is like shooting yourself the foot.

  • JP

    ” Often that can be something like naivete or denial when it came to red flags. OK, that’s your mulligan. Now you know it’s not supposed to feel like that. If you are feeling disrespected or wondering if he likes you, cut your losses and move on.”

    However, you have to know what you are feeling and somehow be able to identify it and then somehow connect it to what is going on inter-personally.

    You first have to somehow recognize that what you are experiencing is “feeling disrespected” instead of simply knowing that you feel some sort of intense emotional pain.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @JP

      You first have to somehow recognize that what you are experiencing is “feeling disrespected” instead of simply knowing that you feel some sort of intense emotional pain.

      True. That’s why it often helps to talk these things through. Hopefully people learn via experience and become more introspective as they mature.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @JP
    The ones you just mentioned right now, along with the money-driven mentality of most people. And also the fact that, when it came to men/women encounter, which is the most important teresterial experience in life, I found that most women there where just not enough sincerely emotional to spend the rest of my life…. Although, I came close to an each to marrying one of them, a delightful flower from Washington (Seattle), but I met her in the Netherlands..

  • Bully

    Insisting that “who asks pays” is flagrantly stacking the deck in the context of a first date, because frankly, how often do men get asked out unless they’re at the absolute top? This is one meme that needs to die, and fast if we’re going to live in an age of equality.

    Regardless of how you feel about him this is one of the things that Tom Leykis gets right; he says no more than $40 on a date. Returns diminish fast for each extra dollar spent on a date.. though I prefer to keep it to a percentage, more like 1-1.5% of my weekly income, to keep it feeling to me like an insignificant amount.

  • Lokland

    We need an edit feature.
    Even I’m starting to think I’m illiterate.

  • Damien Vulaume

    “I came close to an each” should read “close to an inch” of course.

  • JP

    “You can’t really change who you are attracted to, in that sense.

    You may find this post interesting:

    Attraction IS a Choice”

    I’ve tried to force myself to be attracted to certain people.

    That never worked because, well, I wasn’t attracted to them.

  • JP

    “The female 5 says her male 5 is terrific, I’m so lucky! She knows that no male model is going to introduce himself at the gym. She’s pricing herself fairly on the market. Most people actually figure out how to do this.”

    OK.

    So you know that you have an SMV = 5. This means that you know that you are average.

    You’re not going to think “I’m so lucky! My mate is terrific.”

    You’re going to think, “my mate is in the same unpleasant situation that I am (meaning the 5-ness) so we are pretty much stuck with someone like each other. Since we don’t get to be with someone at the level we would actually want, we have to endure each other, even though we fine each other somewhat distasteful.”

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Since we don’t get to be with someone at the level we would actually want, we have to endure each other, even though we fine each other somewhat distasteful.”

      That is not what Ariely has found. He found that at speed dating events, 5s were sexually attracted to other 5s and eager to meet. They are aware of their own SMV and are quite happy to pair off with someone of similar SMV.

      Think about it. If you were right, no one under an 8 would fall in love. And that just isn’t the way the world works. Ugly people fall for each other, have sex and reproduce. In fact, some of the ugliest people in America are hugely successful reproductively speaking.

  • JP

    Fine = find.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “This is where Ariely’s “sour grapes” strategy kicks in.”

    Who and what?

    “The female 5 says her male 5 is terrific, I’m so lucky! She knows that no male model is going to introduce himself at the gym. She’s pricing herself fairly on the market. Most people actually figure out how to do this.”

    Yes, I agree. Then why would comfort traits from the male 5 be deemed desperate (your words not mine)?

    From the male 9 their necessary because of his perceived options and subsequent need to remove the fear of exercising those options.

    The male 5 has no need to do so. So either he does or does not.

    My question is are you suggesting that there would be no difference in frequency of success rates between comfort traits put forward by a M9 to F9 as compared to a M5 to a F5?

    “Sometimes it does work. This is called assortative mating, and it is still the norm.”

    See above. On an individual scale thats cool but one must examine the macro view of the SMP to determine the most effective method of mate acquirement available at ones given SMV.

    Note: Assortative meeting, agree? Why do you think I’m arguing otherwise?

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      My question is are you suggesting that there would be no difference in frequency of success rates between comfort traits put forward by a M9 to F9 as compared to a M5 to a F5?

      I honestly don’t know. The female preference for dominance in men is on a spectrum, and I have not seen any evidence that very good looking women want more dominance than other women. There are some very, very good looking betas. Tom Brady and Brad Pitt come to mind, but there are many. (Note: I am using the word beta here to describe what’s in a man’s head, his natural tendency toward comfort traits in a relationship.)

      The ugly guy with super high T is going to need to reassure his natural SMV counterpart that his prominent brow and lantern jaw don’t mean he’ll be a bad father.

      If you’re talking about supplication, which is not a comfort trait, I think that’s equally unattractive to women across all SMVs.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      “This is where Ariely’s “sour grapes” strategy kicks in.”

      Who and what?

      The post I linked above explains this.

  • Damien Vulaume

    Attraction IS a Choice”

    It never is when it comes to physical attraction. It is when it comes to intellectual and, more importantly when it comes to women, emotional attraction, and that is heaven on earth when all of the above are fullfiled. The hardest, most puzzling part of it is how to make it last till the end though…
    I already feel like some kind of hamster like those manosphere creatures :-)

  • JP

    “It never is when it comes to physical attraction.”

    That’s what I’m saying.

    If you are turned off by a girl, having a relationship with the girl, even if you actually like her personalty, like her as a person, and are emotionally attached to her, it still won’t change the fact that you are turned off by her.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      If you are turned off by a girl, having a relationship with the girl, even if you actually like her personalty, like her as a person, and are emotionally attached to her, it still won’t change the fact that you are turned off by her.

      And yet men claim that they can be attracted to up to 80% of women. Which means that for any woman 3 or higher, there’s a good chance some guys will be interested.

  • http://davidvs.net/ davidvs

    What about dating simply to practice dating?

    One thing I regret is during college only dating young women I thought might have the potential to be a great spouse. After marriage having “date nights” is very important: to help plan for the future early on, talk about strategies, and to get away from the house after having children. Even though I have been happily married for 16 years and have gained a lot of practice making dates romantic and helpful, I would be a few years ahead in developing that skill if I had dated during college just to practice dating.

    Would young women in college or graduated a few years respond well to “Let’s just be friends. But you’re worth talking to, even alone. Let’s spend some evenings together now and then just to practice dating?”

  • JP

    “Think about it. If you were right, no one under an 8 would fall in love. And that just isn’t the way the world works. Ugly people fall for each other, have sex and reproduce. In fact, some of the ugliest people in America are hugely successful reproductively speaking.”

    Is it that they don’t think they themselves are ugly and unattractive?

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @JP

      Is it that they don’t think they themselves are ugly and unattractive?

      I think most people get a realistic sense of their SMV during adolescence. In fact, people who later see a huge rise in their SMV may have difficulty believing it because they identify so strongly with the way they were perceived by the opposite sex in middle school.

      However, when a person falls for you, you can feel like the most beautiful person in the world. Someone has really seen you, and they loved what they saw. That’s incredibly validating. I think there are many couples who have this experience. Sidney knows he’s never been a chick magnet. Martha never had a boyfriend. When they meet in the Bookkeeping department, they fall hard for each other.

      I think we can develop blind spots for the people we love.

  • Damien Vulaume

    If you are turned off by a girl, having a relationship with the girl, even if you actually like her personalty, like her as a person, and are emotionally attached to her, it still won’t change the fact that you are turned off by her.

    Of course. That is a given, but another chapter related to the possible men/women friendship. And that’s called “friend zoning” as you say in America….

  • JP

    “And yet men claim that they can be attracted to up to 80% of women. Which means that for any woman 3 or higher, there’s a good chance some guys will be interested.”

    In my case, my old college roommate was certainly interested in her. He is definitely capable of being attracted to 80% of the women.

    At one point, he even woke up next to a homeless guy in his bed and knew that they had been up to something.

    It’s just personally a bizarre concept to me.

    Since I couldn’t approach anyone I was actually interested in, I was stuck for years dating only people to whom I was not attracted and it never worked.

  • JP

    “Of course. That is a given, but another chapter related to the possible men/women friendship. And that’s called “friend zoning” as you say in America….”

    No, it was a girlfriend-boyfriend, meet the parents relationship.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “nd yet men claim that they can be attracted to up to 80% of women. Which means that for any woman 3 or higher, there’s a good chance some guys will be interested.”

    Not to douse your fire but 80% passing boner test is not equivalent to 80% passing girlfriend test.

    In regards to that I suspect (and hope) that men are as selective wrt commitment as women wrt sex.

    ———

    When I say beta I am referring to comfort (not supplication) traits.
    SMV is variable.

    I thought that was obvious by my use of beta male SMV9 and beta male SMV5?

    I’m just curious about whether or not comfort traits are equally efficacious at varying SMVs (which would indicate the women at different SMVs either do or do not maintain the same distribution wrt preferred dominance).

    Also, are comfort traits exhibited by a beta male MSV9 (bM9) the same as those exhibited by a bM5?

    I can understand why bM9 requires increased comfort traits because he is deemed more high risk. the bM5 is not and thus not required so does providing them anyway produce any effect?

    Interesting questions which I realize you lack the answer to I was merely curious on your opinion.

    Side note.
    Would you say me and my wife are of equal SMV?

    Side, side note.
    I ask for a couple reasons one of which is variance across perceived SMVs, the other is that the discussion came up today amongst friends and the results were largely universal across multiple couples.

    Need outside opinions.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Lokland

      Not to douse your fire but 80% passing boner test is not equivalent to 80% passing girlfriend test.

      In regards to that I suspect (and hope) that men are as selective wrt commitment as women wrt sex.

      Of course, but we were talking about SMV here.

      Your questions about comfort traits at different SMVs are interesting, but I honestly have no idea. However, I do know that when we speak of mating in the evo sense, we generalize to female sexuality and male sexuality. I’ve never seen any research address how various attraction cues vary according to level of attractiveness. So I think I’d be inclined to say that with the caveat that beautiful people have an easier time of it, the principles should apply fairly equally.

      I can tell you that I have met men I objectively knew were a 9 or 10, and upon knowing them better I found them physically repulsive. It’s because they failed miserably on the other female attraction cues.

      I haven’t seen your pic in a while, but I believe I said that you were quite attractive, probably a point below her. Which is a combo that works well.

      I hope you’re not trying to identify with the SMV 5 guy, because that is ridiculous. You’ve fooled me once.

  • Passer_By

    @susan

    “I’ve had a man say to me at the end of a first date that I thought had gone well, “you can suck my dick if you want.” I was also invited to a guy’s family Christmas Eve celebration, and when it came time to sit down to dinner, it was discovered that he had left. There I was with his extended family, about 40 miles from home, and he had just peaced out. His grandfather had to drive me home after dinner. I had a boyfriend break into my apartment while I was sleeping to leave a letter of apology after a fight. I had a man force me out of the car on the freeway at 2 in the morning after he stated his intention to spend the night at my place and I said that wasn’t happening. I had a man grab my breast hard on St. Patrick’s Day in an Australian bar in LA. That’s about 1% of my stories.”

    Wow. You must be a real freak magnet. I guess that explains why you get so many nutty male commenters here. ;

  • Damien Vulaume

    No, it was a girlfriend-boyfriend, meet the parents relationship.

    Mon dieu…. I guess that’s why I already asked some people if they were living on the same planet as mine.
    That social American peer pressure always either depressed or amused me.

  • JP

    @Lokland:

    “I ask for a couple reasons one of which is variance across perceived SMVs, the other is that the discussion came up today amongst friends and the results were largely universal across multiple couples.”

    What results were largely universal and what are you talking about?

  • JP

    “Mon dieu…. I guess that’s why I already asked some people if they were living on the same planet as mine.
    That social American peer pressure always either depressed or amused me.”

    No. No peer pressure was involved with that.

    It wasn’t like I was dating anyone else at that time or had a stable group of friends. My friends were all psychiatric cases as far as I could tell.

    I’m pretty immune to a lot of peer pressure.

  • Passer_By

    @susan

    “And yet men claim that they can be attracted to up to 80% of women.”

    For an ONS, perhaps. But, if she is lower SMV, that attraction is very short lived.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Those women have every right to change the “price” of sex. Mary Magdalene changed the price of sex. A guy can ask, and I believe a woman should be honest, but I reject any cries of “Foul! No fair!”

    Much like early sexual escalation to a girl may make her feel like shit, delayed sexual escalation to a guy may make him feel like shit.

    Girls can indeed set whatever standards they like and raise the bar as much as they like, though they should be aware that they have this effect on men. The so-called Fuck Phantom.

    The solution for women, of course, is quite simple, and quite pc: show remorse and explain the reason for change, and be a high quality girl that fucks his brains out.

    Duh.

    This is not rocket science, people!

  • Lokland

    One is a biological process that got kicked into my thought processes this afternoon when,

    Group of coworkers asked me if I felt lucky for having landed such a beautiful women.

    No. (wrt to luck)

    Apparently without qualification that statement is far to un-PC to be considered acceptable in polite company.

  • Damien Vulaume

    The solution for women, of course, is quite simple, and quite pc: show remorse and explain the reason for change, and be a high quality girl that fucks his brains out.

    I guess that a French girl would also wonder whether she’s living on planet earth or not when reading such a statement.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Lokland

    One is a biological process that got kicked into my thought processes this afternoon when,

    Group of coworkers asked me if I felt lucky for having landed such a beautiful women.

    No. (wrt to luck)

    Apparently without qualification that statement is far to un-PC to be considered acceptable in polite company.

    Oof.

  • Passer_By

    @susan

    “Those women have every right to change the “price” of sex. Mary Magdalene changed the price of sex. A guy can ask, and I believe a woman should be honest, but I reject any cries of “Foul! No fair!” It is fair for a woman to withhold sex for any reason she chooses (before marriage).”

    And a guy is free to tell girl #1 that he wants her for sex but no commitment (saying he’s just not a “commitment type” guy), even though she knows he committed to girl number 2 despite the fact that she held out on him for sex for the entire duration of their relationship. But don’t expect girl#1 to appreciate it.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      And a guy is free to tell girl #1 that he wants her for sex but no commitment (saying he’s just not a “commitment type” guy), even though she knows he committed to girl number 2 despite the fact that she held out on him for sex for the entire duration of their relationship. But don’t expect girl#1 to appreciate it.

      Well said. I think both are fairly common, actually.

  • BroHamlet

    @Susan

    “We know that many women in college feel pressure to hook up and engage in physical intimacy before emotional intimacy is present.”

    And we also know that they feel pressure to make whatever choices they have made look legitimate, because yes, women are more attuned to the status quo amongst their friends and social circle. Bottom line, is that there is a lot of grey area here, and while hindsight is 20/20, she may be experiencing shame in the now, when there was none in the moment. That dichotomy is what is at stake here and it’s very nuanced to the individual.

    Those women have every right to change the “price” of sex. Mary Magdalene changed the price of sex. A guy can ask, and I believe a woman should be honest, but I reject any cries of “Foul! No fair!”

    First of all, if you are implying that I am somehow suggesting that women’s rights to choice should be questioned, just stop your train of thought right there. That is not what I am saying, and you are not hearing me. Second of all, I will go on record as saying that any girl a guy feels he should have to “ask” about her “list” is not one he should stay with. Personally, I have never had that talk. I feel I made myself very clear. The question isn’t one of finding reasons to find fault. My take on this is not a moral one. It’s of questioning the why behind what she appears to want, because there are plenty of reasons for her (and every other girl) to want to appear to be a relationship girl, though the reality may be that she doesn’t fit into any particular box right now.

    “It is fair for a woman to withhold sex for any reason she chooses (before marriage). If a guy does not want to wait – if he prefers the freshman girl who banged jocks, or prefers that she has no past, he can say so. But she has not done anything wrong or inappropriate.”

    Absolutely. Trying to sell something for more one day than you sold it the day before isn’t wrong, but it will draw lots of questions if the buyer finds out. What I am saying is that any guy who understands these things will look for tells- only someone without options doesn’t question whether it’s worth jumping a hurdle. Remember what I suggested about “inner game”? This is part of it for a girl. Just as a girl who decides one day “I’m worth more” probably won’t be able to unflinchingly pull this off, the analogous situation is that an average guy who learns a few pickup lines and decides “I only date tens” won’t pull it off either. You don’t change your value just by outwardly changing you behavior. You change your value by getting to a place where your behavior is a result of the place you have reached. What I am saying, is that you can’t just say or do it, you have to BE it. The best game is none at all. If a girl wants to be a relationship girl- she needs to internalize what it means to be that and work at it until it’s not work at all, not just copy what to do to look like one. That, in a nutshell is why the WHY of price discrimination is important (to me anyway).

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @BroHamlet

      Bottom line, is that there is a lot of grey area here, and while hindsight is 20/20, she may be experiencing shame in the now, when there was none in the moment. That dichotomy is what is at stake here and it’s very nuanced to the individual.

      There is some good research looking at regret after hookups among women, and it’s very common the very next day.

      First of all, if you are implying that I am somehow suggesting that women’s rights to choice should be questioned, just stop your train of thought right there. That is not what I am saying, and you are not hearing me.

      Sorry, I was not even addressing you specifically there. I was actually thinking of an old thread where Jesus Mahoney eloquently laid out the price discrimination metaphor – one guy gets the Sunday Times for .25, why should he have to pay $5? This has been referred to many times at HUS, and while I understand his understandable frustration, the truth is that people change. Over time, guys have said they would not stand for it, and if a woman tried to make them wait longer than she’d made other people wait, they would walk. I did not mean to suggest that you were saying women do not have rights.

      You don’t change your value just by outwardly changing you behavior. You change your value by getting to a place where your behavior is a result of the place you have reached. What I am saying, is that you can’t just say or do it, you have to BE it. The best game is none at all. If a girl wants to be a relationship girl- she needs to internalize what it means to be that and work at it until it’s not work at all, not just copy what to do to look like one. That, in a nutshell is why the WHY of price discrimination is important (to me anyway).

      Agreed. I’m just pointing out that many girls who are relationship worthy today may have made a poor choice or two in their past. As you said, the question is why. Why did you do it? Why did you stop doing it?

      I think the same questions might apply to “reformed” alphas who have banged a lot of women.

  • JP

    @Lokland:

    “Group of coworkers asked me if I felt lucky for having landed such a beautiful women.”

    You will find this somewhat funny, perhaps.

    So, I’m dating a girl in high school.

    One of my teachers, when he found out who I was dating, exclaimed, in shock, “[Girl Name Here]?!” How did you get “[Girl Name Here]“?, meaning that she was quite attractive.

    I really had absolutely no idea how to respond to that.

    It was strange to me because I had no initial interest in dating her whatsoever. She had just randomly decided that she wanted to date me, and naturally it took me some time to talk myself into the idea, having no initial interest.

    So, not only was our apparent SMV mismatched (mine low/her’s high), but I hadn’t “gotten” anyone as much as it took me about three weeks to decide that I could *try* dating her and seeing what I thought.

    (The relationship was a truly strange on on so many levels, but that’s another story).

  • JP

    @BroHamlet: “Absolutely. Trying to sell something for more one day than you sold it the day before isn’t wrong, but it will draw lots of questions if the buyer finds out. ”

    I take it that you don’t participate in the stock market, where the entire system is essentially predicated on the idea that prices for the same thing change daily for no apparent reason.

  • Lokland

    @Sassy

    “Oof.”

    Its truly entertaining to watch people squirm when they realize the knife they held at your neck is made of cotton.
    (Thats as a general metaphor wrt the idea that men should feel lucky for being committed to a beautiful women.)

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    I don’t emotionally attach myself to stocks and stocks have to have a definite return to me to buy them.

    Asking me to pay $90 for a stock that I KNOW is going to depreciate to nothingness in 5 years, for the sake of the company, is beyond idiotic and I would look at you like you are crazy.

    Similarly, if the company made ME buy $90 stock and guaranteed no return, but then let Warren Buffet invest $30/share with guaranteed 10% return, it’s pretty clear who the company values more.

    Same thing with girls who price discriminate, it is a strong indication that she does not consider me attractive and is a major dual-track girl, which are both red flags the size of China. She better be unleashing her nuclear IOIs and her nuclear emotional escalation to make up for that and not show ANY indication that she is flirting with Warren Buffet, or I will not take her seriously.

  • Mike C

    One is a biological process that got kicked into my thought processes this afternoon when,

    Group of coworkers asked me if I felt lucky for having landed such a beautiful women.

    No. (wrt to luck)

    Apparently without qualification that statement is far to un-PC to be considered acceptable in polite company.

    Interesting. Boy, I could really get going here with the fodder you’ve provided. The short answer is my guess is co-workers are true-blue blue-pillers and thus bring that perspective to the question itself and the nature of your answer.

    I could be off here, but based on your previous comments I get the sense that you are a successful businessman and quite well to do. So whatever your physical attributes are, I’m guessing??? you are off the charts on status and provisioning.

    I’ll admit these SMV discussions peeve sometimes because inevitably there is a tendency to play it both ways in terms of how to rate guys to minimize any SMV differential. We know for women, SMV is pretty much 70-90% physical looks so you know what a woman’s SMV is just from full face and body shot picture. Not so with a guy. Physical looks is just one piece of the puzzle so it is beyond ludicrous to rate a guy’s SMV off a picture. You have to know more about his personality, how he carries himself, his “Game” and “confidence” and other things like prestige and status.

    All of that is to say you may very well have an equal SMV if not higher when accounting for all those additional factors beyond just pure physical appearance whereas the blue-pill people giving you their opinion are strictly making a purely physical comparison.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      inevitably there is a tendency to play it both ways in terms of how to rate guys to minimize any SMV differential. We know for women, SMV is pretty much 70-90% physical looks so you know what a woman’s SMV is just from full face and body shot picture. Not so with a guy. Physical looks is just one piece of the puzzle so it is beyond ludicrous to rate a guy’s SMV off a picture.

      You’re right, it’s apples and oranges. I often feel frustrated by this, but have not found a better construct. Maybe RMV?

  • Mike C

    BTW, my standard answer to that question would be we are BOTH lucky to have found each other. That way you seem appreciative without yielding to the wrong frame.

  • Mike C

    Brohamlet,

    Straight up gold there.

  • Sassy6519

    It may be somewhat shallow, but that is one reason why I insist on dating men who are as physically attractive as I am. I would prefer that my man and I are never asked such silly questions.

  • Lokland

    @Mike C

    “The short answer is my guess is co-workers are true-blue blue-pillers and thus bring that perspective to the question itself and the nature of your answer.”

    Yes.

    “I could be off here, but based on your previous comments I get the sense that you are a successful businessman and quite well to do.”

    Scientist.
    With multiple businesses I’ve been running on the side since grad school and a decent family backing which gave me my base.

    I’m successful enough to be unique yet not so much as to be notable.

    ——-

    I don’t feel lucky for having landed a women with my wife’s physical qualities.
    I do feel lucky for having landed a woman that meets my, admittedly, extremely stringent requirements on what constitutes acceptable current and past behaviour.

    Aka. Her beauties nice (and necessary). Her personality (and subsequent actions) are why I feel lucky.

    As for how I answered.
    I didn’t. I let them stew.

  • JP

    @ADBG:

    “Similarly, if the company made ME buy $90 stock and guaranteed no return, but then let Warren Buffet invest $30/share with guaranteed 10% return, it’s pretty clear who the company values more.”

    That’s true, but if the $90 stock, based on your analysis, was going to beat the market by 15% over the next five years and there was no better place to invest your money, you would hold onto the stock whether or not the company valued Warren Buffet more than you.

    In fact, Warren Buffet could own 1,000,000 shares, with you only owning 10,000 and you would still be in the best position if you loaded up on as much as possible, since you couldn’t do any better, even if you were clearly inferior to Warren Buffet in the company’s eyes.

  • Lokland

    @Sassy

    “I would prefer that my man and I are never asked such silly questions.”

    Pff. The weirdest thing that ever happened to me was when one of my parents friends came and started, uhmm, not even sure how to describe it, but drooling on my feet and talking about how startlingly beautiful she was.

    That was creepy.

  • JP

    “However, when a person falls for you, you can feel like the most beautiful person in the world. Someone has really seen you, and they loved what they saw. That’s incredibly validating.”

    Well, yeah.

    That’s really nice.

    Which is why it’s so hard to get rid of someone who’s in love with you who you don’t find attractive.

    Of course, I also realized that I needed to never, ever again date someone who I wasn’t attracted to and I definitely shouldn’t date them for an extended period of time.

    I’m so good at learning these little life lessons in a timely manner!

  • OffTheCuff

    All my posts are disappearing. What’s going on?

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @OTC

      Sorry, the spam filter is wacky today. You’re already whitelisted, so I have no idea why your comment got grabbed.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “I hope you’re not trying to identify with the SMV 5 guy, because that is ridiculous.”

    Nope. Zero personal projection into that questioning. Honestly just curious. That whole INTJ thing, systemizing and sorting until I can label it all in a book is kinda what I do.

    Note: Not writing a book. Thats all yours :P

  • Beth

    I used to be like the girls discussed in the article who would actually show up at the bar at 11pm or whatever, but then I realized that these half-assed efforts NEVER led to any positive experiences for me. I realized that engaging with someone who was half-assing it just wasn’t worth my time. I also became a lot more happy and secure. I realized I was happy and would have a wonderful and happy life even if I never married. Within months of making both of these realizations, after YEARS of torturous dating experiences, I finally met my current boyfriend. I was 30, and he was 33. It was easy. And we DATED. It does happen, if that’s what you truly want.

  • OffTheCuff

    Sue: “That runs counter to almost every guy’s input at HUS. ONS = slut ladder. No exceptions.”

    (I posted this earlier, but my comment disappeared…)

    Joke answer – no, it’s a ONS with *other men* bumps you off the girlfriend ladder. A SNL with *me* is fine. (NB: the second ladder isn’t just for sluts, she can be chaste and still on it – it’s the no-commitment ladder.)

    Serious answer – who says this? I’m not deti, I have exceptions and very few unconditional dealbreakers. One or two SNL’s might be fine, a distinct pattern of them probably wouldn’t be.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @OTC

      Serious answer – who says this? I’m not deti, I have exceptions and very few unconditional dealbreakers. One or two SNL’s might be fine, a distinct pattern of them probably wouldn’t be.

      Fair enough. I know guys say they want a woman to be hard to get for everyone else, easy to get for them. Also that they want a woman who is “my slut.” What I wonder is how do you know whether you are the exception or the rule? If a woman puts out early and often, aren’t you wondering how many times she’s been down this road?

  • JP

    @Beth: “I used to be like the girls discussed in the article who would actually show up at the bar at 11pm or whatever, but then I realized that these half-assed efforts NEVER led to any positive experiences for me.”

    How long did it take you to realize this?

    I think the learning curve is one of the issues here.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Lokland

    Pff. The weirdest thing that ever happened to me was when one of my parents friends came and started, uhmm, not even sure how to describe it, but drooling on my feet and talking about how startlingly beautiful she was.

    That was creepy.

    Honestly, those kind of reactions naturally come with the territory of dating a beautiful woman.

    Dating a handsome male naturally entails subtle competition and having to mentally beat other women away with a stick.

    It all comes with the territory.

  • Richard Aubrey

    Fifty years ago, when I was a high school senior, the schools would occasionally have “mixer” dances where you did not show up with a date. I went to one and saw some mixing and some not mixing. Point was to put together boys and girls whose schedules didn’t put them together in space and time. Not sure what the school though they were doing, but at the time, gym classes included dance lessons. Foxtrot and so forth. So perhaps part of the mission was socializing the young, horny and awkward.
    As far as I could tell, it worked, in the sense that some boys and girls got to be friends, or congenial acquaintances, which was probably good training for the Big Leagues. Not much of a hit on the school budget, either.
    Later, in college, we did a lot of trad dating. Not necessarily starting out with a fancy dinner, but at the least an organized party. It would be later on in the relationship that a long walk or a museum crawl would be part of the program. I guess a guy didn’t want to say, “Let’s go for a walk. You’ll love the time you spend with me.” Many of us didn’t think a woman would actually like us, and until it became clear, risking being turned down because all we were offering was an hour in the cold along with our personality was a big jump. No idea what the women thought of it at the time, never wondered. Figured that was the way it was forever and ever.
    The result, as far as I could tell, was that the event of the trad date, whatever it was, allowed each person to watch the other dealing with the event. How are your table manners. Do you know your way around a menu? Are you polite to the staff? At a party do you get smashed as fast as possible? Flirt with others besides your date–a no-no–or sit there like a potted plant? Could you be energized in conversation, self-presentation, general fun by your date’s ramping up the energy and fun? Did you know how to deal pleasantly with a bunch of folks you didn’t know? Do you start groping after the second drink? Do you like/put up with being groped after the second drink?
    There’s more to it than the provisioning. Keep in mind that it also required at least some planning by the guy and how he managed that was something a woman wanted to know.
    Too bad it’s so rare in the college/young folks arena. Lots to learn and the existence of the event in between you, so to speak, provides cover for one or both if their schedules in terms of relationships/sex don’t match.
    As a friend of mine once remarked, if it weren’t for ambiguity, dating would be no fun at all.

  • JP

    @OTC: “All my posts are disappearing. What’s going on?”

    Your SMV may be declining.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @OTC: “All my posts are disappearing. What’s going on?”

      Your SMV may be declining.

      ROFL

  • Beth

    @ JP, I think it took me until I was maybe 25ish. The problem was though that at that time I lacked patience. And I REALLY wanted a boyfriend. I wondered what was wrong with me that no one felt I was worth putting in some effort. Turning down lame efforts wasn’t enough for me because I always wondered if I was making a mistake, and I was always very tempted to accept these invitations even when I ultimately did not.

    It wasn’t until I took control of my own life as I was nearing 30 that I finally realized that I was perfectly happy sans boyfriend that I promptly met my boyfriend. By taking control I mean that I took advantage of a career opportunity and did several things that fulfilled lifelong dreams which I wouldn’t have been able to do if I was bound to someone else’s idea of a good time. Anyway.

    Now when I meet someone who is running to meet a guy at midnight or who I inventing committed relationship where there isn’t one I think that this girl just hasn’t quite “gotten” it yet.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Beth

      Welcome, I’m glad you added your voice! You said something so simple and yet so profound:

      It was easy.

      I hear this time and time again. When you meet the right person, there’s no angstyness. It just works, no one is wrestling for the upper hand, etc. Trust grows from the very beginning.

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7XzcGnUCI0 OffTheCuff

    JP: “Your SMV may be declining.”

    Oh, for sure. This is a place for the elites, and I’m just a humble, average 4 kinda guy. Your SMV detector script must be working splendidly. Unless this comment gets through.

    Sue: “What I wonder is how do you know whether you are the exception or the rule? If a woman puts out early and often, aren’t you wondering how many times she’s been down this road?”

    I honestly don’t know. But I do know, don’t ask religious tradcons this question.

    No, I subscribe to —–’s idea of spontaneous, organic desire. I think such a question that’s better ascertained by other means. I’ve never even asked, women tend to just bring it up it, without me ever asking. They like to talk.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @OTC

      Oh, for sure. This is a place for the elites, and I’m just a humble, average 4 kinda guy.

      Just stop. Do you say this just to drive me crazy? You are fairly humble, it’s true, but I don’t think you’re even close to average.

      I honestly don’t know. But I do know, don’t ask religious tradcons this question.

      Haha, I think I’ve figured that much out, at least!

  • Mike C

    You’re right, it’s apples and oranges. I often feel frustrated by this, but have not found a better construct. Maybe RMV?

    What’s the R? Relationship? Personally, I like the distinction between SMV and MMV or RMV if you will (assuming it means relationship) because at least from a guy’s perspective it differentiates a woman who simply triggers sexual attraction to some degree versus a woman who is seen as commitment worthy.

    At least to me, the bottom line is you simply cannot rate a guy’s SMV from a picture. A guy’s SMV has to be evaluated in person where you can take in the totality of his personality and vibe. We have proof of this very effect in this thread. Charlotte remarked about the tall and handsome man she saw right away and by the end of her comment he was an awkward schmuck. Clearly, his real world demeanor subtracted major SMV points from his raw physical appearance. And we know this can work exactly in reverse for shorter and uglier guys where they can get a SMV boost from their real world demeanor.

    So, I think if you have a photo of a couple you can make an informed opinion on whether their physical looks are comparable, in terms of being a male 8 versus female 8 or whatever, but you can’t make an assessment of SMV because you don’t know what else the guy is bringing or losing at the table that you can only assess in person

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      At least to me, the bottom line is you simply cannot rate a guy’s SMV from a picture. A guy’s SMV has to be evaluated in person where you can take in the totality of his personality and vibe.

      Totally. Some of the sexiest people are not handsome. And some of the handsomest people are not sexy.

      I did mean relationship by R. I think this (or MMV) is a better metric for men because women consider so many different traits. For STRs, SMV is fine, because it pretty much boils down to looks and dominance, but for LTRs there are many more considerations.

  • Sassy6519

    At least to me, the bottom line is you simply cannot rate a guy’s SMV from a picture. A guy’s SMV has to be evaluated in person where you can take in the totality of his personality and vibe. We have proof of this very effect in this thread. Charlotte remarked about the tall and handsome man she saw right away and by the end of her comment he was an awkward schmuck. Clearly, his real world demeanor subtracted major SMV points from his raw physical appearance. And we know this can work exactly in reverse for shorter and uglier guys where they can get a SMV boost from their real world demeanor.

    So, I think if you have a photo of a couple you can make an informed opinion on whether their physical looks are comparable, in terms of being a male 8 versus female 8 or whatever, but you can’t make an assessment of SMV because you don’t know what else the guy is bringing or losing at the table that you can only assess in person

    This explains why many men have such lackluster results with online dating. A woman can only go off of so much information, initially. The picture is the first thing she sees. Unfortunately, (as the often touted OkCupid study claims), 80% of men are viewed as below average physically on there. The study also showed that the women still messaged the supposedly “below average” men. I’m stumped as to why that is though.

    This could also explain the term “sexy ugly”. Objectively, a man may be average or below average looking, but he can still be sexy with other factors that help him (money, status, wit, charm).

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      The study also showed that the women still messaged the supposedly “below average” men. I’m stumped as to why that is though.

      Maybe they realize that looks is just a part of attraction, and that many guys “improve” upon acquaintance. So they message the guys with interesting profiles?

  • JP

    “The study also showed that the women still messaged the supposedly “below average” men. I’m stumped as to why that is though.”

    Because they gained an acquaintance with that old bald cheater, Time.

    http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Ben_Jonson

  • Tasmin

    @Susan
    “I would point out that you are twice the age…”
    Thanks but no need, my beard is looking like the muzzle of a 12 y/o labrador.

    I agree with the self-image anchoring in youth as well. It can be a hard thing to shake. Coming from a late-blooming, shy, short n skinny kid that didn’t fully grow until Y3 of college, I will never fully see myself as the strapping manhunk that I am infrequently accused of being.

    For men it is a kick in the nuts. For women I actually think it can help a bit to be a late-bloomer or physically change for the better as an adult. I think it helps keep that SMV overestimation tendency in check, builds a sense of gratitude, as well as puts her history a little more in line with that of the average guy.

    Generally, if a woman has been highly attractive her entire life, her experiences are going to be so far from mine in terms of attraction, relationships, attention, etc. that it may not even be possible to reach a point of relating and being empathetic. I’ve found that women who have seen their SMV peak a little later on were much more grounded and in touch with what it is like being on the outside looking in – - which is what many men experience until they hit 25+. Something that is under-appreciated by far too many women. They see the now and just can’t seem to fathom that I could possibly have a decade of my life that sucked relative to attracting women, relationships, etc. Two celibate years in college? Forget it. Of course now that I know that male promiscuity doesn’t really matter, if I were to do it all over I wouldn’t have turned away those chances. In fact, its still on the table. But I digress.

    “I’m just pointing out that many girls who are relationship worthy today may have made a poor choice or two in their past. As you said, the question is why. Why did you do it? Why did you stop doing it?”

    Agree. And it gets complicated when the stopping is in close proximity to their declining ability to do it. Stopping when the getting is still good is different than stopping when the guys you are getting are now too old to father your children or are starting to look more like Aerosmith and less like Kings of Leon or whatever the kids are into.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Tasmin

      I’ve found that women who have seen their SMV peak a little later on were much more grounded and in touch with what it is like being on the outside looking in – – which is what many men experience until they hit 25+.

      Yes, I think this is true. The fact is, suffering builds character. I suspect that’s why so many Prom Queens and high school quarterbacks peak in high school. During their most formative years, they miss out on the key character building moments.

      Of course now that I know that male promiscuity doesn’t really matter, if I were to do it all over I wouldn’t have turned away those chances. In fact, its still on the table.

      Intriguing!

      Actually, I heard from a woman today that I am close to. She and a young man are clearly falling for each other. He has already expressed some insecurity about her past experiences, and last night he broached the topic of sexual histories. He was delighted and relieved by her low-ish number of 5. But she is profoundly disturbed by his number of 21. In fact, she is questioning the relationship. He’s 26 – I pointed out that means 2 or 3 girls a year. To her it sounds like a very big number, and she suddenly feels like she’s dealing with a reformed player, something she does not want.

      Stopping when the getting is still good is different than stopping when the guys you are getting are now too old to father your children or are starting to look more like Aerosmith and less like Kings of Leon or whatever the kids are into.

      Ew! Steven Tyler is so gross, I can’t even…blech. I get your point, tho.

  • OffTheCuff

    Sassy, online dating on sites devoted to dating are sausage parties. Real online dating happens from social networking and chat sites *not* dedicated to dating, but just happen to have have decent features that allow progressive intimacy.

  • JP

    “Sue: “What I wonder is how do you know whether you are the exception or the rule? If a woman puts out early and often, aren’t you wondering how many times she’s been down this road?””

    Only if you know that sexual promiscuity really does exist and it’s not just some urban legend created to scare little children.

  • Tasmin

    @Sassy
    “This explains why many men have such lackluster results with online dating. A woman can only go off of so much information, initially. The picture is the first thing she sees. Unfortunately, (as the often touted OkCupid study claims), 80% of men are viewed as below average physically on there. ”

    Thank you for saying this. I’m always hearing from female friends how I should join this site or that because they – or some girlfriend – has had decent luck with it. They have no idea how the process is not that different than real life for many men.

    I tell them it is like going to a bar with a 3:1 M/F ratio. I can’t directly approach any women but I can pass notes to girls I think look cute/interesting but I should only expect a response 10% of the time. Oh and while I’m doing that, whatever that is, the women are also getting notes from 80% of the men in there and getting notes from the bartender about how there are 30 more guys coming to the bar later on so be patient. Its a last-ditch effort at best and unless there is something shiny you can dangle, you are commoditized beyond recognition.

    The irony is that it is all set up to differentiate, but by means of adding labels, by branding. I buy this brand, watch this show, movie, book, do this job, and on and on. A thousand ways to seem just like every other guy, a thousand ways to fail. Ok Cupid even has internal brands that they assign based on your answers to some pretty vile questions. Awesome. Just like junior high.

    Any attempt to sound different, is trying too hard. Any attempt to sound normal and you are lost in the rounding. Any attempt to show how “nice” you are and you are a DLV supplicant. Any attempt to show how you don’t give a shit means you are a player (if you are hot) and a loser (if you are not).

    It absolutely favors the more binary male attraction, at least in terms of sorting through the initial mess of it. And thats what counts. Most attractive women are too busy dodging “creepy” guys and responding to 10% of the messages to find me and really read between the lines: M 39 Single 5’10″ Fit blah blah blah. Sure it might give me access to more women who I don’t immediately find attractive, but so does going to the library.

  • JP

    @Tasmin:

    “Thank you for saying this. I’m always hearing from female friends how I should join this site or that because they – or some girlfriend – has had decent luck with it. They have no idea how the process is not that different than real life for many men.”

    No, there is “online game” for dating sites.

    In fact, I’m pretty sure that one of the attorneys I know has perfected this technique.

    It’s the strangest thing that I’ve ever seen and I’m not sure where he got it, or whether he came up with his approach on his own, but it’s definitely different.

    And it wouldn’t work in real life. But it works for him.

  • Tasmin

    @Susan
    “He was delighted and relieved by her low-ish number of 5. But she is profoundly disturbed by his number of 21. In fact, she is questioning the relationship. He’s 26 – I pointed out that means 2 or 3 girls a year. To her it sounds like a very big number, and she suddenly feels like she’s dealing with a reformed player, something she does not want.”

    And he was the “insecure” one? Well I’m sure there is a lot more to the story that she should consider. How they met, how aggressive he was, in what ways and how quickly he pressed for sex, whether or not there was commitment prior to that, and on and on.

    In any case, his past made him who he is today. All of that meaningless vagina time just made him appreciate how much he values intimacy now, with her. Plus he knows his body so much better now, you know, what he likes (giving facials, sex in parking lots, light bondage) and doesn’t (her finger in his caboose, being slapped, hot tubs). All those experiences have given him gifts that now he wants to share with her. Just her!

    All of those past women have helped him be a better man. He wasn’t ready for her back then. But through all of that he has figured out what he likes and doesn’t like, what he really wants in a woman. Sure he’s made some mistakes, like the time he went raw on that bird in the hostel in Prague, but he learned so much from that. She benefits from all that ‘experience’ and research and learning. She should be grateful that he picked her to be with and not just bang. Not that banging is just banging because with her it means so much more, but in the past it didn’t mean what it means now, well maybe a few times, because they were GF’s, but I mean the other times not so much. He’s been there and done that and now he has picked her to be his GF. No worries.

    The 2 or 3 girls a year, admittedly feels a bit high to me. But I’m old fashioned. The problem with smoothing the # is that it doesn’t account for actual relationships. I.e. Throw in a couple-few year or more relationships and all of the sudden his per-year gets up into Thai-sex-tour territory.

    Either way, all this banging around can complicate for both men and women, but its good to know I’ve got plenty of headroom if N=20′s shouldn’t be of concern. ;-)

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Tasmin

      LMAO at the rationalization.

      Actually, she reported that he was surprised she cared, and became very apologetic. He did not explain any specifics, but he did say that he was sorry his past hurt her. She said she can’t stop thinking of 20 vaginas! I was struck by this because it’s a reversal of the usual tale we hear at HUS. I asked her if she is worried about his ability to be faithful and she said no. (That would be my concern.) She’s just grossed out by it, and has unwelcome images popping into her mind. Fuck phantoms!

      Anyway, they had this discussion over coffee (Oh, the things baristas must hear!) and she said they parted rather awkwardly. He’s worried that she won’t live with it. Interesting dynamic.

      Either way, all this banging around can complicate for both men and women, but its good to know I’ve got plenty of headroom if N=20′s shouldn’t be of concern.

      Well, that’s just me. I don’t speak for other women, obvs. I asked her what she had hoped he’d say, and she said, she didn’t know, maybe 10-15? She was hoping it wasn’t a really high number, but then her heart sank when he said 21. I’m sure she’ll get over it, she really likes him.

  • JP

    @Susan:

    “But she is profoundly disturbed by his number of 21. In fact, she is questioning the relationship. He’s 26 – I pointed out that means 2 or 3 girls a year. To her it sounds like a very big number, and she suddenly feels like she’s dealing with a reformed player, something she does not want.”

    What she needs is an N distribution by year.

    So, she needs to know whether he had 10 girls when he was 19 as a pack of wild freshmen descended upon him in a matter of weeks, then nothing as he entered a long spell of melancholy, not knowing that he had just experienced too many women, followed by 10 girls when he was 21 and could finally go to bars, as a pack of wild 40 year olds descended upon him, repeating the same horrible pattern of the past, followed by a realization that he was destroying his life by having too many women, followed by a dive into his career fhe tried to finally come of age, emerging only to find your friend when he turned 26.

    Or whether he just kind of switches up every 4 months as he gets bored with is most recent “love of his life”.

    I think there’s a difference.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @JP

      You’re right, distribution is key. I love the idea of packs of wild freshmen and cougars. An amusing twist on the feral female.

  • Tasmin

    @JP
    Such the contrarian.
    If there is game for online, which I’m sure there is, then that just affirms my point that it is not that different than real life in terms of effort-efficacy. But if the secret to online success is to apply unique online game, that kind of works against most men’s motivation for going online in the first place. I’d rather apply real-life game in spades than construct a 2D version of myself and then pull puppet strings from my computer. My point was that there are few actionable advantages for men going online. If your solution is “you can run online game” to stand out, that’s pretty much makes my point: being online is not, in of itself accretive to the bottom line for most men.

  • VeriSeeker

    What she is really saying is: “Courtship is still the best way for women to remain in control of a relationship”. If she simply stated this at the beginning, this article would have made more sense and would have been half as long.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @VeriSeeker

      What she is really saying is: “Courtship is still the best way for women to remain in control of a relationship”. If she simply stated this at the beginning, this article would have made more sense and would have been half as long.

      Your focus on control is a major problem in the SMP today – it’s all about who has hand, who’s most willing to walk away. That’s a terrible foundation for any relationship, and it rarely leads to one, at least a functional one.

      Courtship, or dating, is a process whereby two people become acquainted, with the female in charge of sexual access, and the male in charge of access to commitment. That is called equilibrium, and that makes for happy couples.

  • http://bastiatblogger.blogspot.com/ Bastiat Blogger

    Tasmin, re: pimps and their inventory maintenance concerns. Your comments reminded me of this fabled gentleman:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cnuodLiCGzY

  • Tasmin

    @Bastiat
    Nailed it. That is precisely where I ripped that term from. Classic.

  • BroHamlet

    @JP

    “I take it that you don’t participate in the stock market, where the entire system is essentially predicated on the idea that prices for the same thing change daily for no apparent reason.”

    Really? Come now. The dating landscape and the “valuation” of people is obviously very, very different than the stock market. On the stock market, companies don’t just say how awesome they are and analysts believe them without any questions as to past performance and actual balance sheet factors (and I am aware that there are notable exceptions), nor are you “wedded” (literally and/or figuratively) to your portfolio of choice.

  • http://xanga.com johnny doe

    @Sassy
    “This is what I was talking about earlier. Dates are not the problem. Being viewed as attractive enough to go on dates with is the problem that many men have.
    I’ve said it once, and I’ll say it again. I’ve seen women falling all over themselves to go on dates with men that they considered attractive. I’ve also seen women stuck in dead end “FWB” relationships with guys they are attracted to, desperately hoping that these guys will ask them out on proper dates instead. The dates are not the problem. I think a lot of men just have problems with presenting themselves in ways that spark attraction with women that they are attracted to.”

    This is such a laughable statement I had to quote and comment on it. You make this powerful assumption that guys who can’t get dates do not present themselves in an attractive way, as if we are on equal footing with women. You, by virtue of being an attractive woman (i dont know if i’d call you attractive, but I haven’t seen you in person, I’ll take your word for it) have so many more options, and have no idea whats its like to try and fail over and over and do everything you can to be presentable, only to find you are still competing against many, many other guys, for girls that have so many options the concept of not being able to get a date doesn’t register.

    It’s not that we aren’t trying to make ourselves attractive, its that getting a date, is something that reasonably attractive women, not supermodel hot, but cute women, have an inherent advantage over men. And there aren’t many avenues to ask a girl out without looking creepy. Even bars and nightclubs, the supposed places where people meet up, can be a tough, brutal scene for normal guys.

    If you want for fun, try to put up a dating profile on ok cupid with a guy pic, not a hot guy, but an average looking guy. Message every girl you can find on there, try to be presentable. You’ll be surprised – you’ll get zero responses.

    Go to a bar and notice the only guys who aren’t getting shooed away by girls are the tall attractive ones, that’s it. The rest are dead in the water. No shit I can’t spark attraction, that spark is for the famous, the genetically favored, and those in power. Girls don’t give a fuck what some of guys say, do, think or feel, no matter WHAT it is, they will still say no in the end to a date.

    Sorry, just tired of these stupid quotes about how regular guys need to present themselves better, when we have an inherent disadvantage on the dating field by virtue of being a guy.

    Ever heard of white male privilege? If you don’t know the privilege you have it? That’s what cute women have in dating. All you got to to is show up to a bar, post a profile online, go to a social event, and guys WILL talk to you. That isn’t the case the other way around, just to clear that up for you.

  • Madelena

    @ Damien V

    “The solution for women, of course, is quite simple, and quite pc: show remorse and explain the reason for change, and be a high quality girl that fucks his brains out.”

    I guess that a French girl would also wonder whether she’s living on planet earth or not when reading such a statement.

    My response:

    Not just French girls.

    On a different point, I’m simultaneously appalled by noting how pervasive the language of economics has permeated all aspects of American life, including romance, and yet sincerely impressed by how well those concepts are used by commenters to illustrate current realities.

    “price differentiation”, “sexual market value”, “commoditized dating”, “law of diminishing returns”, etc.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Madelena

      On a different point, I’m simultaneously appalled by noting how pervasive the language of economics has permeated all aspects of American life, including romance, and yet sincerely impressed by how well those concepts are used by commenters to illustrate current realities.

      “price differentiation”, “sexual market value”, “commoditized dating”, “law of diminishing returns”, etc.

      I’m afraid I started it here because of my own background, and how well I thought economics suited the discussion of sex. But it’s a real thing – sexual economics is an actual field of study, and increasingly economists talk about sex and relationships. I think it works, but I’m aware that some find it off-putting.

  • Madelena

    @johnny doe

    I am sympathetic to your dilemma but as someone who until a couple of years was not considered an attractive woman until I made myself over, I have to say that women who are average or below average don’t have it easy either. Everyone, it seems, is aiming for the top 20%.

  • http://xanga.com johnny doe

    @Susan Walsh:
    How about you get me started with some relevant links to data about flaking? I came up empty with a quick search. I have some anecdotal data about flaking, but I’m afraid it applies to both sexes, so that’s not much help.

    I can’t say I have statistics, but its all over the internet as one of the biggest problems guys face in dating, the girl just actually showing up for the date.
    There’s tons of advice links on how to react, and where I come from, you literally don’t know if the girl will show up until she is physically there. For convenience, I google ‘why girls flake’ and all of these links pop up:
    http://www.doctornerdlove.com/2012/04/why-women-flake/all/1/
    Check it out for yourself. There’s no statistics, but I think its a growing trend, and there wouldn’t be wealth of articles on what to do about if a girl flakes if it does not happen pretty frequently in the dating world.

    That’s also why getting a phone number doesn’t mean shit. That’s something else you can google too and a ton of stuff will come up about why do girls give out their number when they have no intention of picking up a call, or returning a text. Also very common, enough to justify tons of articles on the internet about it.

    It’s the funniest thing I find, because its like men get hit with all these messages in society: “Respect women! Dont’ be a pig! Men are pigs! Men just want sex! Get to know a girl for her personality”

    Isn’t it Ironic that, it could be well, these guys are trying to do that, and maybe get sick of feeling like a chump, and decide, I’m going to go just bang as many girls as I can, fuck all this chump shit? You don’t read no articles about women shaming about faulty behavior on the part of women.

    I used to really be come down on guy friends who cheated, who were players, told them that was wrong. But I can’t really say I care anymore, not after the amount of times I’ve gotten flaked on, ignored, rejected, or dismissed by women. Seriously, I feel like women just need less ass-kissing from men. They get their ass kissed so much on a daily basis by unwanted attention from all types of guys, I refuse to be a part of it. I’ll never be a player-type and just ask a girl you want to go home, but I got zero problem correcting a girl whose acting incorrectly, the same way I correct my guy friends.

    Traditional courtship is just more bullshit advice for guys to end up looking like a sucker.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @johnny doe

      Your report of large amounts of anecdotal data online re flaking and other bad female behaviors is true. But there are just as many, if not more, blogs devoted to guys acting like assholes in dating. I have no doubt that all these reports are true, by both sexes. Neither sex has cornered the market on bad behavior. Both sexes need much more stringent filters and higher standards in choosing whom to pursue.

      Traditional courtship is just more bullshit advice for guys to end up looking like a sucker.

      Did you think I was giving advice to males? No, you’ll find plenty of that at your PUA forums, and that’s fine. I’m giving advice to females here. Females should be worthy of courtship and demand it. That’s the side of the equation I’m working with.

  • http://xanga.com johnny doe

    @Madalena

    I am sympathetic to your dilemma but as someone who until a couple of years was not considered an attractive woman until I made myself over, I have to say that women who are average or below average don’t have it easy either. Everyone, it seems, is aiming for the top 20%.

    I never said women who are below average easy, I said reasonably cute.
    If you want me to get specific on being attractive from a male perspective – its this – have nice teeth, get thin, and dress nice – as in what works for you. Almost any girl who follows that formula will be considered above average. At that point, throw on a dating profile, go to a bar – you’ll talk to guys, you won’t get rejected.

    That’s a straight formula for women to follow who don’t get attention from guys. And if you get to that point where you are above average, and start TALKING to guys on your own, watch out – you willl get sooooooo much attention, few rejections (way fewer that guys who do cold approaches), it will boggle your mind.

    I’m not saying you’ll like every single guy, but that creates the power of choice, that very, very few men can claim to have, whereas TONS of women have it, aren’t aware of it, or will never openly admit ‘yes, it is fucking hard as a guy to get a date if you aren’t super hot’

    Not so for guys. There’s no straight formula if you are average or just above average.

    If you’re handsome, maybe you are too cocky – if you are funny, maybe trying to hard – if you are aloof – you didn’t show enough interest, if you asked her on a date too soon – its you don’t even know her yet, you’re creeping her out – if you are ugly – you can’t expect women to go for you when there’s a 6’4 muscular guy thats just more attractive and has more of that ‘spark’ (LMAO at that term). This is all just of getting a date, NOT trying to hook up. That’s so far out of my comprehension I can’t even understand what it means to be about just fucking a girl – how can i even think about that if im just wondering if i can even get a date?

    I’ve done everything society has told me to do get dates – be sweet, pay for dates, have a nice job, man and I am just fucking sick of it. But it won’t stop me from coming online and correcting women who somehow have the nerve to post articles like ‘be about traditional courtship- too many guys are just trying to hook up” – bullshit as if women are some awesome, sweet people who just want nice dates when in reality, there’s some guy getting flaked on right now, some guy who just got a number and didn’t get a call back, or some girl who brags to her friends about how she got all these free meals this week by going on a bunch of dates.

    Seriously, the hypocrisy disgusts me.

    I agree with an above poster who said the girl in the story conveniently left out how many guys she rejected/flaked on who probably did ask her out to a nice dinner. Nice way of misleading, and framing the perception of guys in the dating world, as if there are zero above-average guys who just want a nice, sweet date with a girl that may end at most, with holding hands.

    I’ve spent over $100 on a meal for a girl, for friends, more times than i can count in my life, and I’ve never expected a thing. But i get ignored, and overlooked by the opposite sex, and there are hundreds of guys out there like me. You just don’t notice them.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @johnny doe

      Nice way of misleading, and framing the perception of guys in the dating world, as if there are zero above-average guys who just want a nice, sweet date with a girl that may end at most, with holding hands.

      That was the whole point of the article. There are plenty of guys willing to date, and women who want to date can find them. Courtship is alive and well.

      To ignore the fact that there is an ever increasing number of douchebags is silly – those are the guys who make it hard for you to get a date.

  • http://xanga.com johnny doe

    @Madalena,
    Case in point – okcupid.com – a girl of comparable attractiveness to a guy gets 10000 times the attention – a guy has to do sooooo much more stuff- read the profiles of women who note ‘look i get hundreds of messages so be original, be funny, stand out, and if i don’t reply don’t take it personal, good luck I’m such an awesome person’ and go see if you can find a guys profile that says the same. Again, women get more attention from guys. WAY more.
    Stick your head on a dating profile if you become above-average, and you’ll never be hurting for a date again. Of course, you could never understand how crushing it is for a guy to be that, try to have a good personality, try to be funny, try not to be serious, only to eventually ask ‘fuck another friday night gone and the only time i go out is with guys, or female platonic friends’.

    You aren’t correct, guys do have it harder, getting dates, much harder than you could ever know.

  • BroHamlet

    @Susan

    “There is some good research looking at regret after hookups among women, and it’s very common the very next day.”

    I’m sure there is, and I’m sure you will be glad to refer to it. But, how is post-hookup regret news? I don’t need a study to observe this or understand why it exists. We live in a society that conditions us to believe from day one that women are worth more than men, and that female sexuality is purer than male (word has it we’re dirty in comparison, have you heard?comedy…), and then add hypergamy and the distinctly female desire to follow the herd into the mix. How is it any surprise that women are prone to feel like they have lost value/are interacting with someone lower than them/had something taken from them in lots of exchanges with men (not just sex)? And in something as grey as a hookup? Color me shocked. And the root of these feelings is not necessarily “I was wrong”. It could also be “I just lost status” or “My friends will flip if they hear about this, I am so embarrassed”. Now, when the act of hooking up doesn’t involve a loss of status, or nobody she cares about will find out, things may change, and obviously, feelings change. So to me regret has many causes, and the assumption shouldn’t be that she regrets it because she’s a “good girl” at heart. The societal script and desire to conform is a powerful force in most people’s lives, especially women’s. Not to be a dick, but just because you now want to follow the accepted script, does not mean much. Every girl wants to be a “good girl” when she’s called on it or asked on a survey.

    Price discrimination might not be explicitly wrong, but it is (mostly) moderately disingenuous. All I really ask is that a girl understand what she is really doing in raising her “price” in a “I get it, and I’m really in this “dating” thing to show you I what I have to offer, not just for the sake of dating” type way and make it worth the price.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @BroHamlet

      So to me regret has many causes, and the assumption shouldn’t be that she regrets it because she’s a “good girl” at heart. The societal script and desire to conform is a powerful force in most people’s lives, especially women’s. Not to be a dick, but just because you now want to follow the accepted script, does not mean much. Every girl wants to be a “good girl” when she’s called on it or asked on a survey.

      I think your point about regret is valid, my guess is that most of it comes from disappointed hopes when the guy never calls again. The woman doesn’t regret the hookup per se, she regrets that the guy didn’t want to see her again, or may even now be pretending she doesn’t exist.

      I think that most of the women who go for some casual hookups and then stop do so because they’ve realized it’s a poor strategy, and they don’t want to feel that constant disappointment and humiliation.

      It’s not about being good or bad – as I said earlier, the good girl is the one who got lucky in hooking up with a guy seeking a gf, and the bad girl is the one who rolled the dice and lost.

      All I really ask is that a girl understand what she is really doing in raising her “price” in a “I get it, and I’m really in this “dating” thing to show you I what I have to offer, not just for the sake of dating” type way and make it worth the price.

      That is entirely fair. It’s also fair for you to refuse to wait, FWIW.

  • EIN

    “Nick suggested they go back to his place to hook up. Julie declined. The next time Julie logged into the dating site, Nick had blocked her.”

    Sounds normal to me. If you’re a nice guy and get dumped in the friend zone enough times you eventually learn the frame of mind that you want to know if a girl is sexually interested in you or if she is just using you for monetary or emotional gain on the side.

    The only way to find out if the girl is sexually interested in you is to ask, and if you take into account that they say a girl knows within 30 seconds if she’ll have sex with you and you ask her and she says no, why would you continue to waste your time on a girl who isn’t interested in you sexually?

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @EIN

      The only way to find out if the girl is sexually interested in you is to ask, and if you take into account that they say a girl knows within 30 seconds if she’ll have sex with you and you ask her and she says no, why would you continue to waste your time on a girl who isn’t interested in you sexually?

      Because the quality woman with high relationship value who is very attracted to you will think, “Yes, I want to have sex with you, but I will forego that pleasure until I know that you are not out to pump and dump me.”

      Delaying sex until she is certain of a man’s intentions is the most powerful and important thing a woman can do.

  • http://en.gravatar.com/marellus Marellus

    Seven jealous fools playing by her rules
    Can’t believe her
    He feels so in between, can’t break the scene
    It would grieve her
    And that’s the reason why he must cry
    He’ll never leave her

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fgQ-QrCFMjs

  • Scaramanga

    After reading the comments, (Mikey has it right) the following comes to mind, “Never ask a rabbit how to catch a rabbit. Always ask a wolf.”

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      After reading the comments, (Mikey has it right) the following comes to mind, “Never ask a rabbit how to catch a rabbit. Always ask a wolf.”

      Yes please, go back to the PUA forums.

  • Ted D

    “Honestly, those kind of reactions naturally come with the territory of dating a beautiful woman.”

    My first LTR mate was a late bloomer, and her “hawtness” increased a bit while we were together. I remember one time we were out somewhere and a guy out of the blue walked up and said “what are YOU doing with him?” Before I could even open my mouth she looked him in the eye and said: “It’s purely sexual” and I just smirked at him. No come back, he just walked away. LOL

    “I asked her if she is worried about his ability to be faithful and she said no. (That would be my concern.) She’s just grossed out by it, and has unwelcome images popping into her mind. Fuck phantoms!”

    Exactly! Good Lord I’m glad at least a few women seem to understand my perspective. Yes, it IS gross. Yes, sometimes those random images just pop into my mind, and usually at the worst possible times. It is absolutely fucking awful to deal with.

  • VeriSeeker

    Susan,
    “Courtship, or dating, is a process whereby two people become acquainted, with the female in charge of sexual access, and the male in charge of access to commitment. That is called equilibrium, and that makes for happy couples.” This is a nice sentiment but it is factually inaccurate. This type of relationship died in the early to mid-sixties – the Baby Boomer generation.

    If your idea of “equilibrium” actually worked, most of the Baby Boomer marriages would have worked and not ended in divorce. In truth, our Boomer parents got divorced somewhere around 50% of the time – same as today.

    Conclusion: The sexes don’t “need” each other for anything anymore. Women can and do bring home as much money as men. Men and women get into relationships because they “want” companionship. The definition of companionship is what is different between the sexes. Smart individuals understand that all relationships are give-&-take…only the whiners and maladjusted seem to want hypergamy (men) or absolute control (women).

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @veriseeker

      If your idea of “equilibrium” actually worked, most of the Baby Boomer marriages would have worked and not ended in divorce. In truth, our Boomer parents got divorced somewhere around 50% of the time – same as today.

      First, the divorce rate overall today is 40%, and only 16-17% for those with a college education.

      Second, it was the disruption of the equilibrium – women no longer acting as gatekeepers to sex – that drove up the divorce rate in the first place. However, it should be noted that divorce had been climbing steadily over time, and was already at 25% by 1965.

      Men and women get into relationships because they “want” companionship. The definition of companionship is what is different between the sexes. Smart individuals understand that all relationships are give-&-take…

      They want to be known. They want companionship, and love. That basic human drive never goes away. The difference isn’t between the sexes, it’s between individuals with STR vs. LTR orientations.

  • JP

    “Conclusion: The sexes don’t “need” each other for anything anymore. Women can and do bring home as much money as men. Men and women get into relationships because they “want” companionship.”

    No.

    Need companionship to form that (primal?) bond.

    Feature, not bug.

    However, like anything else in life, it can go wrong.

    And like other parts of reality, ignoring it won’t make it go away.

  • Ion

    “Dating a handsome male naturally entails subtle competition and having to mentally beat other women away with a stick.”

    And that is exactly why I won’t date a man who is that handsome ever again.

    “I’ve done everything society has told me to do get dates – be sweet, pay for dates, have a nice job, man and I am just fucking sick of it. ”

    Did you also abide by the rule of being roughly 6’1 ??

  • Sai

    I really like Tasmin’s comments about honest, non-text communication and the need for direct questions.

    @Lokland
    “Pff. The weirdest thing that ever happened to me was when one of my parents friends came and started, uhmm, not even sure how to describe it, but drooling on my feet and talking about how startlingly beautiful she was.”

    How’d you get away from that ‘conversation’?

    @Susan
    “Yes, I think this is true. The fact is, suffering builds character. I suspect that’s why so many Prom Queens and high school quarterbacks peak in high school. During their most formative years, they miss out on the key character building moments.”

    Watch out -sometimes it backfires, and you get the nerd who’s waiting for the day when it’s his turn to crush somebody (not literally… unless it’s a comic book).

    Also, the potential reformed player would make me feel uneasy too. How would I know if there was a kid out there by one of those other 21? (and yes, guys also have the right to ask this question) How would I know that whatever caused him to leave #4, or #12, or #19, wouldn’t cause him to leave me and seek out #23 and up? (again, a legitimate concern for men that should be asked about)

    Then Tasmin made it funny.

  • http://theprivateman.wordpress.com The Private Man

    “You don’t blame a guy who blocks a woman for not putting out the second time they ever met? That’s his right, but it makes him a total asshole. Re PrivateMan’s method, he’s alone, and he doesn’t want to be. I don’t know why men are taking advice from men who have bad marriages, no love life, and are essentially involuntarily celibate.”

    The ad hominem not withstanding, the online dating method I recommend works. If the woman doesn’t respond, flakes out, or doesn’t fulfill his expectations on a date he absolutely should block and move on. Does that make him an asshole? Who cares? He’s seeking to meet his relationship goals on his own terms.

    As well, you don’t know anything about my current romantic situation, I stopped blogging about my personal life and deleted all the posts related to it. I continue to blog on the subject of attraction and dating because my readers practically demand it.

    You can rail against “game” blogs all you want but there is simply too much truth in those blogs regarding Red Pill wisdom and how it works successfully in the context of dating and relationships. You’ve admitted it yourself more often than not. You’re shooting the messenger but welcoming the message.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Private Man

      The ad hominem not withstanding, the online dating method I recommend works. If the woman doesn’t respond, flakes out, or doesn’t fulfill his expectations on a date he absolutely should block and move on.

      I would have thought that was obvious. Same goes for women. As I said, the guy who blocked the woman for not putting out did her a favor. She laughed. Feature not bug. Neither one wasted their time. He was strictly STR, she was going for LTR. Next.

      As for the ad hom, I consider it 100% valid to consider the source when taking advice. I wouldn’t suggest that women take advice on dating and marriage from 39 year old invol spinsters, and I don’t see why men should take advice from divorced, unhappy men. The number of disgruntled middle aged men in the sphere giving relationship advice is nothing short of alarming. However, I have no dog in that fight. I was simply responding to a comment where you were introduced.

      FTR, the comment you left Hope regarding the birth of her child exposed you as a bitter and angry whiner, as if we care to celebrate your vasectomy. Thanks for not reproducing.

      You can rail against “game” blogs all you want but there is simply too much truth in those blogs regarding Red Pill wisdom and how it works successfully in the context of dating and relationships. You’ve admitted it yourself more often than not. You’re shooting the messenger but welcoming the message.

      No doubt there are true accounts of successful relationships from red pillers. I have several married commenters here and other bloggers I read who can boast these real results. There are also several Game bloggers who are faking it, and some who even admit their results are poor. But again, that’s for guys to decide. I’m certainly not obligated to endorse them, though.

  • JP

    @Susan
    “Yes, I think this is true. The fact is, suffering builds character. I suspect that’s why so many Prom Queens and high school quarterbacks peak in high school. During their most formative years, they miss out on the key character building moments.”

    This is pretty much why I peaked in high school.

  • Tasmin

    @Susan
    “LMAO at the rationalization.”
    Yeah not exactly slapstick though. Every one of those lines have been handed to me by women with ‘active’ pasts, an ‘experienced’ love life and the rationalization part is something the man must do to accept her for who she is and that sort. Swallow it wholesale or hit the bricks. Luckily I’ve got good shoes.

    Imagine how exciting it is to know that a woman has it all figured out sexually already – and now wants you. Or has had a wide variety of men – all colors, faiths, and nationalities – that should me me feel good, because she has not just read the menu, but consumed it and then picked ME out of all of that. I know a couple of men who are fine with that, even look for that in a woman, but then they are N=100+, so I’m sure it will work out fine for them.

    The interesting thing is, I could post those same lines out there on the internets on dozens of sites with chats re: “my GF’s past bothers me” searches and would get applauded for being such a confident, non-judgmental guy. Is it so funny because it is coming from a guy or is it so funny because the rationalization does indeed seem twisted?

    In the case of this young woman I do hope they figure it out with minimal discomfort, but it can be an invasive thing, those phantoms. I wonder what her friends think? What she thinks of her female friends and their behavior – that is, does she work against or reinforce hooking-up and casual within her social circle? The silent majority (if such a thing exists) needs to stand up and be heard.

    I think she is an anomaly, though I know you have mentioned that this is a growing concern for young women. I just find it hard to believe since that same demographic have taken casual to a whole new level. Or perhaps they are growing scared and distrustful of the monster they created: frankenSMP.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Tasmin

      The interesting thing is, I could post those same lines out there on the internets on dozens of sites with chats re: “my GF’s past bothers me” searches and would get applauded for being such a confident, non-judgmental guy. Is it so funny because it is coming from a guy or is it so funny because the rationalization does indeed seem twisted?

      When I have written posts about female promiscuity, I’ve gotten comments like that from guys. And of course, lots of them hang out at Jezebel. I’m always puzzled by it. They seem to have a “the more the merrier” attitude about it.

      I was amused by your rationalization because it does seem so twisted and I think a woman would have to be a complete idiot to buy it. Also, it was written well, I liked your list of likes and dislikes, e.g. caboose.

      What she thinks of her female friends and their behavior – that is, does she work against or reinforce hooking-up and casual within her social circle?

      Like most young women, she has friends who are promiscuous, and others who are not. She obviously is closest to women who share her outlook, but she does not judge the slutty ones. Mostly I think she worries about them, as they go through so many men, all the while hoping for relationships. I do not believe she will stand up to these women on principle. Way too confrontational.

      I think she is an anomaly, though I know you have mentioned that this is a growing concern for young women. I just find it hard to believe since that same demographic have taken casual to a whole new level. Or perhaps they are growing scared and distrustful of the monster they created: frankenSMP.

      I think there’s a real divide, as noted above. The promiscuous women don’t mind players a bit, as you might imagine. With numbers from 50-75, they actually hope for guys who are higher than that. 100 is a mark of real accomplishment!

      More restricted women don’t want to wind up marrying the guy who was a douche in college. I’ve heard a lot of women say that they don’t know how to figure out what a guy was like when he was younger.

      Admittedly, my sample is very biased, in that they read here and absorb some of the information about the risks of male promiscuity. I’m sure that in the general population, most women would not blanch at 20 or 25, though I do believe many women wish to avoid guys who have worked hard to rack up bodies.

  • Passer_By

    @susan
    “I asked her what she had hoped he’d say, and she said, she didn’t know, maybe 10-15? She was hoping it wasn’t a really high number, but then her heart sank when he said 21.”

    LOL. So, 6 or 7 would be too low and make him a loser. 15 would be toward the high side of the ideal range, but 21 is just disgustingly high? That seems preposterous. Or am I misunderstanding what she meant by “hoping”?

    Honestly, once you get past 10 or 15, I’m not sure why a woman would care about his number. As for guys caring, I think once she’s past 5 or 10, it’s probably more about whether they were dating scenarios, or whether she’s was just repeatedly getting fucked by any old guy she just met. Or gang banged or something.

    But, as I said once before, I suppose this depends on age. People in their early 20s now seem obsessed about “N” in a way that I don’t recall anyone being when I was that age.

    “When the bar closed, Nick suggested they go back to his place to hook up. Julie declined. The next time Julie logged into the dating site, Nick had blocked her.”

    I’m generally in agreement with you on this being preposterous, since they met on-line and he hadn’t even allowed for the 7 hour rule, let alone 3 legit dates, but it would also depend on HOW she “declined”. If she smiled and said it felt a little too soon for that, that would be one thing. But if she acted offended by the suggestion or had that “No, that’s not happening” tone that women like to brag about using, then I’d next her immediately and not waste one more second on her. That is, if I was a single young buck.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Passer By

      LOL. So, 6 or 7 would be too low and make him a loser. 15 would be toward the high side of the ideal range, but 21 is just disgustingly high? That seems preposterous. Or am I misunderstanding what she meant by “hoping”?

      Well, she knows he’s been single from 23-26, so she figured single digits was too much to hope for. She finds him very attractive, so she assumes other women do too.

      He brought it up, she wasn’t expecting the conversation, so she hadn’t given it any thought. When he said 21 she realized she was disappointed. I don’t think she can really explain it intellectually – it was a gut response.

      Honestly, once you get past 10 or 15, I’m not sure why a woman would care about his number.

      I assume because the higher the number, the greater the number of ONSs. She doesn’t want to get serious with someone who chased tail as a hobby.

      Re Julie’s manner in declining sex with Nick, I don’t have that information. I believe she was taken aback, and she said he was sullen when she said no. Her attitude was, “WTF? He thinks he’s entitled to come up to my apartment!”

  • BroHamlet

    @Susan

    “It’s not about being good or bad – as I said earlier, the good girl is the one who got lucky in hooking up with a guy seeking a gf, and the bad girl is the one who rolled the dice and lost.”

    If you have paid attention to anything I’ve written in the comments here. You know that I’ve said over and over that I don’t really believe in the good girl/bad girl dynamic. We are all a mixed bag.

    I think articles like this one generate so much ire because a lot of girls use the good/bad girl dynamic as a card to play given the situation and the guy. While, as we mentioned before, that’s not wrong, it’s not a game any man of value should be willing to play. Why? Because for many of us, women have shown us time and again that we don’t really have to play that game if we’re good enough. This is what I mean when I say that there is a really fine line between a good girl and a bad one, so fine that most of the time the whole dynamic and the questions it implies miss the mark entirely as far as I’m concerned. It’s fine to want to raise your price for the sake of being respectable, but I’m not telling you anything you don’t know by saying the cat is out of the bag and it’s not going back in. Trying to return to the dating script is hardly helpful without a huge dose of candor and a dash of empathy on the part of women- saying defiantly that “I can change my price if I want!” without either of those, is obviously sowing the seeds of discord, which you are now witnessing, and only serves to make men more opposed to any kind of conventional courtship. Even those with the goods a la Zach, Jason and a few other prototypically sucessful guys that post here, don’t enjoy what it entails.

    At the end of the day, dating, hooking up, whatever. It’s all a formality- desire is what’s really at stake, so before I’m going to engage in any games I want to know that she understands courtship to be the proxy for desire that it really is.

  • JP

    “FTR, the comment you left Hope regarding the birth of her child exposed you as a bitter and angry whiner, as if we care to celebrate your vasectomy. Thanks for not reproducing.”

    Hey, I’m an angry and bitter whiner, too!

    There’s absolutely nothing wrong with that.

    It’s truly a legitimate lifestyle choice for today’s world.

    Although I’m not interested in having that surgery thingy where, uh, they do whatever they do to sterilize you.

  • JP

    “I think there’s a real divide, as noted above. The promiscuous women don’t mind players a bit, as you might imagine. With numbers from 50-75, they actually hope for guys who are higher than that. 100 is a mark of real accomplishment!”

    At some point, don’t people just stop counting?

    I’m betting that these numbers should really be 50-75 +/- 25.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Johnny joe (whatever your name is)

    So, you pretty much agree with me then. I read your diatribe, and it basically said the same thing I have been saying. Objectively/universally attractive men have options and an easier time at dating. Wome have no problem with dating men that they are already attracted to. What part of what you said is different from what I said?

  • Ted D

    Susan – so maybe the question we need to answer is: what percentage of the population (men and women) are STR vs. LTR oriented. (and broken out by age brackets!) Perhaps we are reaching a stage in our social evolution that STR is becomming more common, or perhaps it has always been a large portion and we simply kept it in check with societal norms?

    To me a surge in STR types makes sense to an extent. In the modern West, even the poorest among us tends to have a better style of life than some of the working poor in other countries. Since we have so much provided for us by default here, maybe the need for LTR thinking/planning is dwindling, and the result is we are producing more STR oriented people.

    I’d wager that if things got really tough (as in having to be concerned more about your life and well being every day) there would be much less divorce, much less flakiness, and a lot more people willing to work things out rather than call it quits.

    Or to put it short: maybe things are just a little too damn easy for us.

  • J

    … and I don’t see why men should take advice from divorced, unhappy men. The number of disgruntled middle aged men in the sphere giving relationship advice is nothing short of alarming.

    I suspect that’s because genuinely happy, married men are too busy with their work and families to blog.

  • Ted D

    Susan – “I don’t think she can really explain it intellectually – it was a gut response. ”

    Well you’ve seen me try and try again to explain it here with limited results. As hard as I try, I can’t put exactly how it makes me feel into words. I can find reasons WHY I feel the way I do, but I have no words to actually describe the feeling itself. Disgust, revulsion, sadness, heartache, anger, hurt… All and none of them at the same time. If I didn’t love her, none of it would exist in my mind. But, loving her is also what makes it not quite all of those emotions above. I WANT to feel them instinctually, but looking at her and knowing how I feel about her makes me angry at myself for feeling that way ABOUT her.

    Any time I try to write about how I feel on something, I can’t help but think it is barely coherent and sensible, so I hope this makes sense.

  • JP

    @TedD:

    You can entertain yourself with this for the moment.

    http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-human-beast/201301/why-women-are-more-sexual-in-some-societies

    Also, life isn’t “easy”. That’s an imperial illusion. Maybe.

    http://thearchdruidreport.blogspot.com/2013/01/the-road-down-from-empire.html

  • JP

    “I suspect that’s because genuinely happy, married men are too busy with their work and families to blog.”

    Blogging does take a significant amount of effort.

    That’s why I’m a commenteer.

  • J

    My first LTR mate was a late bloomer, and her “hawtness” increased a bit while we were together. I remember one time we were out somewhere and a guy out of the blue walked up and said “what are YOU doing with him?” Before I could even open my mouth she looked him in the eye and said: “It’s purely sexual” and I just smirked at him. No come back, he just walked away.

    LOVE IT!!!!!

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    So, Sassy, the vast majority of guys aren’t attractive to girls at an initial glance, so offering a date is, AT BEST, counter-productive. At worst, the girl just thinks “he’s nice, maybe I’ll give it a shot,” and it goes nowhere and guy is out money.

    So dating is a losing proposition for him.

    The guys who are attractive, don’t have to date anyways: they have options and girls are falling over themselves to be with them. Dating, as you can see, takes a lot of time, energy, and money.

    So dating is a losing proposition for him.

    No matter what kind of guy you are, dating is a losing proposition.

    This is contrast to what us blue-pill men were taught, which is that you would introduce yourself to a girl, and then date her to GENERATE attraction, and that girls would appreciate this, because it sets us apart from the men who just don’t offer commitment. That’s treating a girl like crap.

    But, really, dating is a losing proposition. Normal guys need to up themselves to be ATTRACTIVE, and consider dating skills…uhh..of secondary importance at best. Build concentric social circles.

    Girls that do ask for dates should be qualified to an inch of their lives, because chances are it’s a waste of time.

  • J

    Me too, JP.

    I kill way too much time on the net just playing around. I can’t imagine having to write a post every few days, moderate responses to it and then put time and energy into referee-ing the stupid dust-upbetween commenters and defending myself in trhese rifdiculous blog wars. It’s practically a full time job.

    I find it hard to believe that a “happily married man” is going to put 8 hours/day into work, 6-7 hours/day into a blog and still be able to spend much time with a wife and kids. I also find it hard to believe a wife who desires her husband would be happy with him spending so much of his precious free time holding the virtual hands of disgruntled strangers when he could be spending time with her and the kids.

  • Ted D

    “I suspect that’s because genuinely happy, married men are too busy with their work and families to blog.”

    Honestly there are tons of reasons for this.

    First, we all know that blogs and similar forums tend to attract very similar personality types. Surely there is some variety, but we’ve talked many times at how odd it is that certain personality types just aggregate here. So there is a lot of selection bias based on the format.

    Second, happy people do not normally go in search of places to hang out that have unhappy people in them. So, the statement above holds true not only for happily married men, but happy people in general. Why would a guy in a great marriage even know the ‘sphere exists unless someone brings it to his attention?

    Third, misery loves company. Bitter and angry people tend to look for like minded people to share their misery with, and the ‘sphere does a great job at collecting men that are bitter and angry at women. No surprise there for anyone of course. But, just because someone is bitter and/or angry does NOT mean they have nothing useful to say. It simply means that to find those useful tidbits you have to get very good at filtering out the negativity.

    Fourth (and I’m going to quit here), listening to the horror stories of bitter and angry men can keep a guy from repeating the same mistakes. Despite the repeated claims that it doesn’t work for women, men often learn a great deal by example, and listening to the failures of divorced men might just help to motivate them to improve BEFORE they make a life changing mistake. Shock and Awe work well on guys, and the over-the-top angry rantings of ‘spherians are sometimes a wakeup call for guys to be careful. I personally tend to respond faster to negative reenforcement than postive, and therfor get more “use” out of harsh critism than praise delivered with “friendly suggestions” of how to improve. Don’t tell me I’m doing a great job BUT could do this or that better. Tell me I suck at this or that and to get my shit straight, and you’ll see results. I would probably completely disregard the friendly suggestion since a suggestion is NOT a command.

  • J

    I believe all you say in post # 384 paragraphs 1-3 to be the case, Ted.

    Paragraph 4 is YMMV, but I’m sure it’s true for many.

  • Ted D

    JP – Very interesting article. so the premise is: in societies where women tend to behave “like men” (that is more competition, careers, etc.) increased testosterone may be causing them to be more promiscuous. So, we ARE making more STR type people?!

    As a side note, I believe that there are many “female” problems related to increased T production like PCOS (which my wife has). It would be interesting to see if the percentages for such issues are higher in Western countries than others. Of course environmental factors come into play as well (such as hormones in drinking water.) But a correlation would be intriguing.

    And my point regarding easy life in the West is: we aren’t generally worried about war, famine, or lions on the prowl. Most of our basic survival needs are easily taken care of, so there is left to “worry” about from a survival standpoint.

  • Ted D

    J – “Paragraph 4 is YMMV, but I’m sure it’s true for many.”

    At this point everyone should assume YMMV when I say how *I* respond to anything. More often than not I find that my way of dealing with the world really doesn’t line up well with the masses. On occasion I wonder if I’m living in a parallel universe where I share the same physical space with billions of people I have absolutely nothing in common with. :P

  • J

    @Ted

    PCOS is horrible. When I was dealing with my endometriosis, I ran into a lot of women who had PCOS. I felt that endo was the “kinder” illness. I hope things are going well for your wife.

  • JP

    “And my point regarding easy life in the West is: we aren’t generally worried about war, famine, or lions on the prowl. Most of our basic survival needs are easily taken care of, so there is left to “worry” about from a survival standpoint.”

    Our basic survival needs include social support, which is severely lacking in many places.

    Also, our basic survival needs also require a set point of physical exertion or the body essentially goes to sleep. Meaning that we are basically required to exercise a certain amount to meet our needs to maintain a baseline level of function.

    So, no, we are not getting our basic survival needs met.

    Only some of them.

  • J

    On occasion I wonder if I’m living in a parallel universe where I share the same physical space with billions of people I have absolutely nothing in common with.

    No, I think there are a significant number of men who don’t like people to mince words. I personally don’t like people to be mean, but I like people to be honest, even blunt. I don’t quite understand unclear signals.

    When I was working, we had a complete system meltdown. We couldn’t use any computers. My boss came up to me and said that if I made anything I wanted to do, he’d be happy to let me leave work. Dense as I am, I told him I was fine. He then looked at me like I was stupid and said “Let me re-phrase this. You are flextime, and I don’t want to pay you to sit and do nothing.” Then I understood.

  • Ted D

    J – Re: PCOS – she has been fine for some time, although she has some lingering effects and avoids any/all hormonal BC. (which I don’t think I’d want her taking anyway…)

    “My boss came up to me and said that if I made anything I wanted to do, he’d be happy to let me leave work. Dense as I am, I told him I was fine. He then looked at me like I was stupid and said “Let me re-phrase this. You are flextime, and I don’t want to pay you to sit and do nothing.” Then I understood”

    Yep, I’ve found myself in very similar situations from time to time. Over the years I’ve simply learned to ask for clarification if someone says something to me that I feel is irrelevant instead of assuming they just want to gab at me about nothing important. I can’t imagine just how many “subtle hints” I’ve missed throughout my lifetime.

  • J

    I don’t miss a lot, but it’s only because people who know me well expect things to go over my head. My inablility to read cues and my gullibility are standard jokes among my friends.

  • Ted D

    J – OT but we’ve discussed Aspergers spectrum before and it seems like you have some knowledge. I read somewhere yesterday (I can dig the link up at home if you are interested) that high functioning aspies aften learn how people react in social situations by watching TV and Movies. I can’t help but wonder, with all the romcoms out there (many of which I watched as a youth for lack of a choice. LOL) is it possible that very high functioning aspies are learning the wrong messages because they actually think life IS like on TV?

    This ties into the conversation we had last week that perhaps a certain segment of the population is internalizing our standard messages in ways that become detrimental to themselves, and reading that triggered an A-HA moment in my head. I’m trying to remember exactly how I felt when faced with imperical evidence that ‘bad boys’ were successful with women, because I can’t believe I was completely “duped” by a handful of women and authority figures growing up, although I’ve certainly seen stories from other men making it clear I wasn’t the only one.

    I just think it is an interesting mystery that some men seem to fully believe the Blue Pill story of “For Ever After” despite lots of real-world evidence to the contrary. Maybe some of us simply put far too much faith in certain sources of info and completely ignored what we could easily see because it didn’t match.

    I’m in one of those “contemplate the universe and my naval” moods today, so excuse the long tangent if you can. :-P

  • Lokland

    @Sai

    “How’d you get away from that ‘conversation’?”

    Thanks then one foot in front of the other.

  • JP

    @J: “No, I think there are a significant number of men who don’t like people to mince words. I personally don’t like people to be mean, but I like people to be honest, even blunt. I don’t quite understand unclear signals.”

    This would explain the problem when I pointed out that you were using your feminine wiles to trap that poor-unsuspecting co-worker in your web.

  • J

    @Ted

    I can’t help but wonder, with all the romcoms out there (many of which I watched as a youth for lack of a choice. LOL) is it possible that very high functioning aspies are learning the wrong messages because they actually think life IS like on TV?

    I think really is the case. I personally went through a period where I found it hard to understand that people IRL don’t appreciate sarcasm the way people in sit-coms do. Some might say that is still an issue for me. ;-)

    @JP

    This would explain the problem when I pointed out that you were using your feminine wiles to trap that poor-unsuspecting co-worker in your web.

    Yeah. I’m still sorry about that, BTW. I guess I got my signals crossed, but tbh I’m still not sure how I missed the signals.

    But that’s me, not you. It’s frustrating. Sometimes I think I have this thing licked, and then I find out I don’t. Similarly, every five years or so, someone calls me an aloof bitch, and I just want to tell them how hard I work at not looking like an aloof bitch.

  • Ted D

    And to be clear, I’d prefer someone politely tell me what I’m doing wrong and why, but if I have to choose between “friendly suggestion” and assholean critism, I’ll take assholean any day. I might get miffed at their delivery, but at least I won’t miss the intent of the message.

  • http://www.4stargazer.wordpress.com Anacaona

    I believe all you say in post # 384 paragraphs 1-3 to be the case, Ted.
    I will add that happily married man have blogs about games,cars, movies…there are plenty of married men on the Internet they just don’t talk about it, why would they?
    And it also deals with how people do their thinking, for some men typing helps them figure out stuff, so they blog.

  • J

    because I can’t believe I was completely “duped” by a handful of women and authority figures growing up, although I’ve certainly seen stories from other men making it clear I wasn’t the only one.

    And I’d wonder what proportion were INTx.

  • JP

    @J:

    “But that’s me, not you.”

    Well, it could be me, too. Apparently, I’m excellent at joking while presenting what I am saying with extreme seriousness.

    I don’t think I realized that there were incoming fire from the disgruntledmanosphere coming in here all the time.

  • J

    I will add that happily married man have blogs about games,cars, movies

    Sure, but I bet most don’t spend the amount of time you need to spend to have a high traffic blog–unless the blog is profession-related.

    …there are plenty of married men on the Internet they just don’t talk about it, why would they?

    Sure. DH sometimes frequents music blogs, especially when he is condidereing purchasing new instruments or software. I can’t imagine he discusses our marriage there.

  • J

    Well, it could be me, too. Apparently, I’m excellent at joking while presenting what I am saying with extreme seriousness.

    I love deadpan humor IRL and can be reather deadpan myself.

    I don’t think I realized that there were incoming fire from the disgruntled manosphere coming in here all the time.

    Yeah, that was part of it. I’ve had what I thought were lovely conversations many times before that turned ugly in ways that I didn’t see coming.

  • JP

    “J – OT but we’ve discussed Aspergers spectrum before and it seems like you have some knowledge. I read somewhere yesterday (I can dig the link up at home if you are interested) that high functioning aspies aften learn how people react in social situations by watching TV and Movies. I can’t help but wonder, with all the romcoms out there (many of which I watched as a youth for lack of a choice. LOL) is it possible that very high functioning aspies are learning the wrong messages because they actually think life IS like on TV?”

    I think I have the opposite of whatever Asperger’s is.

    Meaning that I’m nearly completely non-concrete and big picture in my thinking. Which means that I miss details.

    Essentially, where an AS would notice the trees and tell you all about the texture of each tree’s bark, while completely missing the point that the trees form a forest, my problem is that I only care about the forest and would be hard pressed to tell you about any tree. And that would be if I even noticed that the forest *had* trees. Sometimes I miss the forest, too, but that’s because I’m thinking about the ecosystem.

    My discovery of the importance of social cues and non-verbal communication was exciting for me.

    Uh, oh, I thought.

    I am so, so in trouble here.

    OK – this explains a lot, I said.

    How on God’s Green Earth do I figure out this one?

  • SayWhaat

    Admittedly, my sample is very biased, in that they read here and absorb some of the information about the risks of male promiscuity. I’m sure that in the general population, most women would not blanch at 20 or 25, though I do believe many women wish to avoid guys who have worked hard to rack up bodies.

    I’ve shared this here before, but in a discussion with a co-worker re: age-appropriateness of men to date, she flatly stated that she would not want to date a guy who is even in his late 20s because “he would be too experienced.”

    This is from a Wellesley alum, who I assume are about as “girl-power” oriented as a girl can get…

  • J

    Meaning that I’m nearly completely non-concrete and big picture in my thinking. Which means that I miss details.

    You are very global. I am too. So is my older son. It’s an advantage in that we see a broader picture than most people. It’s a disadavantage in that we can be very absent-minded professor-ish. I’m not sure what can be done about it. My son used to have a little gf who would walk him through the details of life. That was helpful. Do you have a secretary to handle details for you? Does your wife help you with this? DH will alert me when things go over my head.

  • JP

    “Do you have a secretary to handle details for you? Does your wife help you with this?”

    Oh, my wife is absolutely thrilled with my particular skill-set.

    DW: “Can you fix this lawnmower for me?”

    Me: “Uh, I think fixing the lawnmower requires knowledge of the physical world. I’m not really good at that sort of thing.”

    DW: “Can you do anything at all?”

    Me: “That involves moving or fixing actual *things*? No.”

  • SayWhaat

    Meaning that I’m nearly completely non-concrete and big picture in my thinking. Which means that I miss details.

    You have ADHD.

  • Ion

    “Our basic survival needs include social support, which is severely lacking in many places…So, no, we are not getting our basic survival needs met.

    Only some of them.”

    +1

  • JP

    “You have ADHD.”

    If it’s anything it’s Inattentive-ADD.

    Hyperactive, I’m not.

  • SayWhaat

    Yes, that is what I have. ADHD-PI.

  • Jimmy Hendricks

    @ADBG

    No matter what kind of guy you are, dating is a losing proposition.

    This is contrast to what us blue-pill men were taught, which is that you would introduce yourself to a girl, and then date her to GENERATE attraction, and that girls would appreciate this, because it sets us apart from the men who just don’t offer commitment. That’s treating a girl like crap.

    But, really, dating is a losing proposition. Normal guys need to up themselves to be ATTRACTIVE, and consider dating skills…uhh..of secondary importance at best. Build concentric social circles.

    Girls that do ask for dates should be qualified to an inch of their lives, because chances are it’s a waste of time.

    My thoughts exactly.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      But, really, dating is a losing proposition. Normal guys need to up themselves to be ATTRACTIVE, and consider dating skills…uhh..of secondary importance at best. Build concentric social circles.

      Girls that do ask for dates should be qualified to an inch of their lives, because chances are it’s a waste of time.

      Again, let me define the purpose of dating. Dates are a means of getting to know someone better one on one, with both parties having signaled mutual interest.

      If you do not go on dates, how do you spend time with one other person in a non-sexual way? How do you get to know them better? How is it enjoyable?

      I’m genuinely interested to hear the alternative, as I can’t think of any. It seems to me that “no dates” means hookups, period.

  • J

    I feel personally that too many “absent-minded professor” types are mis-labeled ADD. It’s a different, though possibly related, problem in my opinion.

    “Absent-minded professors” tend to over-focus or misplace focus as opposed to being unable to focus. It also looks like Aspergers because of the focus on weird things.

    I think there is a whole umbrella group of “inappropriate focus” that is yeet to be dealt with.

    A survey: How many people here run around with a daft smile on your face or laugh for what appears to be no reason just because the stuff that goes on inside your head is so much more entertaining than the stuff outside? When I was a kid, I swear, my mother thought I was insane.

  • Ted D

    “And I’d wonder what proportion were INTx.”

    Interestingly enough, there seems to be a high correlation of INTx types with Aspergers. There are certainly many other MBTI types with AS. Of course, it may simply be that INTJ personality traits simply coincide with Aspie traits to a large degree, but it IS interesting that INTJ’s are rare (1 to 3% of the population) and Aspergers is something like .5%. If indeed there are a large number of INTx types with AS, it adds some fuel to the fire that those types are far higher on the spectrum by default.

  • Ted D

    “A survey: How many people here run around with a daft smile on your face or laugh for what appears to be no reason just because the stuff that goes on inside your head is so much more entertaining than the stuff outside? When I was a kid, I swear, my mother thought I was insane.”

    *raises hand*

    People that know me well are no longer surprised when I randomly break out in laughter. In fact, most of the time they ask me to share, because they find my thought processes to be completely fascinating. They often ask how I can get from A to D without going past B and C. Try explaining that I actually started at A, went to L, jumped to 7, and then landed at D. Its funny, because even when they can see my logic, they just can’t figure out how to connect the dots.

  • http://www.4stargazer.wordpress.com Anacaona

    People that know me well are no longer surprised when I randomly break out in laughter. In fact, most of the time they ask me to share, because they find my thought processes to be completely fascinating. They often ask how I can get from A to D without going past B and C. Try explaining that I actually started at A, went to L, jumped to 7, and then landed at D. Its funny, because even when they can see my logic, they just can’t figure out how to connect the dots.

    For the Pinky and the Brain fans. Pinky always made some strange associations out loud and one episode they showed his though process and it was exactly the way mine works. I felt really stupid for a while…

  • JP

    “For the Pinky and the Brain fans. Pinky always made some strange associations out loud and one episode they showed his though process and it was exactly the way mine works. I felt really stupid for a while…”

    Brain: How are going to get the Earth to lose weight?
    Pinky: I know! We can get everyone to go on a diet!
    Brain: Diets don’t work.
    Pinky: Not even if you call them ‘A Whole New Way of Eating?’
    Brain: No.

    Brain: Pinky? What are you doing? You’re supposed to be with Elmyra!
    Pinky: In all my years in the movie business, I have never been treated so shabbily! I tell you, Brain, that show has gone to Elmyra’s head! Give someone a little power, and they turn on you like a rogue duck! Zort!
    Brain: A rogue duck? Pinky, Elmyra has a pretend show. It’s all inside her drum-like head.
    Pinky: Honestly, Brain, if you’re going to make excuses for her unprofessional behavior, [stammers] …I just don’t care to listen!

    http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Pinky_and_the_Brain

  • JP

    ““Absent-minded professors” tend to over-focus or misplace focus as opposed to being unable to focus. It also looks like Aspergers because of the focus on weird things.”

    Oh, there’s absolutely no question that I focus on weird things.

    Which is precisely why it looks like Aspergers.

  • JP

    Brain: Pinky, my laughing gas is designed to make humans laugh to the point of freezing, under certain conditions. Do you know what those conditions are, Pinky?
    Pinky: Ummm… Suzanne Somers must be riding a horse and singing “Don’t Fence Me In”?

  • JP

    Voice: And now it’s time for Cartoon Secrets Revealed.
    Pinky: I’m not really that stupid. I purposely sabotage Brain’s plans, because if he ever succeeded, the show would be over, wouldn’t it?
    Voice: That’s rather smart.
    Pinky: Yes, I thought so.
    Brain: Who are you talking to?
    Pinky: No one.

  • JP

    Brain: Thanks for agreeing to meet with me; I really feel you’re the only one who can help. You see, after five years of unsuccessful attempts at world domination, I finally figured out where I was going wrong.
    Pinky: Brain! Time to walk the sponge again!
    Brain: In short, I need a new partner, one whose might is equal to my intellect. In return, I’m willing to let you have all of northern Europe.
    Superman: You’re kidding, right?
    [Later]
    Pinky: He turned you down, didn’t he?
    Brain: Who asked you?!

  • http://www.4stargazer.wordpress.com Anacaona

    @JP
    Heh, good show :)

  • SayWhaat

    “Absent-minded professors” tend to over-focus or misplace focus as opposed to being unable to focus

    Hyper-focus is related to ADD, especially if it’s something particularly interesting to the ADDled.

    A survey: How many people here run around with a daft smile on your face or laugh for what appears to be no reason just because the stuff that goes on inside your head is so much more entertaining than the stuff outside? When I was a kid, I swear, my mother thought I was insane.

    LOL that’s my life. I’ve been called out on it more than once by professors in class. That wasn’t embarrassing at all…

  • http://flirtyintrovert.wordpress.com flirtyintrovert

    Jeez, as a Millennial, I hereby apologize for my generation! The social circles I frequent practice dating, which is not just good luck on my part: I have always had a strong sense of dating as a mere facilitator of love and marriage – not as entertainment.

    If you’re a traditional female, there’s no point in agonizing about all the hookup kids out there. You just need to filter ruthlessly for the traditional men: sure, they’re rare – but so are you! I went to a small, religious college and went on my first dinner/movie date there. I proceeded to date (not hook up with!) a few other men, until I met my fiance last year. Our first date involved a nice dinner and ice-skating.

    So have hope!

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @flirtyintrovert

      You just need to filter ruthlessly for the traditional men

      It’s all about the filtering. A woman is far better off considering 100 men and DQing 95 than hoping for the best with guys who are “hard to figure out.” If his intentions are not clear, next.

  • Sassy6519

    @ A Definite Beta Guy

    No matter what kind of guy you are, dating is a losing proposition.

    This is contrast to what us blue-pill men were taught, which is that you would introduce yourself to a girl, and then date her to GENERATE attraction, and that girls would appreciate this, because it sets us apart from the men who just don’t offer commitment. That’s treating a girl like crap.

    But, really, dating is a losing proposition. Normal guys need to up themselves to be ATTRACTIVE, and consider dating skills…uhh..of secondary importance at best. Build concentric social circles.

    Girls that do ask for dates should be qualified to an inch of their lives, because chances are it’s a waste of time.

    I don’t think that dating is a waste of time for guys. I do think, however, that many men are misguided about what it takes to get a date with a woman. I’ll go ahead and break it down for everyone.

    1. *This is the most important aspect*: Girls welcome dates from men that they ALREADY CONSIDER ATTRACTIVE. Asking a woman on a date in an attempt to establish attraction is a fool’s errand. The attraction already has to be there.

    2. Some men can be seen as attractive to women on the very first glance (These men are few and far between). Other men become attractive to a woman after some time passes. This explains how some guys are rejected initially, only to be propositioned later by the same women who rejected them. Some men may not want to hear this but it’s a rare man who can spark attraction in a woman at first glance or within about 5 minutes. The men who can are typically the guys who are the most physically attractive. Their looks alone are enough to spark a woman’s interest. It may be sad, but it’s true.

    3. The men who do not illicit such interest initially have to put in a bit more effort. These men tend to grow on women over time. These men can eventually spark attraction with a woman, and this attraction is not based on their looks. Status, dominance, money, charm, wit, intelligence, and prestige can be demonstrated after some time, and these traits can make a man more attractive.

    4. The problem is that the aforementioned traits take time to display, which puts many men at a disadvantage. The men that are able to spark attraction quickly overshadow the men who require more time to display attractive attributes. Bars and online dating aren’t very good options for men who can’t spark attraction quickly. Both places favor men who can spark attraction quickly.

    5. The hottest guy in the bar can overshadow other men with his presence alone. It only takes seconds for a woman to look at him and be attracted to his physical attributes. The men who do not compel attraction in women with their looks alone suffer, simply because their attractive qualities aren’t readily visible. The same applies to online dating. Since women typically filter through the many contacts they receive, the men that can spark attraction quickly also win out.

    6. I think the best thing a guy can do who does not spark attraction in women quickly is to showcase his other attractive qualities over time to extended friend groups. Friends of friends, or family members of friends, would be the best pools to choose from. Preselection could work in their favors, and hanging out in groups would allow these men more time to show their attractive attributes.

    7. Men display and women choose. Time is either on your side or it isn’t. Play to your respective strengths in time frames that give you the biggest bang for your buck.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      ADBG: This is contrast to what us blue-pill men were taught, which is that you would introduce yourself to a girl, and then date her to GENERATE attraction

      Sassy: Girls welcome dates from men that they ALREADY CONSIDER ATTRACTIVE. Asking a woman on a date in an attempt to establish attraction is a fool’s errand.

      +1

      Never ask a woman out cold. You should not invite her to spend more time until a baseline of mutual attraction is established. If you’re not getting IOIs, don’t do it. Work the connection until you do, or until it’s clear she’s not interested.

  • JP

    “If you do not go on dates, how do you spend time with one other person in a non-sexual way? How do you get to know them better? How is it enjoyable?

    I’m genuinely interested to hear the alternative, as I can’t think of any. It seems to me that “no dates” means hookups, period.”

    I wonder if part of the problem is the strange transition between high school/college and post-college.

    In high school/college, if you live near to the girl/guy, you can just hang out with them a lot and get to know them without actually dating because you just spent lots of time with them.

    Dates are kind of strange coming from this context.

  • Sai

    @Ted D
    “And my point regarding easy life in the West is: we aren’t generally worried about war, famine, or lions on the prowl. Most of our basic survival needs are easily taken care of, so there is left to “worry” about from a survival standpoint.”

    He’s right.
    This is usually the first thing I bring up every Thanksgiving.

    @J
    “A survey: How many people here run around with a daft smile on your face or laugh for what appears to be no reason just because the stuff that goes on inside your head is so much more entertaining than the stuff outside? When I was a kid, I swear, my mother thought I was insane.”

    Every other day. :)

    Here’s something moderately amusing: tomorrow Dr. Phil discusses slut shaming, and interviews a man on the “skanky women wear skanky clothes” side of the clothing disagreement.
    (I just hope no one bashes the vintage stuff.)

  • JP

    ” Never ask a woman out cold. You should not invite her to spend more time until a baseline of mutual attraction is established. If you’re not getting IOIs, don’t do it. Work the connection until you do, or until it’s clear she’s not interested..”

    One of the things that I learned from this blog is that there is such a thing as an IOI.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “I’m genuinely interested to hear the alternative, as I can’t think of any. It seems to me that “no dates” means hookups, period.”

    Dating is a loaded term.
    It implies that the man invests while the woman receives and makes judgement which is really too fucking bad cause their the ones auditioning for girlfriend.

    Hence hangout, it implies even footing where both parties are auditioning for each other.

    The difference is about $120 and the removal of female hand.

    Side note, I’m a big fan of coffee dates but even I wasn’t dull enough to call them dates. They were a woman’s 30 minute audition.

    Thats an excellent frame with which to go on a date.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Side note, I’m a big fan of coffee dates but even I wasn’t dull enough to call them dates. They were a woman’s 30 minute audition.

      Thats an excellent frame with which to go on a date.

      The male auditions the female for commitment worthiness. The female auditions the male for sex worthiness. Both parties have hand, because both have something to offer, or trade.

      The sexes are always in conflict – the goal is to find an equilibrium where both parties feel the same way. The goal should not be for either party to have more hand.

  • JP

    “The male auditions the female for commitment worthiness. The female auditions the male for sex worthiness. Both parties have hand, because both have something to offer, or trade.”

    I thought the point was to find someone you were compatible with.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “The sexes are always in conflict – the goal is to find an equilibrium where both parties feel the same way. The goal should not be for either party to have more hand.”

    Which is why dating does not work.
    Dating under all definitions implies that the man is auditioning for the woman but not vice versa.

    Hence hanging out.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Lokland

      Which is why dating does not work.
      Dating under all definitions implies that the man is auditioning for the woman but not vice versa.

      Hence hanging out.

      I don’t understand the difference. How about this scenario –

      Guy: Hey, wanna hang out sometime?

      Girl: Sure!

      Guy: There’s a great Korean place I’ve been wanting to try.

      Girl: Korean BBQ, awesome.

      Guy: How’s Saturday.

      Girl: Perfect, ttyl.

      If it’s two people romantically interested in one another planning to spend time alone, it’s a date.

  • Lokland

    @Sassy

    “4. The problem is that the aforementioned traits take time to display, which puts many men at a disadvantage. The men that are able to spark attraction quickly overshadow the men who require more time to display attractive attributes. Bars and online dating aren’t very good options for men who can’t spark attraction quickly. Both places favor men who can spark attraction quickly.”
    “I think the best thing a guy can do who does not spark attraction in women quickly is to showcase his other attractive qualities over time to extended friend groups. Friends of friends, or family members of friends, would be the best pools to choose from.”

    I agree with all of this but these two need to have special attention drawn to them.

    The fact is most guys don’t get to be successful at bar or places where attraction is required to be sparked quickly.

    The second part is the wholly realistic option.

    The problem is that option A has been defined as normal and that those unable or unwilling to do it are therefore losers, freaks etc.

    It can be very hard for a young man to divorce himself of the club seen if he thinks that the friends of friends route is for losers who can’t get laid.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Lokland

      The problem is that option A has been defined as normal and that those unable or unwilling to do it are therefore losers, freaks etc.

      It can be very hard for a young man to divorce himself of the club seen if he thinks that the friends of friends route is for losers who can’t get laid.

      That’s a problem in the guy’s head. 90% of women who go to bars regularly have never met a guy at a bar and dated him. I can think of three couples offhand who met that way. Bars are a good way for unrestricteds to meet one another.

  • John

    wouldn’t an already traditional woman attract a traditional man? Haven’t you gone on a lot about people attracting their equals? Asking loose women to try and attract traditional men is dumb.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @John

      wouldn’t an already traditional woman attract a traditional man? Haven’t you gone on a lot about people attracting their equals? Asking loose women to try and attract traditional men is dumb.

      I’m sorry, this comment makes no sense to me. Who has suggested that?

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Again, let me define the purpose of dating. Dates are a means of getting to know someone better one on one, with both parties having signaled mutual interest.

    If you do not go on dates, how do you spend time with one other person in a non-sexual way? How do you get to know them better? How is it enjoyable?

    I’m genuinely interested to hear the alternative, as I can’t think of any. It seems to me that “no dates” means hookups, period.

    Okay, I have to be honest here.

    I have never been on a date in my life.

    Period.

    This concept is utterly foreign to me. I wasn’t even attractive, strictly speaking, but I had a “technical” N of 10 (going by what PUAs will hold women to), and this was all done via hanging out in groups and building attraction that way over time, which resulted in chemistry at whatever obvious points somewhere else.

    I have no experience with a post-college script. In my senior year of college, I had a TERRIBLE experience with a girl that I had fallen for who had gone completely bonkers, night ending with her trying to drive a car from the backseat, and I swore off women for-fucking-ever. My current SO is the only girl I have been with after years of no-affection, and we followed the standard college hookup >>>relationship by accident script.

    So I am not an expert, and I won’t claim I am one.

    Now, that said, I don’t see why this can’t continue OUTSIDE of college, too, for some time. I am several years outside of college now, and I have expanded my social circle a lot, with concentric social circles that put me into contact with new girls regularly.

    I much prefer to handle things THIS way as opposed to going on “dates” with women that aren’t in the social circle. I can get to know her this way non-sexually and see if there is any attraction before deciding to invest time and money, and even then, the investment is going to be minimal and fun.

    So I don’t think we are too far off the page here.

    Now, Blue-Pill ADBG didn’t think of things this way. He, of course, knew that some girls were hooking up with him, and maybe others wanted to, but he didn’t think that was a strategy that was to be built upon and re-enforced: hook-ups were an aberration.

    Blue-Pill ADBG asked out precisely one girl formally, at the age of 15. He thought, well, we have a class together, she’s cute, we seem to get along, let’s see if she wants to go on a date!

    “Would you like to see a movie sometime?”
    “Uhhhh….what movie?”
    “uhhhh…”
    “I don’t think so”

    So ended ADBG’s only real attempt at dating. Turns out she really liked my friend and had friend-zoned me. I basically stopped talking to her.

    But I had thought that she should give me a date so we could see if a spark could generate. In fact, I figured that’s how couples SHOULD meet and attraction SHOULD generate! I didn’t understand attraction very well and didn’t believe in attraction-at-first-sight or hook-ups. How I didn’t believe it when it was happening right in front of my face I have no fucking idea, but I was an idiot.

    I did, however, subconsciously absorb the lesson that I should never ask a girl out on a date unless I was pretty sure she was attracted to me. Which, by the way, is difficult to understand. At 14, I was coming out of boy world, where competition is fierce and in the open and breaks down into fights. I am a docile guy and I was in a fight once a week in middle school.

    Dealing with more domesticated girls who understand politeness was interpreted as obvious attraction by 14 year old ADBG.

    Anyways, I am rambling, what was my point, ahhhh…

    I never asked a girl out on a date ever again because there was never I girl that I liked that also liked me. But I still had those occasional hook-ups, because some girls thought I was attractive and would fall over themselves trying to prove themselves to me.

    And I am sure they would have LOVED to go on dates with me.

    But I didn’t have to…they were showering me with attention ANYWAYS.

    So what the hell was the purpose of dating? Totally useless skill.

    Even today, I don’t necessarily have to invite a girl on a date to get to know her, she can hang out occasionally with my friends first.

    And all girls must pass through this filter before they can be considered worthy of a possible date. We can test personal compatibility there and see whether or not she is actually attracted to me. I save time and money.

    After that, if she wants date, sure, but she will be held to a high standard.

    A girl who has not passed this filter? Maybe. But, if she is not damn near perfect, she will not be given a second date, and I may or may not consider leaving in the middle of it so that I can watch Star Trek.

    As for guys:
    Guys don’t need to know shit about dating, they need to know shit about generating attraction and building social circles first. I know this isn’t a guy-advice website, but that seems like the crux to me. I am not sure what OTHER guys will do, but that’s what I would do. You are basically telling girls that any guy like me should be DQ’d, which seems…off.

    I would be okay with

    “Don’t have sex with ADBG until you are in a relationship. Don’t think you are in a relationship just because you are hanging out with his friends”

    This seems more like

    “ADBG invited you to hang out with his friends. He is a player and a bad LTR prospect.”

    I may be misinterpreting, though.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Even today, I don’t necessarily have to invite a girl on a date to get to know her, she can hang out occasionally with my friends first.

      It is fun to hang out in groups, but it’s not a good way for two people to build intimacy. If romantic interest is present, time alone is a must.

      99% of women who are included in group hangs but get no request for one-on-one time will assume the guy is not interested, and if they’re smart will not waste time cultivating the “friendship.”

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    I think my comment got eaten or was placed in moderation for being so long.

    Good god I Hope it didn’t get eaten, I Spent a lot of time making that thing!

  • JP

    “Good god I Hope it didn’t get eaten, I Spent a lot of time making that thing!”

    If you have a loving post you love to love, just type it in word or something, save it and then copy it.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Lok is nailing it, the very fact that guys are expected to pay is an obvious indicator of who has “hand.” the whole situation reeks to me.

    Also, yes, sexual zoning also means that guys who cannot succeed in designated sexual zones are “losers.” All guys get laid in clubs, that’s what they are there for. What, you can’t get laid, even at a CLUB? Where all the girls are drunk? What kind of pathetic loser are you?

    I think the biggest problem with youth today is this obsession over hand and power dynamics, but when the insistence is “guy pays,” it’s hard not to think that girls are trying to pull one over on you. Given how people who OBSESS about power so easily ABUSE it, it’s hard to trust a girl unless she’s already been vetted by a social circle.

    Hence, dating a girl you don’t already know is akin to playing Russian Roulette where 5 chambers are loaded with depleted uranium rounds. Or at least that’s how it seems. But I have the attitude that I am bulletproof, so I don’t care a lot, except to think that it’s probably not the best use of time to shoot myself in the head, even if I AM Superman.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @ADBG

      Lok is nailing it, the very fact that guys are expected to pay is an obvious indicator of who has “hand.” the whole situation reeks to me.

      J has already explained the rationale behind the male paying quite well. I agree that women should pay their way in this feminist era. Most surveys show, however, that there are more women are willing to pay than there are men who want women to pay. The provider role is important to many men, which is hardly surprising, as it is an opportunity to show off occupational status, the strongest female attraction cue.

      If you don’t want to pay, don’t. If you don’t want to go on dates, don’t. Many men want to go on dates, and many men are interested in paying for dates. They will clearly have an advantage with women who are interested in dating.

      *Shrugs* It’s not a political choice, it’s not a gender battle. Do what works for you.

  • JP

    “Also, yes, sexual zoning also means that guys who cannot succeed in designated sexual zones are “losers.” All guys get laid in clubs, that’s what they are there for. What, you can’t get laid, even at a CLUB? Where all the girls are drunk? What kind of pathetic loser are you?”

    Clubs are loud, annoying places that always wanted to make me want to leave as soon as possible.

    You simply cannot accomplish anything of value there. I despised them when I was younger. It always boggled my mind how people were able to enjoy being there.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    I agree 110% JP. Now. Now that I turn 26 in a month. It also doesn’t help that I am half deaf and cannot make out female voices.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pOHG_t1mr2k

    I cannot make out that voice in my left ear. Excited women tend to SHRRRRRIIIIEEEEEEEEEEKKKK and it sounds like nothing more than indecipherable static to me.

  • BroHamlet

    @Susan

    “Again, let me define the purpose of dating. Dates are a means of getting to know someone better one on one, with both parties having signaled mutual interest.”

    Yes.

    “If you do not go on dates, how do you spend time with one other person in a non-sexual way? How do you get to know them better? How is it enjoyable?”

    A lot of times it’s somewhere in the middle, with a tilt toward remaining casual yet still sexual at the front end, because that is what works. You yourself have acknowledged that the casual first route and escalating quickly is what appears to be working for men these days. It’s enjoyable for people who desire each other to spend time together, period, and sometimes it will go somewhere, sometimes it won’t, but labeling it is a distinct no-no. My philosophy: I give ‘em what they want. And what they want is not “dates” in the explicit sense of the word. It’s about walking a line and understanding what is going on without it having to be said, because logic is a serious buzzkill for women in those situations (don’t shoot the messenger, I’m telling it exactly as I have witnessed it). That is what is selling these days, like it or not. We are not pulling this out of thin air. Even if she likes you, there are any number of reasons it will not work out, so no, dating in the traditional sense, is not, and has not been the answer for a while now, no matter what you want.

    @Lokland

    “Dating is a loaded term.
    It implies that the man invests while the woman receives and makes judgement which is really too fucking bad cause their the ones auditioning for girlfriend.”

    Yup. That may be part of the disconnect here. “Courtship” implies that men should step up, when it’s really the other way around, that’s why the concept of “dating” just . Everything from the culture, to the implications of “who pays” is not in a man’s best interest because it sets up the wrong vibe. Girls want a “prize”, but “dating” makes the prize not a prize anymore. We’ve even heard from attractive guys here that say that dating is exhausting. I agree with them, with the exception being if the girl understands dating for the song and dance that it is, and can treat it as such.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @BroHamlet

      Are you still in a college environment? If not, then how do you effect casual but sexual at the front end? Are you meeting women in bars and having ONSs with them? Meeting them through friends and starting with flings?

      Among the women I know, there’s been a strong move to dating, even including those who did the hooking up thing in college. At 24 they say they’re over it.

      I would think that if you’re hooking up with women in their 20s without dating or spending non-sexual time, you’re really focusing on carousel riders.

      no, dating in the traditional sense, is not, and has not been the answer for a while now, no matter what you want.

      But that’s the point of the post. Post-college, dating is alive and well. A lot of people are dating. They meet via work or friends and begin dating. They schedule drinks, dinner, double date with other friends. I’m not saying they wait long for sex – I think around a month is typical. The sex first, get to know you later approach remains the norm for those avoiding relationships, but that percentage steadily declines after college, and when people want relationships, they start dating.

  • Madelena

    @Sassy

    2. Some men can be seen as attractive to women on the very first glance (These men are few and far between). Other men become attractive to a woman after some time passes. This explains how some guys are rejected initially, only to be propositioned later by the same women who rejected them. Some men may not want to hear this but it’s a rare man who can spark attraction in a woman at first glance or within about 5 minutes. The men who can are typically the guys who are the most physically attractive. Their looks alone are enough to spark a woman’s interest. It may be sad, but it’s true.

    +1 to your entire post but especially this. It’s the very rare men who elicits immediate attraction and interest from me. Most of the time, I require familiarity with a man in order to build attraction which is why I tend to awlays go for at least 2 dates in order to give it a decent shot. I recall in graduate school finding a man almost ugly at the beginning of the term and then by the end of the term finding him devastatingly attractive, mainly due to his character and intelligence.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Madelena

      I recall in graduate school finding a man almost ugly at the beginning of the term and then by the end of the term finding him devastatingly attractive, mainly due to his character and intelligence.

      Most women have had this experience, I expect. I know I did several times. It’s interesting – Game is about firing up that attraction in the short-term – which is not surprising since the advertised goal is “getting beautiful women into bed.” But there’s an LT approach that is much more likely to lead to a relationship, which is really about inner Game.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    And, Madalena, how often does the men go to date 3? How often does a man grow on you? I suspect it isn’t very often if you can easily recall a time with such great clarity. If it was more mundane, it’d be like trying to remember the 17th monday of the year 2008.

    That’s my initial reaction, anyways. The advice for guys would be the same, eschew dates, build social circles and upfront attractiveness so you can “tingle” more girls more quickly and stop wasting your time on dates.

  • Lokland

    Ahh fuck sorry.
    Susan, you can delete that if you want its just nonsense.

    @ADBG

    “how often does the men go to date 3? How often does a man grow on you? I suspect it isn’t very often if you can easily recall a time with such great clarity. If it was more mundane, it’d be like trying to remember the 17th monday of the year 2008.”

    Hopefully rarely.
    It might seem like quite a bitch in the dating phase that women have a high degree of selectivity and take a while to get warmed up.
    When your actually in a relationship those attributes become worth more than her weight in gold. She is unlikely to become attracted to another man without a serious time investment.
    Which allows you time to intervene and her time to change course and prove fidelity. Whereas male fidelity especially when tempted requires a more brute force of will approach.

    Again, sucks to lose a $100 in dates (not date) but I’d pay that a thousand times over to have a woman whose fidelity I can be positive of.

  • Ted D

    Lokland – “When your actually in a relationship those attributes become worth more than her weight in gold. She is unlikely to become attracted to another man without a serious time investment.”

    I feel stupid for not seeing this…

    Brilliant man. Absolutely brilliant. I take back one third of all the mean things I’ve said about dating. After some consideration, I may have to retract a bit more.

    However, this does exacerbate the issue of price discrimination a bit.

  • Cooper

    “However, this does exacerbate the issue of price discrimination a bit.”

    I’ve been dealing with exactly this.

    I like paying for romantic dates. But, then again, I’m a smuck. And I’ve had many (majority) of them turn out to be utter waste of time. I sware the fact that I still seem to select that route, over and over, is just a strong indicator of how little I know (or accept) more than anything.

    Besides the time and money, (which seem to be expected) the price decrimination thing gets completely out of hand. (To the point it’s unthinkable.) It’s goes up and up with an enduring courtship.

    I don’t know how to deal with it beside letting it go. (Which takes the best effort)

  • Madelena

    @ A Definite Beta Guy

    And, Madalena, how often does the men go to date 3? How often does a man grow on you? I suspect it isn’t very often if you can easily recall a time with such great clarity. If it was more mundane, it’d be like trying to remember the 17th monday of the year 2008

    My response:
    Date 3 doesn’t occur with everyone, of course not. Only the ones I do feel attracted to or could see myself being attracted to, in lieu of their other perceived qualities and in light of the time we spent together. However, keep in in mind that tends to be for men I meet online. The criteria for them is more stringent because we are starting out on a blank slate. Men in social environments like work, interest groups etc have a much greater change of building their attractivenes through sheer exposure.

    As per Sassy’s comment, men can focus on avenues where they can build familiarity with women, if they percieve themselves lacking in attraction.

    However, once they built attraction, through familiarity or game, then the appropriate method is to ask the woman out on a date in order to spend exclusive time together.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Men in social environments like work, interest groups etc have a much greater change of building their attractivenes through sheer exposure.

      There is a great deal of evidence that familiarity breeds attraction.

      Findings strongly supported the “familiarity leads to attraction” hypothesis: The more participants interacted, the more attracted they were to each other. Mediation analyses identified three processes that contribute to this effect: perceived responsiveness, increased comfort and satisfaction during interaction, and perceived knowledge.

      http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21381850

  • BroHamlet

    @Madelena

    “However, once they built attraction, through familiarity or game, then the appropriate method is to ask the woman out on a date in order to spend exclusive time together.”

    Now, I’m not trying to be flip, but something needs to be clarified here. Since your “appropriate method” involves a date, it makes me curious whether the guys and the girls here are even speaking the same language. I don’t have a problem generating attraction up front, and I don’t ask women out on dates. It’s more indirect- like getting a number and then hitting her up to meet up on fairly short notice, preferably somewhere I would already want to go (or already regularly do), and within close enough proximity (location and sometimes timewise) to something I already had planned. I used to ask women on dates, and found that it was a great way to spend more time and money and get worse results, whether what I was looking for was long or short term. Think about what you are implying, when you say “always go for at least 2 dates in order to give it a decent shot”. Someone has to pay for those, and it’s not going to be you. At the end of the day, I have plenty better to do than date for the sake of dating. Works better for me when she has to earn the date.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Works better for me when she has to earn the date.

      And she earns that by putting out?

  • Madelena

    @Bro Hamlet

    I read your statement and find myself in a bit of a dilemma. Knowing that attraction builds slowly for me, I hesitate to next a guy over one date when we both might be feelin anxious, unfamiliar, upon first meeting. However, as per your comment, if I give it another shot and extend a second date, then the subtle implication is that I’m a “resource extractor” (to use another economic term). Damned if I do, damned if I don’t.

  • BroHamlet

    @Madelena

    I have no beef with you over extending things if you’re the type to take the initiative to suggest a second meetup and even pay (or just make something and have him over to eat it). It’s easy to not be labeled a resource extractor. Just don’t extract resources, or at least provide some of your own early on. You said “attraction builds slowly for me”. Not to put you on the spot, but almost every girl will tell you this when asked, but when the chips are down, attraction usually happens right away or not at all. So dating in the mode what you seem to be describing as a way to find out if you like someone, is a bit wasteful of both of your time IMO. You either feel it or not. Finding this out on someone else’s dime doesn’t really bode well for the provider of said dime.

    My real beef is not with you, but more with the “dating” script. It more or less implies that a guy should do the lion’s share of qualifying for something that benefits a girl more than it benefits him. If she wants a relationship, it’s not my job to pitch it to her. That’s backwards, and that’s why traditional dating does more to hinder attraction, than to foster it.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      attraction usually happens right away or not at all

      You have been misinformed.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      It more or less implies that a guy should do the lion’s share of qualifying for something that benefits a girl more than it benefits him. If she wants a relationship, it’s not my job to pitch it to her.

      You’re not, you’re pitching sex. If you can pitch and get sex without dating, and the women who take the bait are the women you want, then good for you. That’s a winning strategy. For many men, that’s either not possible, or they don’t care for the women who are willing to make that deal.

  • Mike C

    Not to put you on the spot, but almost every girl will tell you this when asked, but when the chips are down, attraction usually happens right away or not at all. So dating in the mode what you seem to be describing as a way to find out if you like someone, is a bit wasteful of both of your time IMO. You either feel it or not. Finding this out on someone else’s dime doesn’t really bode well for the provider of said dime.

    Yup, there is that old joke about a woman knowing in 30-60 seconds if she if she would sleep with you. That’s not to say in 60 seconds she has made an affirmative decision, but she can disqualify you for good inside 60 seconds.

    Here is the ugly truth of it. There are men who have more of those immediate attraction/arousal traits, and for them it is their game to lose. There are other guys who don’t have those initial attraction/arousal traits, and they have to play to win if they are going to generate attraction.

    Let’s go back to Charlotte’s story:

    ***As soon as we walked into this place, I noticed this gorgeous guy.*** He was EXTREMELY tall, dark hair, etc. etc.

    Not awhile. As soon as she walked in. She was obviously attracted right away. Now the guy lost the game over the course of the night due to the mistakes he made, but he had the attraction right off the bat.

    Let’s be real. Those immediate attraction guys (and I’ll note that few men are universally attractive due to the idiosyncratic nature of female preferences) are a minority, and usually have serious options. Not every girl obviously can land one, not even attractive ones, so they are going to have to cast a wider net to include the guys where “attraction can grow” over time, and maybe that is 2-3 dates where some aspect of his personality can show that triggers attraction that isn’t here in the first 60 seconds of interaction.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Mike C

      . Now the guy lost the game over the course of the night due to the mistakes he made, but he had the attraction right off the bat.

      No, not the mistakes he made. His personality. He was very good looking, and he could not sustain attraction for even one night.

      Furthermore, Charlotte clearly was not thinking about sleeping with him, regardless of how attractive she found him.

      So the 7 hours to get the woman into bed is strictly a slut-pursuit strategy, it seems to me.

  • Mike C

    Damn, screwed up the formatting. Just meant to bold Charlotte’s quote

  • EIN

    @Susan

    “Because the quality woman with high relationship value who is very attracted to you will think, “Yes, I want to have sex with you, but I will forego that pleasure until I know that you are not out to pump and dump me.
    Delaying sex until she is certain of a man’s intentions is the most powerful and important thing a woman can do.”

    But Susan you should know that sort of woman is like hunting for a unicorn now days, and that same woman will apply the news paper example when she sees a guy that just wants sex.

    Susan guys see this all the time all the time and they eventually get to a point where they ask themselves “Why should a guy that just wants to sleep around only have to pay .25c and the guy that wants a serious relationship have to wait and pay substantially more time and money and get nothing out of it?”

    There comes a point where guys realise this and they are fed up of shelling out their time, money and energy on girls that do nothing but waste it all.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @EIN

      But Susan you should know that sort of woman is like hunting for a unicorn now days,

      I don’t know that. In fact, based on the solid data we have on sexual behavior among college students, we know that only 15-20% of women engage in casual sex. The unicorn is the woman who will bang just about anyone just for the hell of it.

      That’s not to say that some women, or perhaps even a majority of women, have not ever had casual sex, but your strategy assumes a success rate that is highly unlikely, except among the slutty unicorns.

      FTR, the data on online dating is very similar to the college data re casual sex. Only about a quarter of female online daters have ever had first date sex.

      There comes a point where guys realise this and they are fed up of shelling out their time, money and energy on girls that do nothing but waste it all.

      But a lot of people are in relationships, and not with someone they banged for .25.

      There’s some massive confirmation bias going on here. I understand the frustration of many men here, but I suspect that you have shelled out big money and effort on dates with women who were not particularly attracted and enthused. You should definitely qualify women before dates – they should be clearly attracted or as Sassy said, it’s a fool’s errand.

      As Madelena pointed out, online dating is a bit different. There I think a woman should pay for the second date, ideally.

  • http://www.4stargazer.wordpress.com Anacaona

    I have a confession to make. I know I have certain reputation around here so I hope you don’t feel disappointed, here it goes.

    Can someone explain to me Tumblr? I don’t get it You post things and other people post it again but can’t comment/ What is the purpose then to sort of high-five each other? I really don’t see the big deal about it but everyone seems to be opening one of those so…any kind soul can explain to me, who uses it and with what purpose? Thanks ;)

  • Damien Vulaume

    #456
    I have a confession to make. I know I have some kind of reputation around here so I hope I won’t disappoint people by asking this, but here it goes:
    Can someone explain to me the use of Facebook? I don’t get it. Clearly, Facebook is another uber-capitalist experiment which eventually reads like this: Can you make money out of friendship? Can you create communities free of national boundaries – and then sell Coca-Cola to them? Facebook is profoundly uncreative. It simply mediates in relationships that were happening anyway, and pretends to create new ones which are not real ones. I don’t see the big deal about it but everyone seems to be having an account there, so…could any kind soul explain to me, who uses it and for what purpose? Thanks :-)

    So, Tumblr, Pfffff…………
    Next, another of those Californian geeks will maybe come up with something like “Baby-face book”, designed for 5 years old, filled with simplified text and nice little images of pink animals all over the page. Why not? that’s a huge amount of gullible consumers right there.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Next, another of those Californian geeks will maybe come up with something like “Baby-face book”

      Actually, that’s brilliant. A site where you do nothing but show off your kids, share parenting links, promote mommy blogs, etc. Someone could make a lot of money doing that.

  • A definite beta guy

    Madalena, you did not answer my question, which was, how OFTEN does a guy “grow” on you

  • OffTheCuff

    Sue: “If you do not go on dates, how do you spend time with one other person in a non-sexual way? How do you get to know them better? How is it enjoyable. I’m genuinely interested to hear the alternative, as I can’t think of any. It seems to me that “no dates” means hookups, period.”

    Almost. A hookup counts, but it isn’t limited to it. No “dates” until some sort of nontrivial physical or sexual escalation happens. That escalation is context-dependent. An IOI is not enough, it must be real escalation.

    Example: you meet at, or meet up at, at a house party. You realize she is acting flirty, so you offer to “take her for a walk” to “get some air”. On the walk, you hold hands, and make out a bit. Come back to the party, and now you can have her sit on you lap, kiss more, etc.

    Example: you meet online, and have some flirty banter in a Facebook post. Switch to PMs, talk. Eventually you get her mobile number, and you text. The topic of eventually sex comes up. She sends a pic of a “dress” asking if you like the “dress”. Some well placed remarks, and soon you both are exchanging racy semi-clothed pictures that you wouldn’t show Mom.

    None of these are “dates” where you follow the “I pick you up, take you to this place, and take you back” script. Either you happen to meet her right there, or, you arrange it so she meets you there.

    You can actually keep doing this for weeks, until things are quite serious – at which point you might actually go on a more formal date.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @OTC

      In your first example, connecting at the party is awesome! That girl will now be looking for the next step. You hit it off, now what? Why would you want to keep going for walks and hold hands for weeks without having any meaningful conversations?

      Your second example is terrible, at least for women. Sending half-clothed sexts for weeks when you met on an online dating site? Most women would definitely write that off as WTF. I sure would. If you’re not willing to DATE, don’t sign up for online DATING.

      I just don’t see how either party gets closer to what they want during those weeks. It sounds like a complete waste of time, and the guy comes off as someone who can’t pull the trigger.

  • Madelena

    @ a definite beta guy

    I assume you want me to quantify my response but I am not sure how to do that. Let me say that the second dates occur when I simply perceive a lack of chemistry on my end, assuming his values and inclinations are similar to mine. If his values are v different (doesn’t believe in marriage) or a deal breaker that didn’t come up in the pre- date communication period is revealed (has a child) or noticeable negative sociable behaviour is observed (unable to maintain eye contact once during the entire date) or he simply is uninterested, then a second date doesn’t occur.
    As for the men who I went on a second date with, the second date tends to be better due the building of familiarity and attraction. Thinking about it now, the smarter or more invested men, keep building on the familiarity via daily calls or other means of communication. A man who I fell hard for last year used this strategy, and he was someone I definitely took a while to fall for but fall hard, I did. My current bf did the same thing and with each date my attraction built more and more, to the point that I wonder how I didn’t see how great he was during the first date.
    I do think attraction is a choice. How many old couples tell stories where the woman was not impressed or wasn’t aware of the man’s existence. Or even outright disliked him. But she still gave it a shot and went on repeated dates with him and 40 yrs later they’re still together.
    Like I mentioned before, from past experience I know that it takes me a while to be attracted to someone, hence my second date strategy. Ideally, my preference was to meet someone through work or social circles due to the familiarity and comfort building factor but that was not possible.
    Online dating is not the best avenue for a restricted woman who finds it difficult to be attracted right off the bat to a stranger so this is one way I overcome the challenge.

  • Richard Aubrey

    WRT attraction:
    Some of the PUA folks say, claim, that if the guy does this, says that, follows the script and the choreography, the woman will be attracted, will she or nill she. Can’t help it. Trips a neural circuit.
    Now, I can see the marketing advantage if you’re trying to sell a system.
    And I can see feminists and others not wanting to accept that women can’t help themselves.
    But what if, in some small way, they’re right?

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      But what if, in some small way, they’re right?

      They are right in some small way. Or perhaps I should say some brief way. You can definitely get a woman’s interest by setting her back on her heels a bit. Now, how are you going to sustain it?

      Push pull forever? Yup, there are married Game bloggers prescribing that exact method. It’s all choreographed and scripted.

  • Lokland

    @Ted

    “Brilliant man. Absolutely brilliant. I take back one third of all the mean things I’ve said about dating. After some consideration, I may have to retract a bit more.”

    Bows**

    “However, this does exacerbate the issue of price discrimination a bit.”

    No it doesn’t because there should be no issue with price discrimination.
    Either your best or on even keel and respected and therefore a relationship is possible or your not and your being disrespected and its not worth doing.

    I should note that I associate price discrimination with poor character in much the same way I do men who lie about the ILU to get sex. Since of course with honesty, price discrimination is not possible. Its an inherently dishonest practice.
    Paying $5 for the paper when you’re aware that everyone else paid $.25 is entirely acceptable behaviour on the woman’s part and not price discrimination.

    I should point out that I’m 26 and have never had to sacrifice any of my ideals in selecting my girlfriends. I could see being 40 requiring compromise on my part merely because of the passage of time. But since this blog is aimed at college aged kids, telling men they need to accept a woman with a few mistakes (J and Susan),

    Math time

    median lifetime partner count for women=3
    couple=2

    Therefore the argument that a college aged kid must accept women with a couple mistakes in their past is for the average girl representative for approx. 2/3′s of her sexual history (if not more at that point).

    An entirely unrealistic argument for pretty much everyone under every metric but even more ludicrous to suggest that a 20 year old virgin guy should have to date a woman with multiple ONSs in her past.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      But since this blog is aimed at college aged kids, telling men they need to accept a woman with a few mistakes (J and Susan)

      I know I’ve never said that, and I don’t think J has either. Men should not accept less than what they want in a mate. We all need to recognize that the more conditions we place on a person, the smaller the pool of potential matches.

      That worked well for you, and I’m sure it does for lots of other men too. I think that there are many woman with no “mistakes” in their pasts. There must be if a quarter of female college graduates are virgins, right?

      A lot of men feel differently – they have no interest in finding a virgin. And many men with a high N look at low double digits as rounding error. YMMV.

      FTR, as we’ve seen, women are increasingly finding themselves confronting men whose past they can’t respect. And I wouldn’t pressure them one way or the other. If you want a guy with massive preselection, that means high N. Go for it. If you want a guy who’s more restricted in his sexuality, because you are, there are plenty of those too.

      People should do what works for them. I have no interest in telling anyone who to date or marry.

  • Lokland

    Last,

    WRT price discrimination.

    What makes it wrong is not that it feels bad (which in and of itself is enough reason to forego the relationship) but that it implies lack of discernment on the woman’s part and a higher chance of future infidelity/divorce.

    Again, a woman with a ‘couple’ mistakes is hopefully highly unrepresentative of what could be constituted as normal. As it would mean most women get P&D’d twice before marriage, no boyfriends. Not an entirely positive message to be spreading to girls who want a boyfriend.

  • OffTheCuff

    Sue: “Just stop. Do you say this just to drive me crazy? You are fairly humble, it’s true, but I don’t think you’re even close to average.”

    Ok, I was needling you a bit with elite. Heh.

    But I honestly think most folks here are above average — I mean, Olive thought she was “average” despite being a young babe-next-door, and I think this partially due the to crowd. Being of average looks ain’t a crime. We have lots of company.

  • Lisa C

    @Anacoana: Can someone explain to me Tumblr? I don’t get it …

    Well, I can give you my perspective as the mom of high school girls (with the caveat that Tumblr seems to no longer be “the thing” at my girls’ school and has been replaced largely by Instagram and Twitter).

    Tumblr allows girls to create an online photo collage that is in some ways a reflection of themselves. Girls (very few boys have a Tumblr) post photos they find on the internet that they believe are interesting/beautiful etc …, they repost photos from other people’s Tumblrs as a way to pat that person on the back, and they post their own original photos. Some Tumblrs are themed (beachy photos, only black and white photos, hot boys etc…), but many are not.

    The social dynamic in high school is that everyone wants a lot of followers on Tumblr, so it is a competition to get people to follow you. Also, if one of your own personal photos is reposted hundreds of times, you may become “Tumblr famous” and that’s also a big deal. You can also post questions and answers, and girls often use this feature to allow others to ask them highly personal questions, such as “are you still a virgin?” and then answer them (like Formspring).

    NOT following a friend on Tumblr can be a big deal to the friend who is not followed. Also, if you’re not popular, some girls won’t follow you, but will go to your Tumblr and “steal” your photos by reposting them from another cited source.

    Tumblr also contains a tremendous amount of porn (easy theme) and is blocked at my daughters’ school as well as in my home.

    In summary, it seems to be a source of social validation (and gossip via the Q&A feature) that appeals primarily to girls. I believe the more “grown-up” version is Pinterest.

  • Sai

    I’m with the guys -if I see somebody’s face and body, hear his voice, am able to smell him (for good or bad) then I’ll know whether or not I would like to give him a chance. That doesn’t mean I want someone who only looks good, but I fail at tricking myself from “no” to “yes.”

    @Women are what? Is this a response to “all men are rapists?” Neither statement can be proven.
    “Women’s refusal to ask men out is the reason that most women hate themselves, hate their bodies, obsess about their appearance, have their bodies mutilated so they can shove pieces of silicon inside, starve themselves,”
    As somebody who is going to a shrink years too late, I can tell you this is EXTREMELY false.

    @Richard Aubrey
    “But what if, in some small way, they’re right?”

    They could be right. But it’s still the woman’s choice (responsibility) to walk away, like I would if I were driving past a greasy burger joint. Is there lots of bacon and cheese present? Yes. Will I hate myself forever if I go for it? Yes. Time to move on.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Sai

      if I see somebody’s face and body, hear his voice, am able to smell him (for good or bad) then I’ll know whether or not I would like to give him a chance. That doesn’t mean I want someone who only looks good, but I fail at tricking myself from “no” to “yes.”

      You raise an important point. There is so much going on subconsciously. If his scent, i.e. his DNA, doesn’t work, there’s no hope for it. You could never “trick” yourself into attraction. This is actually a problem for couples who marry without the woman ever having been off birth control. She goes off, experiences her man’s scent very differently because she is now ovulating, and may find him repugnant. I’ve read articles by marriage counselors who say they see it fairly frequently.

      Don’t ever commit to someone for life unless you’ve been off the Pill for at least 6 months. Better, use another form of BC.

      However, if that’s not the case, then the female attraction cues that are not generally obvious at first meeting, but still very important to women selecting LT mates, may increase attraction over time. The “weighted formula” jumps from about 3-4 attraction cues to a dozen or so. And that can change a person’s “score” very dramatically.

  • Jonny

    @SusanW: With the Te’o scandal, I was wondering if you can do a future topic on online dating or long distance relationships, which sort of come together in this. I’m not against meeting someone online, but at some point it should result in an actual relationship. I’m entirely against long distance relationships unless it is a mere acquaintance. Oh well. It is a big issue for some.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Jonny

      That story is just so weird. There’s still a lot we don’t know. A priest says he met this woman! But sure, if there’s anything to be gleaned from it, I’m happy to write about it.

      Mostly I think it’s very sad if it’s true that he had an intimate LDR with someone he never met.

  • JP

    “I don’t understand the difference. How about this scenario –

    Guy: Hey, wanna hang out sometime?

    Girl: Sure!

    Guy: There’s a great Korean place I’ve been wanting to try.

    Girl: Korean BBQ, awesome.

    Guy: How’s Saturday.

    Girl: Perfect, ttyl.

    If it’s two people romantically interested in one another planning to spend time alone, it’s a date.”

    Hanging out to me just mostly involved wandering around randomly, so to speak and meeting people. If you find them intellectually engaging and somewhat attractive, you spend more time talking to them.

    This only works in college environments.

    I have never dated or done anything with women outside of college environments, since I’ve only ever dated high school and college age women.

  • Ion

    Ted D!

    “Of course environmental factors come into play as well (such as hormones in drinking water.) ”

    Actually, I’ve heard this problem is way worse for men of today, estrogen is in everything. According to The Disappearing Male, which has been probably been link’d here a million times, less men are born today, have smaller genitals, and less than half of the sperm count of their fathers generation (those raised in the 50s), and the problem is getting worse. The problem with environmental estrogen like petroleum and plastics is even more widespread now. This doc was made in the 90s, I believe that’s before we were told to add soy to our diets, and of course the problem with birth control pills in our drinking water, and everyone drinking water out of Poland Spring plastic bottles, etc.,.

    Men today are also more irrational/violent, have higher voices, take personal offense at everything, and are more sensitive and moody? I have no idea if that’s related to estrogen though (I don’t like estrogen being associated with “negative” traits, and testosterone with positive/neutral traits. Both are great in moderation).

  • JP

    “If it’s two people romantically interested in one another planning to spend time alone, it’s a date.”

    Then I spent a lot of time dating my ex-girlfriend after I broke up with her.

  • Ted D

    Lokland – “No it doesn’t because there should be no issue with price discrimination.”

    Sure there is:
    1. If she jumped into bed with a guy on day one once upon a time (because she didn’t want a relationship but wanted sex) then why should some other guy pay “full price” for the same access later?
    2. The only way this isn’t an issue is if sexual access isn’t a primary concern for the guy taking her out on dates. If he wants to spend $100 dollars simply for the pleasure of sharing her company at dinner, then fine. But, most guys are doing the dinner thing in hopes that they will eventually turn it into a relationship to get sex. Does he want more? Surely. But, sex IS a primary motivating factor for guys to pair up. Right?

    So the issue to me is this: woman put far too much “value” on their other attributes as if they are more than enough to justify price discrimination of sex. But, I can get many of those other attributes from friends and family and/or a FWB that doesn’t require nearly the level of investment in time and resources as a relationship does.

    So, what exactly is it a woman is offering other than exclusive sexual access to a guy wining and dining her? If the answer is nothing special, then there is your price discrimination.

    Don’t get me wrong! I’d say most to all men looking for a LTR want all that relationship stuff like support, nurturing, and all those other wonderful female attributes. Much in the same way a woman wants beta security from a man. However she ALSO wants him to be her idea of alpha. I don’t look at those attributes as the advantage to a relationship, because to me they are assumed by default. Just like marrying a woman means I’m promising her beta support, I expect her to be offering her sexual exclusivity as well as all those fine nurturing traits. However, that exclusivity isn’t worth much if she didn’t keep it very exclusive before I showed up.

    “I should point out that I’m 26 and have never had to sacrifice any of my ideals in selecting my girlfriends. I could see being 40 requiring compromise on my part merely because of the passage of time.”

    Yep. It is almost impossible to find anyone without some “interesting” tidbits in their past at my age.

    “But since this blog is aimed at college aged kids, telling men they need to accept a woman with a few mistakes (J and Susan),”

    Why? Young guys are in a MUCH better position to find a woman with a low/no N than a guy in his 30’s! If anything, young men should be much more choosy than us old dudes.

    “What makes it wrong is not that it feels bad (which in and of itself is enough reason to forego the relationship) but that it implies lack of discernment on the woman’s part and a higher chance of future infidelity/divorce.”

    Well this is where it becomes a character issue for me. It is damn hard to distinguish the woman with a few “mistakes” in their past and the ones that willingly jumped in for a bit before deciding it was time to get off the ride.

    Bottom line: men can’t depend only on their beta traits to attract a woman sexually. Woman can’t depend only on their nurturing/female nature to attract a man long term for a relationship. (I’d imagine plenty of guys would do the FWB thing with just about any woman willing regardless of past history or any personality issues, especially if she is very attractive and/or wild in the sack)

  • OffTheCuff

    Sue.. That’s a date, and a bad one at that. Boxing her in, paying for dinner, too much time.. And that scenario is likely a total bust for the man, if mutual attraction isn’t dead, rock-solid at the time of asking. Cooper, is any of this getting through?

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Sue.. That’s a date, and a bad one at that. Boxing her in, paying for dinner, too much time.. And that scenario is likely a total bust for the man, if mutual attraction isn’t dead, rock-solid at the time of asking.

      OK, then, let me hear how you’d play it. You met at a party on Saturday, and made out. You’ve been texting Sunday through Tuesday. She’s responsive. What’s next?

  • JP

    “2. The only way this isn’t an issue is if sexual access isn’t a primary concern for the guy taking her out on dates. If he wants to spend $100 dollars simply for the pleasure of sharing her company at dinner, then fine.”

    I went dutch in these cases.

    Like with my ex or girl friends in whom I have no interest.

    My primary interest was social connection and gaining friends in these cases, not relationships or sex.

  • BroHamlet

    @Richard Aubrey

    “Some of the PUA folks say, claim, that if the guy does this, says that, follows the script and the choreography, the woman will be attracted, will she or nill she. Can’t help it. Trips a neural circuit.
    Now, I can see the marketing advantage if you’re trying to sell a system.
    And I can see feminists and others not wanting to accept that women can’t help themselves.
    But what if, in some small way, they’re right?”

    For what it’s worth, I’m not a PUA. I’m just some guy with a (new) girlfriend, and I didn’t get her through a social circle or familiarity. I met her less than a month after a career move to a new city where I literally had no social circle outside of a few friends. I had a friend years back who dabbled in the PUA realm, and I balked when he told me that attraction is not a choice. As it turned out, “game” wise I arrived at much the same point he did but via more “natural” means. I came to wholeheartedly believe he was right about attraction, in no small part because I can look back at every relationship and encounter, and pinpoint exactly where the tipping point was where I knew she was interested. It was always within hours of meeting her, and I either made good on it or not in interacting with her.

    @Madelena

    “Let me say that the second dates occur when I simply perceive a lack of chemistry on my end, assuming his values and inclinations are similar to mine.”

    This sounds incomplete. Similar values/inclinations + attraction equal chemistry, but it appears that when the attraction part is missing, you take your time and gamble that it will come around. You are not “choosing” to be attracted over time, you are allowing time to probe for other traits that cause you to be attracted enough to break the familiarity barrier. Lucky you, you’re the rare girl who makes up for shyness by looking for reasons to make it work instead of reasons to disqualify. But, the other side of this, is that you can afford to operate this way because you are not on the hook to make things happen, pay etc. (unless it is the case that you are stepping up to pay part of the way or offer something homemade in the first two dates, which I am curious about). It only works this way for you, because the social norm is set up to allow you to do so. A man doing the same will spend far more time, energy, and money to get the same result, or no results. He’s better off going with a girl who’s eyes light up the moment she sees him. My guess is that there are plenty of men you would be attracted to right away, but they’re rarely in your immediate circle. This is true for a lot of girls, but it doesn’t say anything about the nature of attraction. Maybe you have even dated some of those men, and found yourself unaware of how quickly things progressed.

    I think you should reconsider whether attraction is really a choice. Re: Old people, My parents have been together for 30+ years, and they can tell you in detail about the moment they saw each other. They just knew. They were married inside of six months. The chasing or “hammering away at her” strategy worked when dating was a true and reliable gateway to a real commitment (40 years worth, to use your story), and people married young. These days the dynamic is different. People are largely serial monogamists for long stretches of time, so an “all in” strategy isn’t helpful in all but a few cases.

  • JP

    “But that’s the point of the post. Post-college, dating is alive and well. A lot of people are dating. They meet via work or friends and begin dating. They schedule drinks, dinner, double date with other friends. I’m not saying they wait long for sex – I think around a month is typical.”

    The problem is that this is completely inconsistent with how you bond with people *prior* to post-college.

    So, there is a way in which you develop friendships/relationships while younger which is completely inapplicable when you are out of college.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      So, there is a way in which you develop friendships/relationships while younger which is completely inapplicable when you are out of college.

      Yes, this is a serious problem, and why we see the two camps. Those who want to hang onto college hookup culture, and those who want to graduate to dating. The key difference being that sex need not precede emotional intimacy (though it still may).

  • Ted D

    Susan – I became acquainted with my wife through mutual friends. We spent many Friday nights together with those friends for about 3 months prior to getting involved. Our first “official” date came about 1.5 months AFTER we were already a couple. Before then, all the time we spent “getting to know each other” was in a hang out format, and it worked just fine. If I’d have had to cold approach her to ‘ask her out’ we would have never become a couple. And for that matter, our first “date” was a trip to my buddies ski cabin new Seven Springs, and other than gas and something to eat, it didn’t cost me a dime. We spent the weekend wandering around the ski resort and getting in some “quality time” in front of the fireplace.

    Now that I think on it, my ex-wife is probably the only woman I spent any time with that I took on actual dates as part of the process… She was also the only one I “cold approached” and even then she was related to someone I knew, and I had very little doubt she was interested so the risk was minimal I suppose.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      If I’d have had to cold approach her to ‘ask her out’ we would have never become a couple

      I’ve already said that I don’t think cold approaching is ever a good idea.

      Our first “official” date came about 1.5 months AFTER we were already a couple. Before then, all the time we spent “getting to know each other” was in a hang out format, and it worked just fine.

      Did you “hang out” alone? Did you do anything other than have sex? Did you go anywhere? Have any experiences? If so, I call those dates.

  • Ted D

    JP – “I went dutch in these cases.

    Like with my ex or girl friends in whom I have no interest.

    My primary interest was social connection and gaining friends in these cases, not relationships or sex.”

    That is my point exactly. I don’t need to “date” a woman for social companionship and interaction. I can go out with friends and only be concerned with laying out money for myself, and probably have a better time than I would on a first date. Early dating is completely uncomfortable to me since I’m not a fan of idle chit chat and am more than happy to let a conversation lapse into silence if I have nothing to say. With friends it isn’t an issue because we have a long history of sharing similar interests.

    To me, traditional dating simply IS NOT enjoyable at all. The only reason for me to participate would be to jump through the appropriate “hoop” to make it into the semi-finals with a particular woman.

  • Cooper

    ” Cooper, is any of this getting through?”

    I can’t let it through. The only conclusions I see that come from accepting this shit is bitterness and anger. Which quite frankly I have more of than I’d like already.

  • Mike C

    No, not the mistakes he made. His personality.

    This is semantics/distinction without a difference. OK, I’ll use your word. He displayed an unattractive personality. That is the mistake. He needs to work on displaying an attractive personality which boiled down to its essence is what Game is about.

    Furthermore, Charlotte clearly was not thinking about sleeping with him, regardless of how attractive she found him.

    We don’t know that as an initial impression. You are assuming here. You might be right, but nothing in Charlotte’s original comment would indicate that. Yes, at the end of the night she felt that way when he propositioned her, but on first appearance she may have been open to the possibility if everything else fell into place.

    So the 7 hours to get the woman into bed is strictly a slut-pursuit strategy, it seems to me.

    Hmmm…did I miss something, some discussion somewhere….I don’t recall anywhere in this thread a discussion of the 7 hour to get a woman into bed strategy. I thought we were kind of on a roll here in this thread :) but things can get off-track when you introduce something out of left field that I feel like I want to debate/argue with you. I’m going to resist that temptation here

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Mike C

      He needs to work on displaying an attractive personality which boiled down to its essence is what Game is about.

      No, Game is about behavioral correlates. It provides a set of principles that men can use whether they have a good personality or not. Many players do not have good personalities. This guy was cocky – so he had obviously had sexual success in the past. Charlotte wasn’t interested in cocky, and she thought he was boring. Game can’t make him interesting, just dominant.

      Yes, at the end of the night she felt that way when he propositioned her, but on first appearance she may have been open to the possibility if everything else fell into place.

      No she stated clearly in this thread (and has stated before in a previous thread) that she does not have casual sex. At all.

      I don’t recall anywhere in this thread a discussion of the 7 hour to get a woman into bed strategy.

      You are so literal it’s difficult to converse with you a lot of the time.

      Game = 7 Hours to get a woman into bed. See Mystery Method.

      You were the one who introduced his game.

  • Jonny

    “I recall in graduate school finding a man almost ugly at the beginning of the term and then by the end of the term finding him devastatingly attractive, mainly due to his character and intelligence.”

    Ahhh. Pride and Prejudice. I enjoyed the movie(s) even though I’m a straight man.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Jonny

      Ahhh. Pride and Prejudice. I enjoyed the movie(s) even though I’m a straight man.

      Exactly. And of course, the man she found handsome and sexy early on became disgusting to her via lack of character.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Susan Walsh

    Actually, I heard from a woman today that I am close to. She and a young man are clearly falling for each other. He has already expressed some insecurity about her past experiences, and last night he broached the topic of sexual histories. He was delighted and relieved by her low-ish number of 5. But she is profoundly disturbed by his number of 21. In fact, she is questioning the relationship. He’s 26 – I pointed out that means 2 or 3 girls a year. To her it sounds like a very big number, and she suddenly feels like she’s dealing with a reformed player, something she does not want.

    OMG. This just happened to me, almost word for word.

    The guy that I have been dating recently, who is now my boyfriend, talked with me last night about our sexual histories. I asked him about his number, and he admitted that it is somewhere in the 20s. He even took it a step further by admitting to having a threesome once.

    I’m somewhat in shock about it. I’m not sure what to think, to be honest. He is a really handsome guy, so I do understand how his number can be that high. Still, I’m a little worried by it at the same time. I’d be lying if I said that it doesn’t bother me a little. He’s been fantastic so far though, and I won’t break up with him over it. I guess I’ll just have to suck it up and take this in stride.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Sassy

      He even took it a step further by admitting to having a threesome once.

      Whoa. I’d say that puts him in the highly unrestricted camp. You should at least have your eyes open about that. If that works for you, fine, I know you have said you might consider an open relationship. But if you’re still feeling that you might want to have his babies, I would proceed with extreme caution. (I’m assuming he made this decision as a mature adult, not that he got roped into a wild event on the spur of the moment at the age of 19.)

  • BroHamlet

    @Susan

    I think the comment I just wrote in response to Madelena and Richard is in moderation.

    “Are you still in a college environment? If not, then how do you effect casual but sexual at the front end? Are you meeting women in bars and having ONSs with them? Meeting them through friends and starting with flings?”

    Nope, post-college. I still do meet women in bars sometimes, although ONS is really, really rare these days- been there, done that a few times, don’t have anything to prove. It usually gets sexual pretty quick, though, even if I just get a number, which is usually the case these days. I have a girlfriend so I’m off the market as of the last several months.

    “Among the women I know, there’s been a strong move to dating, even including those who did the hooking up thing in college. At 24 they say they’re over it.”

    Sure, they SAY that, haha. Truth is it moves somewhere toward a middle ground between dating and hooking up, because, let’s face it, people are busy and have reputations to look after. But, things move quick when there’s real attraction.

    “I would think that if you’re hooking up with women in their 20s without dating or spending non-sexual time, you’re really focusing on carousel riders.”

    None of my previous girlfriends, nor the one I have now, would be anywhere close to what you would call a carousel rider (and I was involved in the nightlife industry for a time- I can spot those girls a mile away blindfolded). Some of the hookups, maybe (one I recall was definitely a “rider”- I got a glimpse of someone sexting her at the most ironic of times, funny story). First meeting is definitely somewhat non-sexual, but things don’t stay that way for long. Please reconsider your stance on categorizing women (and people in general), it’s not representative of the real world. Many women have two tracks, the hot guy track and the he could be a boyfriend track, and have spent a little bit of time on the former and a lot of time on the latter, and will reserve the right to switch to the former when the right opportunity presents itself. That’s why I won’t bend to price controls, because (whether I am really that conventionally attractive or not, I don’t know), I have spent time on the hot guy track and seen all of what you have marginalized to the <20% from the inside, from "good" girls who later got married and (I can guess) had kids. That's why "good" has a different meaning to me. Fact is, attractive girls have options, and sometimes they use them. No shame in that.

    "But that’s the point of the post. Post-college, dating is alive and well. A lot of people are dating. They meet via work or friends and begin dating. They schedule drinks, dinner, double date with other friends. I’m not saying they wait long for sex – I think around a month is typical. The sex first, get to know you later approach remains the norm for those avoiding relationships, but that percentage steadily declines after college, and when people want relationships, they start dating."

    That's the point of the post, but you and I both know I'm not going to believe something just because you wrote 700 words and referenced a survey or two to tell us what we've already been spending the last 3-4 decades marinating in. The way it really works for me, is that inside of 2-3 weeks things have escalated to the physical- concurrently to getting to know her. I can't remember waiting a month for a girl I was willing to focus on, and usually they want it just as much as I do. Maybe I am not most guys, but I am not pompous enough to think that my experience is rare enough not to be relevant (though I gather I am not what would pass for a "beta" around here). Dating is not exactly what you think it is out there. With all due respect, you have not been "in the field", so to speak, so your data is just as second hand as the researchers who sit on ivory towers and write the studies you consider to be gold. Back before the rise of mainstream "game", I bet those same researchers would have told Neil Strauss that his book was complete BS, and now there's been tv shows based on it… I find that studies of behavior tend to snapshot things as they happened at a lag to what is actually happening in the here and now. You are not the first to explore any of these concepts, nor have you experienced them up close. That is why you get so much pushback from guys here. Fact of the matter is their anecdotes have some merit, because most of the data points to the same few conclusions, ones that I can personally speak for. This is not to be adversarial or chop you down, but know what you know and what you don't.

    Alright people. Happy Friday. Go drink beer. I'm done for now.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @BroHamlet

      I have spent time on the hot guy track and seen all of what you have marginalized to the <20% from the inside, from “good” girls who later got married and (I can guess) had kids. That’s why “good” has a different meaning to me. Fact is, attractive girls have options, and sometimes they use them. No shame in that.

      No shame at all, but you don’t consider sociosexuality, something that we know is real and hardwired.

      The way it really works for me, is that inside of 2-3 weeks things have escalated to the physical- concurrently to getting to know her.

      How were you getting to know her? This is what I’m really trying to determine. It doesn’t surprise me in the least that most women would have sex 2-3 weeks after meeting someone, depending on how he was trying to get to know her.

      You are not the first to explore any of these concepts, nor have you experienced them up close.

      I’m certainly not the first, but I definitely do experience them up close. I have plenty of recent anecdotal evidence in the form of FRs from highly trusted sources, and I also have the opportunity to speak with both parties.

      Fact of the matter is their anecdotes have some merit, because most of the data points to the same few conclusions, ones that I can personally speak for.

      First, there is not consensus among males here. At all. There are quite a few who completely reject the tenets of game. Second, most of the data is in direct contradiction to the anecdotes you refer to. How do we square that circle? These studies are not conducted in ivory towers, unless by ivory tower you mean college campus, which is the exact environment we want data from. One study of 300 college students is worth 1,000 anecdotes about the player in the next cubicle who shows his sexts at work.

      This is not to be adversarial or chop you down, but know what you know and what you don’t.

      I don’t take it personally, that’s not an issue. I don’t care for adversarial tactics between the sexes, but I have no problem with your disagreeing.

      FWIW, I am not seeking to persuade you of anything. I am in continuous pursuit of a complete assessment of the current sexual marketplace. Within in there are many “sub SMPs.” The post college SMP is very, very different from the college SMP.

      Your experience is one snapshot. No one is denying your experience, but you are really not in a position to extrapolate to the whole market due to the number of variables, and the fact that you are only in one sub SMP at any given time.

  • Ted D

    Cooper – “I can’t let it through. The only conclusions I see that come from accepting this shit is bitterness and anger. Which quite frankly I have more of than I’d like already.”

    You must go through being angry and bitter to get to the other side though. And I won’t say it is in any way, shape, or form easy to accomplish. I’m several years in and still working through a bit of deep bitterness, and that is taking into consideration that from my POV, Lord willing I won’t ever need to attract another woman in my lifetime. (of course, “game” tells me I should always work on staying attractive to other women even if I have NO intention of actually attracting them…)

    I’d like to tell you it isn’t so, but at least IME it was/is inevitable.

  • YaReallyId

    Google Image Search for Shani’s pic. She’s 30yo, past her prime, and looks average at best done up for her photo-shoots, probably a notch or two worse on an average day.

    Why would the guy wine and dine her? Especially if he has a social life (he’s out with his friends after all) where he can probably meet a younger hotter chick.

    His thought process is literally “well she’s not that hot so if she makes it easy to bang her, cool, I’m in. Otherwise ehhh, not worth the effort I’d rather take my chances here in this bar full of college hotties.”

    But it’s not politically correct to say that she’s not hot enough to be worth the guy’s effort lol especially since she’s a “career woman” (is “social media and blog manager really a job?). How come having a career and drinking cosmos isn’t attractive to men?? Sex & The City told us it was!!!

    Don’t shoot the messenger, I’m just giving you a glimpse into what that guy is actually thinking. Like it or not, guys aren’t falling for “I have a vagina so you should invest in me by default” anymore, this generation looks at it like “I’m willing to invest, but lets see exactly what you’re bringing to the table here.”

    In short, men have simply realized their own value. :)

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      YaReally

      Um, Shani’s pic was in the article I linked to.

      You have no information about the looks of the guy in question. He might be a 2 who’s getting cred only from the fact that he’s a hipster musician.

      Don’t shoot the messenger, I’m just giving you a glimpse into what that guy is actually thinking.

      Are you serious? It doesn’t take much intelligence to know exactly what the guy is thinking. That’s not the problem. The point of the article isn’t to shame the guy who wants casual. The point is that the douche asked her out on a date for Friday night. He flaked, then disrespected her by going for the low effort booty call option. Which she rejected.

      Sounds to me like Shani realized his low value.

  • Ted D

    Sassy – ” I guess I’ll just have to suck it up and take this in stride.”

    Welcome to the club! ;-)

  • OffTheCuff

    Coop, what’s to be bitter about? Its all laid out here by Sassy.

    Women will start asking YOU on formal “dates”, if you focus 100% on building attraction in low-pressure situations first. There won’t even be a rejection, it will just seem like you are planning stuff together. If you’re nervous about the response you might get when offering a date, it means your intimacy hasn’t flowed smoothly up to this point, and you’ve got this sort of “speed-bump” that someone now has to ride over.

    You either focus on women who are immediately attracted to you, or give them lots of low-pressure NON-DATE time for it to build to that point. The result is the same.

    Then, at the point, they love to be dated, which you may or may not choose to offer. *After* attraction.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      it will just seem like you are planning stuff together.

      Planning stuff together is dating. I think people should stop using the word date to indicate linen tablecloths and hushed restaurants. Dating is doing stuff as a pair that is non-sexual in nature. It doesn’t have to cost anything. It works best when men suggest the plans in the beginning.

  • JP

    @Susan:

    “You raise an important point. There is so much going on subconsciously. If his scent, i.e. his DNA, doesn’t work, there’s no hope for it. You could never “trick” yourself into attraction. This is actually a problem for couples who marry without the woman ever having been off birth control. She goes off, experiences her man’s scent very differently because she is now ovulating, and may find him repugnant. I’ve read articles by marriage counselors who say they see it fairly frequently.

    Don’t ever commit to someone for life unless you’ve been off the Pill for at least 6 months. Better, use another form of BC.””

    Well, there’s also this problem, which may be happening at the same time:

    http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/anger-in-the-age-entitlement/201301/love-marriage-uncertainty

    “If you’re like most people, you rode into married life on powerful waves of affection and intimacy that crashed occasionally into self-doubt and apprehension, only to rise again, stronger than ever. In other words, you believed that you married for love. That was the easy part.

    Lots of research shows that love is more effective at bringing us together than keeping us together. You may have heard the saying, “Love is easy; relationships are hard.” The truth is relationships are hard because love is easy. Strong feelings and sensations of any kind carry an illusion of certainty. With the exception of resentment, no emotional experience has more illusion of certainty than love. The need to feel certain is at least part of the reason why we come to resent the most the people we love the most.

    Strong feelings and sensations of any kind also tend to block out those of other people. When you have a terrible headache, it’s hard to recognize that someone else has a backache. If you’re resentful, you cannot appreciate the vulnerabilities of others. If you feel excited or euphoric, you are less likely to notice the homeless sleeping on the street. Love makes us less sensitive to the subtleties of our loved ones’ emotional worlds in the rush to project our own onto them.”

  • Mike C

    OMG. This just happened to me, almost word for word.

    The guy that I have been dating recently, who is now my boyfriend, talked with me last night about our sexual histories. I asked him about his number, and he admitted that it is somewhere in the 20s. He even took it a step further by admitting to having a threesome once.

    I’m somewhat in shock about it. I’m not sure what to think, to be honest. He is a really handsome guy, so I do understand how his number can be that high. Still, I’m a little worried by it at the same time. I’d be lying if I said that it doesn’t bother me a little. He’s been fantastic so far though, and I won’t break up with him over it. I guess I’ll just have to suck it up and take this in stride.

    Well…Sassy, your conundrum is that to some extent you want “fried ice”. I’ve read a great number of your comments so I think I have a pretty good handle on the “type of guy” you find attractive, and screen and filter for both in terms of physicality and demeanor. Very often, those are the guys who are going to have high Ns and also have experienced some “extracurricular” stuff like threesomes. You could always switch it up to the more emotional, cuddly beta type and be pretty sure it comes with a low N and pretty much straight vanilla sexual experience.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Very often, those are the guys who are going to have high Ns and also have experienced some “extracurricular” stuff like threesomes.

      I read somewhere that only 14% of Americans of all ages have ever had a threesome. I believe a lot of those are in open, swinging or polyamorous relationships. The number of monogamy oriented guys in their 20s should actually be very, very low. Probably less common than the benevolent alpha Sassy wants.

  • Mike C

    No, Game is about behavioral correlates. It provides a set of principles that men can use whether they have a good personality or not. Many players do not have good personalities. This guy was cocky – so he had obviously had sexual success in the past. Charlotte wasn’t interested in cocky, and she thought he was boring. Game can’t make him interesting, just dominant.

    LOL…I swear sometimes I think you throw material out there just wanting to argue with me. With all due respect, even after all this time, you still don’t really understand what Game is and is not. Personality is malleable. The “fake it til you make it” line refers to the fact that you essentially imitate certain personality attributes until you actually internalize them and you become them. What is personality? It is your verbal language, your body language, your interests, your choice in discussion, tone, etc. It is all malleable to some degree

    You are so literal it’s difficult to converse with you a lot of the time.

    You’ve mentioned this a number of times. I don’t think it means what you think it means, or I really have no idea what you mean. You have a strong tendency to simply make random points or random statements that have nothing to do with the previous paragraphs/sentences. I think you referred to it as “making associations”. It simply becomes a distraction to the point at hand, and gets us sucked into a different argument. I’m trying here…I really am…I am trying to be judicious but you have to meet me halfway, and not throw out these random statements that serve to want to draw me into conflict.

    You were the one who introduced his game.

    Ehhh..in this sense “game” is simply a generalized term referring to a guy’s interaction style with women. It has nothing necessarily to do with Mystery’s 7-hour script to get them into bed

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Personality is malleable. The “fake it til you make it” line refers to the fact that you essentially imitate certain personality attributes until you actually internalize them and you become them.

      No, that is completely false. You cannot change your personality via game or anything else. Here are the Big 5:

      Openness
      Conscientiousness
      Extraversion
      Agreeableness
      Neuroticism

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Five_personality_traits

      They have been found consistent across cultures, and have built in sex differences.

      They are generally considered 50% heritable, but by adolescence are generally set and are not malleable.

      You have a strong tendency to simply make random points or random statements that have nothing to do with the previous paragraphs/sentences.

      My point was not random. I think that you use a certain word when making a point, but you can’t handle a related idea or even a synonym. Often it’s valuable to expand a point, use a metaphor or make an analogy, but you appear flummoxed when the debate expands or goes off in a slightly different direction. That is the nature of debate. It is not linear, nor is it a ping pong match. Or at least the best debates are not. I’m interested in discussing related ideas, providing relevant or similar examples, in an effort to better understand what is being discussed. Otherwise all you’ve got is “yes it is”, “no it’s not”, “yes it is,” etc.

      Ehhh..in this sense “game” is simply a generalized term referring to a guy’s interaction style with women. It has nothing necessarily to do with Mystery’s 7-hour script to get them into bed

      You cannot separate Game blogs and Game discussions from Mystery. I’m sorry, but you just can’t. He didn’t invent it, but he codified it most recently, and nearly all the terms people use related to Game, especially on blogs and PUA sites, are directly traceable to him.

      If a guy in a bar gets blown out, and you say his game was lacking, you should expect that I might naturally associate that with Mystery’s treatise on Game, which was developed in bars.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    I’m not sure you are understanding the frustration. We are agreeing with you, attraction takes time to build, familiarity is good, that’s why most marriages come from people you met through friends, school, work, etc, and THEN maybe you can take her on a date.

    The way blue-pill guys are taking this is cold-approaching a girl you have no social connection with at all and having a date with her.

    This is dumb. Dumb dumb dumb dumb dumb dumb dumb dumb DUMB DUMB DUMB. As far as I can tell, anyways, and I am not an expert.

    What guys should be doing is building their social circles, so they CAN meet girls at work, school, through friends, etc, and then, after you have had invested some time in her through THOSE circles, which is a GOOD filter, THEN you can take her on a date.

    IF you meet a new girl, you should integrate her into your social circles FIRST.

    That is a good strategy for men. I would say it’s a great strategy for girls, too, and they should welcome it.

    The tone of this post is “if he invites you out for drinks with his friends he isn’t serious and you are wasting time with him.” At least that’s what I INITIALLY got. I am wondering how far off I am? You said it’s an okay strategy earlier on, I honestly think it’s the only one that makes sense.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @ADBG

      The way blue-pill guys are taking this is cold-approaching a girl you have no social connection with at all and having a date with her.

      This is dumb. Dumb dumb dumb dumb dumb dumb dumb dumb DUMB DUMB DUMB. As far as I can tell, anyways, and I am not an expert.

      We are all in agreement AFAICT.

      The tone of this post is “if he invites you out for drinks with his friends he isn’t serious and you are wasting time with him.”

      No, the point is that if a guy does not graduate very quickly to wanting to spend non-sexual time alone he is not interested. Mutual attraction is a prerequisite to this, so by all means socialize in groups until this is established. Once it is, you need to move and isolate. I hear a lot of women say, “Ugh, he never wants to get together just the two of us! It’s always with his friends at a bar.”

      I don’t care if you call them dates or hangs or two-person appointments.

  • Scipio Africanus

    Madalena,
    Just re-imburse him for the amount of money he spent on you during the dates, once you realize you’re not interested.

  • Sassy6519

    @ Susan Walsh

    Whoa. I’d say that puts him in the highly unrestricted camp. You should at least have your eyes open about that. If that works for you, fine, I know you have said you might consider an open relationship. But if you’re still feeling that you might want to have his babies, I would proceed with extreme caution. (I’m assuming he made this decision as a mature adult, not that he got roped into a wild event on the spur of the moment at the age of 19.)

    He said that it happened when he was 19. He is 28 now. He admitted to losing his virginity at 18, so that equates to roughly 2-3 girls per year, I guess. That’s not completely horrible.

    @ Mike C

    Well…Sassy, your conundrum is that to some extent you want “fried ice”. I’ve read a great number of your comments so I think I have a pretty good handle on the “type of guy” you find attractive, and screen and filter for both in terms of physicality and demeanor. Very often, those are the guys who are going to have high Ns and also have experienced some “extracurricular” stuff like threesomes. You could always switch it up to the more emotional, cuddly beta type and be pretty sure it comes with a low N and pretty much straight vanilla sexual experience.

    Yeah, I know. I do want “fried ice”, in a sense. I do really like him though, which is why I don’t think this will be a deal breaker. As Susan said though, however, I plan on keeping my eyes open for any bad signs.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Sassy

      He said that it happened when he was 19. He is 28 now. He admitted to losing his virginity at 18, so that equates to roughly 2-3 girls per year, I guess. That’s not completely horrible.

      OK, I’d cut him some slack then. I’d be much more concerned if he said it happened last year. The fact that he was honest is good.

      I think Mike C is right that a lot of attractive guys are going to have opportunities, and btw that includes handsome betas. For the ONS, looks are the most important thing. Handsome guys have status and preselection.

      So in that context I don’t think 21 should be a dealbreaker. At least, that’s what I told the other girl. The types who are hardwired for ST only and work it get into much higher zones than that. No woman in her right mind should get with a guy at 100, for example, IMO. Both her guy and your guy are very interested in a serious relationship – that alone is a good sign.

      But yeah, I’d keep one eye open.

  • JP

    @Susan: “They have been found consistent across cultures, and have built in sex differences.”

    I think there has been some recent research indicating that this isn’t true.

    Apparently it doesn’t work on certain aboriginal cultures, at least.

    I don’t know where the article is or I would post it here.

  • Ted D

    Susan – “Did you “hang out” alone?”

    Not until we determined that we wanted something more than friendship to be honest.

    “Did you do anything other than have sex?”

    We didn’t have sex right away, mostly because *I* wasn’t willing to get that physical until *I* knew there was something more in it for me than getting off. So sex wasn’t a shared activity until after a relationship was Established.

    “Did you go anywhere? Have any experiences?”

    Not really. We went from hanging out with our mutual friends, to deciding to pursue something more. (at that time “something more” was undefined, although she pulled out the “I’m not looking for a boyfriend” line from the start.) I think we spent probably a few weeks hanging out alone at her place or mine before it started getting really physical, and at that time I laid out my “no sex before commitment” POV.

    I will say this: it went VERY fast from just friends to lovers, probably three weeks to a month. (and of course we didn’t see each other every single day, but we communicated by text often from day one prior to even considering a relationship) And that first “official” date came about two weeks after we “consummated” the relationship. So, we didn’t date in any traditional sense until after we were having sex, despite the fact that we both considered it a relationship of some sort already.

    That being said, we weren’t exactly in the position to do a lot of real dating anyway. We both had kids at home and responsibilities to attend, so evening/weekend time was at a premium. Plus, we didn’t really want to start integrating our kids until we were sure we both were shooting for the long term. We started that process at about the 2 month mark, give or take a few days.

    That being said, it worked without going the traditional dating route, and results are the focus.

  • Damien Vulaume

    A site where you do nothing but show off your kids, share parenting links, promote mommy blogs, etc. Someone could make a lot of money doing that.

    Oh you Americans :-)

    @Beta Guy:
    How often does a girl grow on you?

    @Most of the guys:
    I think I already wrote to Ted about that once, but dating/courtship is girls’ domain, where THEY choose what to do next. Just accept it. I don’t understand this impatience and sheer intolerance at girls games (well, the reasonable ones, those they pull because they like you and are scared to be disappointed), as if it should be like your own rational script, and it seems in a bit of a boorish way. Even if a girl likes you from the start, one wrong move in the process and you’re out. So there’s a minimum you are required to do if you want to make a better impression than the average Chuck or Dave.
    I don’t understand (although this is no surprise…) this money issue you mention. Paying for the girl is something normal, out of galantery, although this is not so strict anymore by today’s standards. A few of the guys mentioned wasting 100 $ on a first date???? I don’t remember EVER spending more than say, 10$ on first dates (even in America), but not because I was stingy. The idea of taking a “valuable” girl to a fancy restaurant/place on a first date is something that should normally smell to her like douchey cologne intended to impress. The stiffness and dull atmosphere of those places are anyway rarelly suited for a first encounter. Girls pull the strings during courtship, but that doesn’t mean you’re their puppet. One essential tool you have as a guy is to surprise them, like taking them to unusual, cheap, authentic (but CLEAN) or exotic places. You’ll get much more a feeling of complicity early on, and those places are “romantic”, because cosy, unusual and authentic.
    One last thing about “dates”, which always seemed to me to have such a ridiculously strict definition over there (There’s no such word in my language, nor do we have words for Boyfriend or Girlfriend): A date should just be taken as a casual, relaxed one on one meeting with the fairer sex, and can have many variations, depending on her apparent personality.
    And in case you start wondering if I’m not posing as an expert here (no one is), I can reassure you that I have had my fair share of miserable failures as well. :-) But as I reflected on them later on, I had to admit to myself that, most of the time, I was the one who had played my cards wrong, not them.
    As we say: “L’homme propose, la femme dispose”. It is a law of nature that it is useless to negate. And if you rebel against it, you’re playing in the hands of the radfems’ script.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Damien

      The idea of taking a “valuable” girl to a fancy restaurant/place on a first date is something that should normally smell to her like douchey cologne intended to impress. The stiffness and dull atmosphere of those places are anyway rarelly suited for a first encounter.

      Exactly. It’s just very forced and awkward, trying way too hard. It’s also formal and boring.

      One essential tool you have as a guy is to surprise them, like taking them to unusual, cheap, authentic (but CLEAN) or exotic places. You’ll get much more a feeling of complicity early on, and those places are “romantic”, because cosy, unusual and authentic.

      I would rather go to a dive hole in the wall with the best …..(insert your favorite ethnic food here: dumplings, chicken soup, ice cream, pizza, pad thai). Something new and different is always best.

      A date should just be taken as a casual, relaxed one on one meeting with the fairer sex, and can have many variations, depending on her apparent personality.

      Thank you, that is what I have been trying and failing to say throughout this thread.

  • JP

    “No, the point is that if a guy does not graduate very quickly to wanting to spend non-sexual time alone he is not interested. Mutual attraction is a prerequisite to this, so by all means socialize in groups until this is established.”

    Huh?

    If I like to talk to you, I will certainly want to spend non-sexual alone time with you. That doesn’t have anything to do with whether I am attracted to you. It has to do with the fact that I can’t really form social bonds in group situations.

    Being interested with connecting with the person is a prerequisite.

  • INTJ

    @ Susan

    Agreed. I’m just pointing out that many girls who are relationship worthy today may have made a poor choice or two in their past. As you said, the question is why. Why did you do it? Why did you stop doing it?

    I think the same questions might apply to “reformed” alphas who have banged a lot of women.

    One or two poor choices is okay. But I’m not a “reformed” alpha so I don’t deserve a “reformed” slut.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @INTJ

      One or two poor choices is okay. But I’m not a “reformed” alpha so I don’t deserve a “reformed” slut.

      I think the problem is that I attempted to define “relationship worthy” there. That is not for me to judge, but to the individual male. I certainly do not feel that you owe any girl some sort of second chance. I am totally opposed to the idea that if women all sleep around, guys will have no choice but to accept slutty women. That’s a sentiment that’s common on feminist sites and I think it’s totally wrong and unethical. BTW, those same women have made the same argument about STDs – if everyone gets herpes, none of us will have to worry about it being a problem. Ugh.

  • Mike C

    No, that is completely false. You cannot change your personality via game or anything else. Here are the Big 5:

    Openness Conscientiousness Extraversion Agreeableness Neuroticism

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Five_personality_traits

    They have been found consistent across cultures, and have built in sex differences.

    They are generally considered 50% heritable, but by adolescence are generally set and are not malleable.

    This is apples and oranges. You’ve shifted personality to the clinical psychological definition whereas I am talking about male-female interaction. A couple of those are not even relevant to establishing initial attraction or are even counterproductive. Conscientiousness has ZILCH to do with generating attraction in an initial conversation although it is good for long-term relationship success. If you don’t want to call it “personality” then make up whatever word you want…but I think you know exactly what I am talking about. A person can become more outgoing, change up their vocal patterns, body language, conversational style… that is the stuff that I am saying is malleable to some degree.

    Often it’s valuable to expand a point, use a metaphor or make an analogy, but you appear flummoxed when the debate expands or goes off in a slightly different direction.

    Flummoxed is the wrong word. Annoyed or perturbed would be more accurate because in many of those cases I recognize the “slightly different direction” is being utilized as a dodge to escape directly addressing my point or question. That is all well and good, but when it happens, I have a strong desire to point it out. Really, what it is is Vox’s distinction between dialectic and rhetoric. I’m capable of playing the rhetoric game but it isn’t my first preference. I recognize that you are highly skilled at it which is why you probably default to it in most exchanges.

    You cannot separate Game blogs and Game discussions from Mystery. I’m sorry, but you just can’t.

    Maybe we need a Mount Rushmore with heads of Buss and Mystery :) Mystery is just one guy. The early Game community had a lot of guys developing stuff and since then it has gone in many different directions.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Mike C

      You’ve shifted personality to the clinical psychological definition whereas I am talking about male-female interaction. A couple of those are not even relevant to establishing initial attraction or are even counterproductive. Conscientiousness has ZILCH to do with generating attraction in an initial conversation although it is good for long-term relationship success.

      Nah, they’re the same thing. In fact, low conscientiousness is correlated to male promiscuity, so it generates attraction all by itself.

      A person can become more outgoing, change up their vocal patterns, body language, conversational style… that is the stuff that I am saying is malleable to some degree.

      A person can learn skills, sure. That is not personality. I think that people can learn to hide the least attractive aspects of their personalities for a time, e.g. narcissists. They can focus on what they do well, e.g. charm, charisma, and it may take a while for them to get “found out.”

      You can pretend to be an extrovert – in fact, I’ve read that this is helpful for introverts to learn for work and social situations. But any person who knows you for a period of time is not going to perceive you that way. That part of your personality is fixed.

      Annoyed or perturbed would be more accurate because in many of those cases I recognize the “slightly different direction” is being utilized as a dodge to escape directly addressing my point or question.

      You can demonize my communication style all you want, have at it. I can’t say I have ever had this problem anywhere else. I think you and I are particularly incompatible, but my intent is not to dodge. I feel extremely comfortable and confident of the points I am trying to make, and am not intimidated by your arguments.

      In any case, I maintain that Charlotte’s experience is a case of a man becoming less attractive once he opens his mouth, not because he doesn’t have game, but because his character, values, interests, intelligence, etc. did not appeal to her, and those things are an important part of attraction after the first glimpse.

  • Ted D

    Susan – “No, the point is that if a guy does not graduate very quickly to wanting to spend non-sexual time alone he is not interested. ”

    But wait a minute, that DOES NOT mean he needs to switch to “traditional dating” at all. A guy can spend non-sexual time with a woman without the need to be all alone, and certainly without anything resembling a traditional date. I spent lots of non-sexual time with my wife during the period when we still hung out with mutual friends. How you ask? I’d often “isolate” her when were in mixed company by simply initiating a conversation directed at her. With enough people around, it isn’t as rude to just tune out the ‘group’ and focus on a single person, and, if you two don’t jive, its a simply matter of reengaging with the group to make a low drama exit.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Ted

      . I spent lots of non-sexual time with my wife during the period when we still hung out with mutual friends. How you ask? I’d often “isolate” her when were in mixed company by simply initiating a conversation directed at her.

      Obviously, that worked for you, and I’m glad it did. Personally, I would find that woefully lacking, but then again I admit I’m an attention whore. :) Seriously, emotional intimacy cannot be built in large groups at noisy venues with alcohol flowing. I mean, privacy. Gotta have privacy.

      Have we changed from saying “I want to be alone with you” to “I wanna be in a big group with you?”

  • Damien Vulaume

    Just re-imburse him for the amount of money he spent on you during the dates, once you realize you’re not interested.

    Yawn.

  • Passer_By

    @madelena

    ” However, as per your comment, if I give it another shot and extend a second date, then the subtle implication is that I’m a “resource extractor” (to use another economic term). Damned if I do, damned if I don’t.”

    So take him on the second date. What’s stopping you from doing that? Arrange for it yourself. Flip the switch so that he’s not in the position of being perceived as putting on a perpetual dog and pony show for you, which is bound to lower your attraction for him anyway. You might find that attraction builds more easily for you if suddenly you’re in the position of providing the date, rather than putting him in constant approval seeking mode.

  • Passer_By

    @susan

    “Here are the Big 5:

    Openness
    Conscientiousness
    Extraversion
    Agreeableness
    Neuroticism”

    That leaves out confidence/self-assuredness, as well as the habitual behaviors which convey it or convey a lack of it. I think that’s the part that may be most malleable and is most useful as an attractor.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Passer By

      That leaves out confidence/self-assuredness, as well as the habitual behaviors which convey it or convey a lack of it. I think that’s the part that may be most malleable and is most useful as an attractor.

      I agree, it’s a strong attractor for both sexes, because it connotes high value. It is probably somewhat related to personality. In particular, these traits:

      Extraversion – Energy, positive emotions, surgency, assertiveness, sociability and the tendency to seek stimulation in the company of others, and talkativeness.

      Neuroticism – (sensitive/nervous vs. secure/confident). The tendency to experience unpleasant emotions easily, such as anger, anxiety, depression, or vulnerability. Neuroticism also refers to the degree of emotional stability and impulse control, and is sometimes referred by its low pole – “emotional stability”.

      But it’s probably more of a condition related to environment, including family background and upbringing, as well as real achievement.

      If someone lacks self-confidence, I think the best thing they can do is choose something to get very, very good at and build from there. Unfortunately, low self-esteem, which is not quite the same thing, tends to be tenacious and pervasive, so mastery will probably not work.

  • Ted D

    “That leaves out confidence/self-assuredness, as well as the habitual behaviors which convey it or convey a lack of it. I think that’s the part that may be most malleable and is most useful as an attractor.”

    This. Susan I think you are too stuck on the specifics of personality which don’t come into play until later on in the relationship escalation process.

    Look, I’m not going to toot my own horn, but at my core I am a decent guy. I have good solid values, and I’m loyal to a fault. However, it didn’t matter AT ALL that I was a decent guy when women were unable to figure that out quickly because of how I interacted with them.

    “Game” concentrates a lot on teaching guys how to interact with women to increase attraction. Full stop. If they have nothing to back it up, they won’t get far. However, a guy with all the best qualities in the world will also not get very far if women can’t see some glimmer of those qualities fairly soon during their early interactions.

    Can game take a total asshat and turn him into a husband? Not a chance in hell. But, game CAN take a very good husband and turn him into an attractive man. Being a good husband IS NOT an initial attraction cue, because there is no way to determine it without deeper exploration. He has to get a shot to show the good stuff before she can see it. Right?

  • Damien Vulaume

    Passer by
    Yeah, I’d tuned Susan’s big 5 my own way like this:
    Self confidence
    Frank eye contact
    Agreeableness
    Smooth but manly body language
    Extraversion-yes, but already partially contained in self confidence.
    Also, interesting topics of discussion which the girl can relate to on a personal, emotional level.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Yeah, I’d tuned Susan’s big 5

      Just to be clear, I cannot take any credit or ownership of this now prevalent model:

      The Big Five model is a comprehensive, empirical, data-driven research finding. Identifying the traits and structure of human personality has been one of the most fundamental goals in all of psychology. The five broad factors were discovered and defined by several independent sets of researchers. These researchers began by studying known personality traits and then factor-analyzing hundreds of measures of these traits (in self-report and questionnaire data, peer ratings, and objective measures from experimental settings) in order to find the underlying factors of personality.

      At least four sets of researchers have worked independently for decades on this problem and have identified generally the same Big Five factors. Ever since the 1990s when the consensus of psychologists gradually came to support the Big Five, there has been a growing body of research surrounding these personality traits.

      Another area of investigation is the downward extension of Big Five theory, or the Five Factor Model, into childhood. Studies have found Big Five personality traits to correlate with children’s social and emotional adjustment and academic achievement.

  • Ted D

    Susan – “You can pretend to be an extrovert – in fact, I’ve read that this is helpful for introverts to learn for work and social situations. But any person who knows you for a period of time is not going to perceive you that way. That part of your personality is fixed.”

    You don’t have to explain this to me, I live it every day. I’d like to share my perspective though as one of these men.

    There are people in this world who would tell you I am the most friendly, outgoing, and perhaps even charming man they know, simply because the only side of me they ever see is my “game face” otherwise known as my “mask so I can fit into an extroverted world” mask. As you pointed out, anyone that actually knows me realizes I am rather introverted, and in fact they mostly find it very amusing that I’m able to disguise it so well.

    Now, that being said, how in the hell would I have a chance of meeting a woman to pair up with IF I didn’t change my behavior to fit her expectations of what “normal” is? I mean, I normally don’t talk to people I don’t know, so no woman would ever get the chance to see my good qualities. When my wife first met me, she thought I was a very outgoing and extroverted person, because she met me when I was with close friends, and all of our interaction happened in that environment for a matter of months before she started to realize the truth: I was VERY introverted. Thing is, by then she had seen my good qualities, and decided she was OK with my “introvertedness”, provided I was OK with her dragging me out to do stuff from time to time. And now I think she actually sees it as a bonus because she realizes that she is in the company of a select few people that actually know the “real” me. And, she seems to see my ability to “blend in” as a sign of something close to an alpha trait. She has told me before that she admires it and finds it highly attractive that despite my aversion to being social, I can and do manage it when necessary. *shrug* It works so I’m not looking to fix it…

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Now, that being said, how in the hell would I have a chance of meeting a woman to pair up with IF I didn’t change my behavior to fit her expectations of what “normal” is?

      That’s the point, Ted. You have learned how to change your behavior, at least temporarily, despite the underlying personality trait. Anyway, we’ve gone off on a tangent here. Game is a learned set of behaviors. They can certainly be internalized, scripted, choreographed, etc. And people can get better at things just by practicing – I’ve often said that Game is essentially a form of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy. But you’d obviously be the first to say that it’s a relief to go home and stop being social after doing it for several hours.

      In the end, you can stimulate attraction with behaviors, but you can’t sustain it based on behaviors alone. Your wife obviously fell for you, an introvert. Part of my attraction for my husband is based on his introversion, though I recognize that while I find his nailing the Sunday crossword puzzle sexy, a woman in a bar probably would not. :)

  • A definite beta guy

    DV, I can name one girl that “grew” on me. It turned into a disaster. I would not advise girls to put out for me thinking they will “grow” on me

  • Ted D

    Susan – I hate when we cross post because I tend to write a lot regardless but…

    “Seriously, emotional intimacy cannot be built in large groups at noisy venues with alcohol flowing. I mean, privacy. Gotta have privacy.”

    Oh I can answer this one!!!! We texted. Often. Daily in fact, well before we were anywhere near a relationship. We were both going through divorce issues (her post divorce, me knee deep in it) and kinda formed our own support group. We had some very deep and meaningful conversations in digital format, and I firmly believe that it was those conversations that really got her thinking about me in terms of relationship potential. In a physical sense, we did NOT have any privacy to speak of until after we decided to see where it went. After all, I was still very much a married man as the ex and I hadn’t formally “decided” we were getting divorced yet. However the fact that she moved out pretty much indicated to me we were done, so emotionally I moved on before we started the paperwork. But, I consciously decided to NOT start any kind of relationship until that point out of ethical and moral respect for my ex, myself, and most importantly out of respect for whatever woman I’d have wanted to get with.

    Also note: the times we were hanging out with friends was not at some loud crowded club. It was at a home, with a small group of related friends. Think large dinner party sized on busy nights, and 6 to 8 people on an average night. We basically hung out, drank, BSed, and played cards. LOTS of cards.

  • Sai

    “Don’t have sex with ADBG until you are in a relationship. Don’t think you are in a relationship just because you are hanging out with his friends”
    I like this because it makes a lot of sense to me.

    “Just re-imburse him for the amount of money he spent on you during the dates, once you realize you’re not interested.”

    I think that’s perfectly fair. :)

  • SayWhaat

    You might find that attraction builds more easily for you if suddenly you’re in the position of providing the date, rather than putting him in constant approval seeking mode.

    +1. I usually suggested the second date when I was dating. I think a good second date idea would be a picnic and/or museum-outing. That way she can demonstrate her nurturing capabilities by bringing a few baked goods, and they can figure out more about their compatibility during the daytime when there is no pressure to end the night.

  • SayWhaat

    @ Damien:

    And in case you start wondering if I’m not posing as an expert here (no one is), I can reassure you that I have had my fair share of miserable failures as well. But as I reflected on them later on, I had to admit to myself that, most of the time, I was the one who had played my cards wrong, not them.

    A very healthy attitude to have. I am still battling my cynicism re: the opposite sex, especially since I had some pretty bad experiences while dating. The fact that many men reject virgins is still a bitter pill that I am trying to choke down, and it’s easy to blame the guys I went out with as being “assholes”. Certainly, most of them were. (:P) But there were things that I should have done that would have spared me heartbreak. I should have qualified them more. I should not have ignored certain red flags and should have prepared myself to immediately walk at the first sign of bad behavior. I dealt with a very small sample of bad eggs and it is important that I not allow myself to become jaded by those experiences.

    I guess what I’m trying to say is that I know I played a role in my own unhappiness, and I stood in my way more than I should have. It is *so easy* to paint oneself as the victim, and it is so hard to remove oneself from that self-imposed label. Yes, it sucked that guys judged me without really getting to know me, but they are entitled to their preferences. As am I.

  • http://bastiatblogger.blogspot.com/ Bastiat Blogger

    Re: N. I think the N counts being thrown around here are actually quite conservative. A guy can almost casually be at 20+ women more quickly than one might imagine, and without requiring him to dedicate himself to a full-time PUA lifestyle. Female intrasexual competition is intensely focused on a relatively concentrated set of males and even the promise of 3-some type activity is frequently employed as a kind of sweetener.

    I can but imagine what it’s like to be a popular male student on campus these days—even as a shy, mild-mannered part-time professor, I feel objectified and subject to some kind of weird auction/bidding war process.

    Another thought: imagine that there is a seesaw with “Sex” on one side and “Commitment” on the other. As the price of Sex has gone down, the price of Commitment has gone up. While I believe that the alpha/beta dichotomy is very useful from a descriptive standpoint, it can fail to capture another dimension of the mating game, and that is the concept that a man who has many options in this SMP may rationally set an extremely high price for commitment. He’s not against the idea of monogamy per se; he just imposes a very stringent—perhaps unrealistically so—set of prereqs.

    In the meantime, he has a different kind of fun. To those unable to “pay” the dues required for his commitment, he may appear to be a cad or player and be vilified. In fact, he may just be employing a dual-strategy that works very well for male sexuality—taking the offered, readily-available sex, but rejecting the more dangerous commitment opportunities until someone comes along who clears this very high bar.

    Most of the really successful players that I know are not pathologically commitment-phobic (a few are, yes), but they do have very high expectations in terms of LTR/marriage mate selection.

    For example, Brad Pitt is typically being described as a beta these days, but consider what it took to break this bucking bronco and make him a beta—it literally took the real-life Lara Croft, a freakishly seductive, knife-collecting alpha female with an SMV so high that it defies normal grading attempts. To Jennifer Anniston, Gwyneth Paltrow, and God knows how many others, however, Pitt’s behavior was quite different and terms like “cad” and “cheater” were frequently employed.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @BB

      I can but imagine what it’s like to be a popular male student on campus these days—even as a shy, mild-mannered part-time professor, I feel objectified and subject to some kind of weird auction/bidding war process.

      I have my doubts about shy, but the rest of your statement is very easy for me to believe. I don’t know if you saw it, but I shared a story about a guy who is a male model trying to find a girl who will not objectify him. And the girl he likes is very wary of embarking on a journey of fending off interlopers and competitors for the foreseeable future. (Though she certainly will do it.)

      In the meantime, he has a different kind of fun. To those unable to “pay” the dues required for his commitment, he may appear to be a cad or player and be vilified. In fact, he may just be employing a dual-strategy that works very well for male sexuality—taking the offered, readily-available sex, but rejecting the more dangerous commitment opportunities until someone comes along who clears this very high bar.

      Agreed, that is a sensible strategy that accurately reflects market conditions. The question is, is there any cost to the readily-available sex? Some men here have said yes. If so, that needs to be factored in.

      Re Brad Pitt, I think his “Gwynny” broke his heart, but I take your point. I don’t find his “beta-ness” a weakness, at all. He strikes me more as the ideal, benevolent alpha family man. I would say the same about Brady, though he has made a few statements that were fairly pussy-whipped in nature. There’s no reason for a man with sky high MMV to go all in with a woman with lower MMV.

      P.S. Brad did try to cheat on Jennifer. It was AJ who refused, according to her.

  • SayWhaat

    Olive posted her picture??? I missed it!!!! :(

  • Ted D

    Susan – “In the end, you can stimulate attraction with behaviors, but you can’t sustain it based on behaviors alone. Your wife obviously fell for you, an introvert.”

    I don’t think anyone here has ever suggested that anyone could pretend to be something they are not long term, unless I missed something.

    My wife fell for me because of or despite my introversion. In the end the introversion may have became a plus for me, but I’m pretty damn sure that had she seen that side of me from the gate, it would have been a minus. And that is the point I’m trying to make.

    You seem to be assuming that men are suggesting “game” be used to gloss over your faults. It can surely be used for that, but the results are completely predictable. However, game can be used to overcome many personality traits that may not be “bad” necessarily, but are certainly not very attractive.

    My introversion is hardly attractive on its own as most people don’t like unsocial people. “game” allows me to show that extroverted face to the world long enough for a woman to realize that my introversion, although not attractive, isn’t necessarily unattractive either. And in many ways it can become a bonus despite the initial hit to attraction it causes.

    If what you say is true, and attraction needs to grow for women, I don’t see any other way for guys to succeed if they have traits that present as unattractive up front. And, I’ll add that for guys like me that don’t generate instant attraction by looks/charisma alone, it can be VERY difficult to equalize what appears to be price discrimination from a woman. We see that in her past she escalated quickly with men she found attractive right away, and we wonder why WE have to build that level of attraction. It makes me feel less attractive and valuable to her because *I* had to qualify slowly when someone else didn’t.

  • SayWhaat

    Female intrasexual competition is intensely focused on a relatively concentrated set of males and even the promise of 3-some type activity is frequently employed as a kind of sweetener.

    Ha, tell that to my Fake Ex-BF. MMF threesome with a shady guy in Berlin. Even his bisexual friend was like, “you were okay with that?!” XD

  • SayWhaat

    (I should clarify that threesome was most emphatically not with me. Lol.)

  • Passer_By

    @saywhaat
    “Ha, tell that to my Fake Ex-BF.”

    Wait, did I miss something. Did you and your BF break up?

    “The fact that many men reject virgins is still a bitter pill that I am trying to choke down, ”

    Why do you need to choke it down now? I thought that problem was “solved”. lol.

  • BroHamlet

    @Susan

    “You’re not, you’re pitching sex. If you can pitch and get sex without dating, and the women who take the bait are the women you want, then good for you. That’s a winning strategy. For many men, that’s either not possible, or they don’t care for the women who are willing to make that deal.”

    This is one of the nuances that is largely intangible about “game”, and your reaction in asking me “does she have to put out to earn a date?” is why I say it is clear that you really don’t understand as much as you think you do. I don’t “pitch” anything, or make demands, or draw up a “contract” as you seem to be implying (the results would be Comedy Central material I’m sure). I know how to convey what I have to offer, and how to connect, and I know how to walk the line between keeping it light and getting serious. Most of this has come from experience. And the key to it all, is that there is no “pitch”, because I don’t come from the frame of mind where I am chasing or even trying to “get” something. It does help that I pick women that find me attractive instead of just randomly hitting on everyone, and that this group of women is big enough to allow me to have some good options.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @BroHamlet

      I’m afraid you misunderstood me. Language of contracts, transaction, negotiations, pitching a sale, etc. is being used generally here as sexual economics, which has been the framework at HUS literally from the first post. It is in no way personal to you.

      I was simply curious to know what you meant by qualifying a woman for a date. You said you focus on casual sex up front. Do you go on dates at all? Or only after sex? I ask because there are quite a few PUAs who subscribe to the “she buys her own latte until we’ve had sex” rule of dating. I mean, during post-coital bliss do you tentatively ask her whether she would like to go for dinner and a movie sometime?

      See, I’m well aware that I don’t know it all. You have me baffled. :P

  • VeriSeeker

    Susan,

    First, lets get a few things straight…

    “First, the divorce rate overall today is 40%, and only 16-17% for those with a college education.”

    No, it is acutally 50% like I stated earlier. Whether or not a couple is college educated has no bearing on my statement.

    “Second, it was the disruption of the equilibrium – women no longer acting as gatekeepers to sex – that drove up the divorce rate in the first place.”

    Wrong, women are still gatekeepers of sex. Ask the majority of men if you do not believe me. In general, men want to introduce sex into a given relationship before women do. You are going to have too explain how being a gatekeeper of sex is tied to the divorce rate. Most studies do not site this as a cause of divorce.

    “However, it should be noted that divorce had been climbing steadily over time, and was already at 25% by 1965.”

    Thanks for proving my theory. This was our parents generation. This is the time the relationship balance of power began to shift. Compare your rate to the rate in 1955. What do you get?

    “They want to be known. They want companionship, and love. That basic human drive never goes away. The difference isn’t between the sexes, it’s between individuals with STR vs. LTR orientations.”

    This is a fairly broad assumption. The real drive seems to be resources for women and looks for men. If this is not true then why do we not see supermodels dating garbage men or fast-food employees? Can these men not provide just as much love and companionship as the ultra-rich individuals they customarily date? The same is true for men. When is the last time you saw a rich play boy pictured with a “few extra pounds” or “BBW”? Never? Can we now focus on the true reason for the end of courtship: economic shift of resouces from men to women? Now maybe we can get somewhere on the topic.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @VeriSeeker

      No, it is acutally 50% like I stated earlier.

      Link please.

      Whether or not a couple is college educated has no bearing on my statement.

      Perhaps not, but in that case your statement is irrelevant here, and I write for a college educated population and work with those stats.

      Wrong, women are still gatekeepers of sex. Ask the majority of men if you do not believe me. In general, men want to introduce sex into a given relationship before women do

      That’s not saying much. Men want sex without the relationship much of the time. After the Pill and Women’s Movement happened in the 60s, women began having sex like crazy. The notion of gatekeeping flew out the window as outdated and “square.” Couples began swapping, having open marriages, attending key parties, etc. and the divorce rate soared as a direct result. It peaked at 50% in 1980, but has been declining ever since.

      My point about the divorce rate being 25% in 1965 is that it has gone up 15 points since then. An increase certainly, but not a dramatic one, and almost entirely in lower SES groups.

      The real drive seems to be resources for women and looks for men. If this is not true then why do we not see supermodels dating garbage men or fast-food employees?

      Attraction cues exist to facilitate mating, which is about reproduction via love and companionship. That is how we have evolved.

      Women today do not need resources from men. But they do like a man of high status, in answer to your question.

      Are you Michael, Piper, et al? Are you also Gutless Wonder? There’s a lot of trolling going on today.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “If it’s two people romantically interested in one another planning to spend time alone, it’s a date.”

    Yes of course you just can’t call it a date.
    Date= I’m a loser who needs to date.
    Hang out= I’m a stud giving you a chance.

    No one said it makes any sense but asking for a date implicitly states that she is better than him. A hang out does not carry that implication.

    As for paying, I have no problem with paying cause I refuse to do it endlessly. I’d imagine a guy who expected to drop $500 before sex would be annoyed.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Lokland

      No one said it makes any sense but asking for a date implicitly states that she is better than him. A hang out does not carry that implication.

      Well I’m glad you said it – I didn’t know guys felt that way. It’s the word date that has everyone so riled up?

  • YaReallyId

    “You met at a party on Saturday, and made out. You’ve been texting Sunday through Tuesday. She’s responsive. What’s next?”

    Invite her to do something non-sexual like come pick you up so you can go to a movie or do some non-sexual activity. If you say “come over and watch a movie” her ASD triggers because you made out with her at the party without sealing the deal so she’ll think you think she’s a slut and if she agrees to coming over that’s like saying “I am a big slut and want cock”.

    When she shows up to get you, you just pin her against the wall and make out for a few minutes, escalate it with some groping during the makeout, then whisper “let’s skip the movie.” into her ear and you two go back inside to you place and have sex.

    If she’s cool and fun and a good lay, and you WANT a girlfriend, then after sex while cuddling you arrange a legit date because now you know she’s worth it.

    This is my standard M.O. in that situation. I did it a few weeks ago in fact lol

    “Um, Shani’s pic was in the article I linked to.”

    They always pick the best pic of the chick. I like to see what she really looks like. The girl who “won’t settle” for men who don’t take her to plays and shit is no prize either lol. They’re both past their prime and into cat-lady territory to most men.

    “You have no information about the looks of the guy in question.”

    Doesn’t matter. His looks are irrelevant. He has status/value (musician, friends aka social proof, Shani chasing him, etc).

    “The point is that the douche asked her out on a date for Friday night. He flaked, then disrespected her by going for the low effort booty call option.”

    Yes, that’s what a date is now. A date in 1950 was different from a date in 1980 and a date in 2012 is different from a date in 1980. He did nothing wrong unless he said specifically that he was taking her to dinner etc and flaked on THOSE plans…but he didn’t.

    She simply has a different view of what a “date” constitutes, based in entitlement and older generation thinking.

    “Sounds to me like Shani realized his low value.”

    lol no, her ego was smashed by the realization that at 30+ despite her accomplishments in life, men will now start looking at her as only a piece of ass instead of as anything worth taking on a traditional date. From here a thread of thinking will unravel as she realizes that she should’ve settled down with one of the Nice Guys that used to want to wine & dine her in her early 20s.

    Too bad she didn’t have your blog back then hey? lol

    In all seriousness despite the lols I write, I truly feel bad for her. Life is about to get pretty depressing from here on.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Doesn’t matter. His looks are irrelevant. He has status/value (musician, friends aka social proof, Shani chasing him, etc).

      This is something that unattractive PUAs like to say, but it’s nonsense. Looks are never irrelevant. However, since Shani agreed to a date and put on her cutest jeans, we can assume she found him attractive. However, in no way did she chase him. He asked her out, then flaked. She did not contact him at all. When he finally texted, she declined his invitation. She DQ’d this guy once he showed his bad manners and true intent.

      He did nothing wrong unless he said specifically that he was taking her to dinner etc and flaked on THOSE plans…but he didn’t.

      Wrong. He said he was taking her on a date and he didn’t. He either flaked and disrespected her time or he lied from the start.

      She simply has a different view of what a “date” constitutes, based in entitlement and older generation thinking.

      That’s BS. She expected honesty and common courtesy and got neither. That’s the problem with your outlook at why I don’t care to have you around. You are amoral. You’ve said that the ends justify the means. I reject that utterly. That makes you a bad guy, in fact.

      her ego was smashed by the realization that at 30+ despite her accomplishments in life, men will now start looking at her as only a piece of ass instead of as anything worth taking on a traditional date.

      Wow, way to judge someone you know nothing about! More bad character in evidence here.

      You are ridiculous. Ya Really! I feel truly bad for you.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “That’s a problem in the guy’s head. 90% of women who go to bars regularly have never met a guy at a bar and dated him. I can think of three couples offhand who met that way. Bars are a good way for unrestricteds to meet one another.”

    I agree. Problem being that many young men are being led to believe that this is the script. I always hated clubs yet I spent years going to them and left feeling like shit afterwards.

  • http://7thseriesgongshow.blogspot.com Mr. Nervous Toes

    I have absolutely found that women do react well to many PUA tactics. Indifference in particular has become a fabulously important part of my toolkit. Basically I play hard to get. It doesn’t seem to matter whether a women is a sex-negative feminist or a slut, there is a way of carrying oneself that women appreciate. Strong yet relaxed, posture, confidence on the border of cockiness, athleticism, social proof, etc. For example, before reading on the subject I always assumed that if I flirted with one woman in a room I would be disqualifying myself to the others. That’s plainly not the case in fact.

    I have read a bunch of PUAs (e.g. de Angelo, Pook, even Roosh), and I take little pieces of lessons from each but they generally seem to get lost in the forest of details and not observe the bigger picture. The difference for me compared to the PUA guys is that I understand that the human brain has multiple evolutionary levels: instinctive, emotional, and rational. A lot of the PUA community assumes that women never use their rational brains, but I’m not that ignorant. Women rationalize more than men — that is the emotional brain takes over for the rational brain — BUT not nearly as much as the conceit of men would care to admit.

    On the brain:

    http://thebrain.mcgill.ca/flash/d/d_05/d_05_cr/d_05_cr_her/d_05_cr_her.html

    The PUA tactics are designed to work on the unconscious parts of the brain: the instinctive and emotional. They, the pick-up artists, fail to elicit a positive response from the rational female brain, the part that that determines commitment. As much as we like to claim that men control commitment, that’s only true insomuch as stereotypes are true. The fact that celebrity pick-up artists who do find themselves happily married are treated with derision by the community is a major red flag. The only ‘Red-pill’ teacher I identify with now is David Deida, and he’s a tantric yoga teacher, not a pick-up artist in the slightest, most infinitesimal way imaginable.

    OTOH, I cannot relate to the normal guys who are invisible to women. On Wednesday I went to yoga class, and I had three women smile at me there. Afterwards I went grocery shopping and had two more smile at me. This was a good day, but still probably otherworldly for many. I would describe all these women as attractive but not beautiful. To get the attention of a beautiful women generally takes some time and some sort of display (i.e. peacocking).

    Unfortunately, I didn’t smile back at any of them. I’m slow to react in any case, but I’m too busy to hit on girls since I’m likely moving to France soon. Of course, I hear French girls play hard to get too, so I may need a major strategy revision.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “People should do what works for them. I have no interest in telling anyone who to date or marry.”

    Neither do I. I’m more concerned with trying to quantify relative value and determine who is better than everyone else.

    Thats part of an INTJ mindset.
    Ranking along the thinest slice of difference matters to me.

    Also, it was J who said it then almost word for word as I spelled it.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Neither do I. I’m more concerned with trying to quantify relative value and determine who is better than everyone else.

      Haha, fair enough, that can be fun.

  • JP

    “We see that in her past she escalated quickly with men she found attractive right away, and we wonder why WE have to build that level of attraction. It makes me feel less attractive and valuable to her because *I* had to qualify slowly when someone else didn’t.”

    I had this feeling once. I’m not sure what it is? Humiliation?

    In any event, it’s related to contempt or resentment or something.

    It tends to want you make you end the relationship.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “OK, then, let me hear how you’d play it. You met at a party on Saturday, and made out. You’ve been texting Sunday through Tuesday. She’s responsive. What’s next?”

    Not em but I’ll give my answer.
    I don’t text unless limbs are in the process of being lost and even then its iffy.

    I would have called her the next night at 5:13pm (every call/email (wife did not have a cell when I met her) sent at that time, exactly one day after) and set up a hang out in the park where we can go to the coffee pub then walk around.

    Not a date as dating implies that I am less than her.

    Also, texting is a genuine waste of time. Its infinitely easier to make a situation worse than better via text in terms of gaining sexual access. I know some guys who are pro but most aren’t.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      I would have called her the next night at 5:13pm (every call/email (wife did not have a cell when I met her) sent at that time, exactly one day after) and set up a hang out in the park where we can go to the coffee pub then walk around.

      I think that’s perfect and obviously she did too.

  • Ted D

    “Also, texting is a genuine waste of time. ”

    I actually find “text game” to be FAR easier than anything I can pull off in person. I can’t say I’ve ever scored a hookup by text, (because I’ve never tried) but I can and do constantly game my wife throughout the day by text. Mostly just lots of cocky/funny, with a bit of extra asshole for good measure.

    Plus, you can use written word to express very deep emotion and meaning. Texts don’t have to be: “what u up 2? wanna hang?”

    But yeah, in general I’d agree that most guys fail horribly at text game IME. I’ve seen plenty of male friends crash and burn trying it, and it has always been extremely amusing as a spectator.

  • Lokland

    @Damien

    “I don’t remember EVER spending more than say, 10$ on first dates (even in America), but not because I was stingy. The idea of taking a “valuable” girl to a fancy restaurant/place on a first date is something that should normally smell to her like douchey cologne intended to impress. ”

    +1

    Except here the expensive 1st date is more like a whiny kid trying to show how awesome he is.

    In either case I can’t follow the money issue as its neither required nor expected.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    Ahhaaaa

    It was you, (thanks INTJ)

    “I’m just pointing out that many girls who are relationship worthy today may have made a poor choice or two in their past. As you said, the question is why. Why did you do it? Why did you stop doing it?”

    How is this not a ‘man up’ and marry that ‘former’ slut advice?

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      How is this not a ‘man up’ and marry that ‘former’ slut advice?

      Well, did you see my apology for having said that? I regret making the judgment call over who is relationship worthy. But then, my own sociosexuality is much less restricted than some here.

  • Lokland

    “You can pretend to be an extrovert – in fact, I’ve read that this is helpful for introverts to learn for work and social situations. But any person who knows you for a period of time is not going to perceive you that way. ”

    This is a very useful tool.
    The ability to charm. socialize and meet new people is incredibly valuable and should not be forgotten merely because it makes one (me) tired.

  • YaReallyId

    “Part of my attraction for my husband is based on his introversion, though I recognize that while I find his nailing the Sunday crossword puzzle sexy, a woman in a bar probably would not. :)”

    Have you ever been in a bar? Ever? For ANY reason?

    Because if a guy wants to find a “relationship” type girl in a bar (one that you yourself would approve of), I always recommend they approach groups of girls who are celebrating something (birthday, engagement, etc.) and go for the chick who’s only there because she’s there to support her friends in whatever they’re celebrating. That girl doesn’t go out and party at the bars much, so if you build some comfort/rapport with her and slow-play her (no same night lay, build attraction slower over a few weeks of txts/calls etc.), now you’ve got a girlfriend who’s not a “bar slut” and who finds your crossword puzzle shit interesting.

    Scary that we know how to target those girls, hey? lol

    “Also, texting is a genuine waste of time. Its infinitely easier to make a situation worse than better via text in terms of gaining sexual access. I know some guys who are pro but most aren’t.”

    There is actually an art to txting from a game perspective. There’s a good PDF on it I can link if you like, but I would need Sue’s permission so she doesn’t delete my post lol In general though, I agree that most guys do more harm than good with txting, but it’s mainly because they suck ass at it and don’t understand how to game. I routinely build my comfort/rapport via txt and escalate to getting naked pics and getting eachother off etc. via txts…I honestly can’t even remember the last time I talked on the phone to a girl. 3 or 4 years ago maybe? People txt these days, it’s good to learn how to seduce via txts.

  • SayWhaat

    Wait, did I miss something. Did you and your BF break up?

    Haha, no. I was referring to the guy who lied about my giving a bj. Bastiat was surmising that threesomes would “sweeten” the deal for college boys and I was just amused that ex BF sold himself short, hahaha!

    “The fact that many men reject virgins is still a bitter pill that I am trying to choke down, ”

    Why do you need to choke it down now? I thought that problem was “solved”. lol.

    Not really. I’m still the same person as I was with a hymen, I haven’t changed. That I was treated and judged as sub-human has left its mark. Even if my relationship were to end, I don’t think I could get back into dating guys who would have rejected me when I was “inexperienced”.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @SayWhaat

      Not really. I’m still the same person as I was with a hymen, I haven’t changed. That I was treated and judged as sub-human has left its mark.

      You’re channeling Shoshanna here! She feels that something is missing since she lost her hymen, lol.

  • SayWhaat

    Ex Fake* BF.

  • Lokland

    @Saywhaat

    “That I was treated and judged as sub-human has left its mark. Even if my relationship were to end, I don’t think I could get back into dating guys who would have rejected me when I was “inexperienced.”

    I’m curious, do you realize that what you feel about this is somewhat analogous to the price discrimination issue faced by men?

    Also, why does not being good enough for a relationship (under any metric) mean the person thinks you are sub-human? It just means they think you suck, no judgement call is being made about a persons humanity when they are rejected.

  • JP

    “Also, why does not being good enough for a relationship (under any metric) mean the person thinks you are sub-human?”

    No, I think that the feeling of sub-humanity is probably what she was on the receiving end of.

    I’ve certainly projected my feelings of contempt and sub-humanity onto people who swore/had pre-marital sex back when I was a teenager going through my reactionary perfectionistic moral absolutism phase.

  • SayWhaat

    I’m curious, do you realize that what you feel about this is somewhat analogous to the price discrimination issue faced by men?

    Of course. I’ve always been open about the fact that I can empathize with the men here, because I’ve been through many analogous experiences. You learn a lot about character when you are the Ugly Duckling.

    Also, why does not being good enough for a relationship (under any metric) mean the person thinks you are sub-human? It just means they think you suck, no judgement call is being made about a persons humanity when they are rejected.

    It’s not just that, even people I knew and hung out with would act as though virgins weren’t real people with real feelings. It hurt, a lot.

    Like I said…I’m trying to accept that it was an incompatibility issue more so than a dismissal of me. I felt like I wasn’t being judged on the content of my character, and that kind of objectification is hard to get over.

  • Cooper
  • J

    @JP #406

    Funny convo. Dh and I have had it too, but we take turns at being the most useless.

    @Say Whaat

    If I may ask, are you being treated for ADD-PI. If so, how and is it effective? What about side effects?

    @Ted

    If indeed there are a large number of INTx types with AS, it adds some fuel to the fire that those types are far higher on the spectrum by default.

    I don’t know for a fact that INTx folks are over-represented among people with AS, but it wouldn’t surprise me if they were. It seems to me that a lot of us, while not in the spectrum, are standing uncomfortably close to it.

  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E7XzcGnUCI0 OffTheCuff

    Sue: “Your second example is terrible, at least for women. Sending half-clothed sexts for weeks when you met on an online dating site? Most women would definitely write that off as WTF. I sure would. If you’re not willing to DATE, don’t sign up for online DATING.”

    You are choosing to intepret that is in the maximally negative manner. Let me give a better example. First, stop thinking dating sites. Dating sites are for losers and sluts.

    You meet another person in an internet chatroom dedicated to some shared interest, I dunno, photography or something, along with a bunch of other people. You both are regulars, and are part of a repeating crowd of people who know each other. After a few weeks of idle chatter, you learn she’s your age, and lives about an hour away.

    One night, she PM’s you a technical question about your camera, and a long, meandering conversation ensues. The next time you go, you look forward to the hearing from her, go right to PM, and just spend time talking with each other. About photography and other things.

    One night you’re all sharing pictures of your shots, critiquing them, and you see… wow, she is cute. You send some pics of “you and your dog” to the group.

    Eventually at some point things escalate, and she starts flirting hard. You send a private picture to her phone. She sends one, just one slightly, risque picture of her boobs when tipsy, and admit she likes you.

    You keep corresponding. Send a picture back, with some skin, maybe a candid bathing suit shot. She loves it, and wants to go voice. Intense conversation ensues; it feels like you’ve known each other for years…

    All this takes over the span of a few months. At this point you’ve gone on NO dates, spent NO money – but you’re guaranteed she is very interested in you.

    Do I even need to continue, or does this make sense?

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @OTC

      All this takes over the span of a few months. At this point you’ve gone on NO dates, spent NO money – but you’re guaranteed she is very interested in you.

      Do I even need to continue, or does this make sense?

      I can see why that’s a good male strategy, especially if you are “spinning plates.” I do not think it is a very good female strategy, for whom time has a higher cost. Months of that sounds to me like a massive waste of time. She should focus on the men she is meeting IRL who are actually interested in making something happen.

  • Passer_By

    @OTC

    “All this takes over the span of a few months. At this point you’ve gone on NO dates, spent NO money – but you’re guaranteed she is very interested in you. ”

    At this point . . . if you call her your girlfriend, you’re probably Manti Te’o. ;)

  • BroHamlet

    @Susan & Lokland

    “Not a date as dating implies that I am less than her.”

    This. It might be a matter of semantics sometimes, but what Lokland is describing is real, especially with 20-something girls. If the word “date” is used, it’s not good (for obvious reasons- it telegraphs too much). Even if you don’t call it a date some (many) don’t want it to look, feel, or smell too much like a date. I’d try to explain, but even I don’t really understand- I can only chalk it up to girls being extremely picky (and the ones with options always have been), so you need to get the details right. Whatever is going on, girls appear to be going for something less than a date right now.

  • JP

    @J:

    “It seems to me that a lot of us, while not in the spectrum, are standing uncomfortably close to it.”

    Or, like me, you’re in your own private Idaho.

  • SayWhaat

    @ J:

    If I may ask, are you being treated for ADD-PI. If so, how and is it effective? What about side effects?

    I’m currently taking Vyvanse, though not as often as I should be. It’s definitely effective. I am way more productive when on it, I can focus on a task and remember to go back to it if I get distracted, etc. The side effects I experience are dry mouth, loss of appetite, and mood crashes. Mood crashes can be mitigated by proper exercise, diet, and hydration, however.

    I am considering an alternate medication, because my mood crashes are bad enough to make me not want to take my meds for a period of time. Granted, it’s partially due to the fact that I don’t hydrate/eat well when I’m on it.

    ADD medication effects are *always* YMMV though so I would speak to a psychiatrist. Hope that helps! : )

  • Passer_By

    @susan
    “No she stated clearly in this thread (and has stated before in a previous thread) that she does not have casual sex. At all.”

    I think you misinterpret Mike’s comment. He didn’t say that she knew right away that he was a sex possibility for THAT NIGHT. Merely that she knew instantly that he’s be an attractive possibility for sex in the future (assuming all went well in the interim).

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      I think you misinterpret Mike’s comment.

      Hmmm, I wonder why he didn’t clarify then when I responded to it as a same-night implication, stating Charlotte was not down for casual sex.

      Anyway, here is the comment:

      As soon as she walked in. She was obviously attracted right away. Now the guy lost the game over the course of the night due to the mistakes he made, but he had the attraction right off the bat.

      She did not state that she was sexually attracted, she simply observed that he was very good looking. When she spoke with him, no tingle. He did not necessarily lack game, she thought he had a bad personality, and she didn’t like his cocky attitude.

      For the record, women can see a good looking man and not jump straight to mind fucking. In fact, few women do that, and obvs Charlotte is not one of them.

  • OffTheCuff

    Sue: “OK, then, let me hear how you’d play it. You met at a party on Saturday, and made out. You’ve been texting Sunday through Tuesday. She’s responsive. What’s next?”

    Escalation already happened so a short, low-investment date is fine. Lokland captured it nicely, if you’re a city dweller with a lot of free time. Older people and suburbanites probably have less flexibility to “walk around town” – what if you live 60 minutes away?

    I suppose I would call voice, and continue the flirty/sexy vibe and maybe talk about the kiss. Maybe even escalate a bit on the phone. If that original vibe is rebuffed, then goodbye. If it continues at least at the level at the party, then go for the date.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      I suppose I would call voice, and continue the flirty/sexy vibe and maybe talk about the kiss. Maybe even escalate a bit on the phone. If that original vibe is rebuffed, then goodbye. If it continues at least at the level at the party, then go for the date.

      That sounds good. I am now convinced that we have been at cross purposes again wrt word choice and semantics.

  • J

    People that know me well are no longer surprised when I randomly break out in laughter. In fact, most of the time they ask me to share, because they find my thought processes to be completely fascinating. They often ask how I can get from A to D without going past B and C. Try explaining that I actually started at A, went to L, jumped to 7, and then landed at D. Its funny, because even when they can see my logic, they just can’t figure out how to connect the dots.

    LMAO.

    This is a true story, Ted.

    Some years ago, DH and I were out for a drive with the kids. I turned to DH and said, “I think I’m getting a sty.” He replied, “Maybe it’s just allergies. I said, “I hope so.” Thirty seconds later I added, “You know, a lot of people love palominos, but I think buckskins are less showy and more elegant.”

    DH laughed and said, “I’ve been with you long enought to know that those two statements are connected in your mind, but I have to tell you, I’m not seeing it, J.

    I traced my train of thought for him. The possibility of having a sty reminded me of sty ointment. That reminded me of a pharmacy in Brooklyn where I bought ointment when I was visiting my aunt. Thinking about visiting my aunt led me to a quick mental review of several previous vacations, including the one in which my younger son delighted us by saying his third word, “Doggies!” upon seeing some dachshunds. This in turn reminded that my older boy used to call any large four-legged animal a “doggie.” I then pondered how the Native Americans in the novel “Hanta Yo” called horses “big dogs” or “mystery dogs.” That made me think of Western movies and how Alex Carras punched out a horse in “Blazing Saddles.” I then envisioned the scene in which Cleavon Little was seated atop the tricked out palomino. You can guess the rest.

    The truly scary part is that my older son, after taking in that whole recitation, said, “That actually makes sense to me.”

  • Mike C

    I think you misinterpret Mike’s comment. He didn’t say that she knew right away that he was a sex possibility for THAT NIGHT. Merely that she knew instantly that he’s be an attractive possibility for sex in the future (assuming all went well in the interim).

    Passer by,

    Thanks for translating :) I might need to retain your services….I think most to all of my comments are generally interpreted to maximize disagreement :)

  • OffTheCuff

    That’s true. That slowness is more of a male strategy, its certianly more efficient for women to line up pile of a suitors on a dating site, and scream through then.

    But, it’s no different than what Hope did – it could happen very fast, or slow, the point is no “Dates” until attraction is established, and that can happen online. You get to know each other before a date ever happens.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      But, it’s no different than what Hope did – it could happen very fast, or slow, the point is no “Dates” until attraction is established, and that can happen online. You get to know each other before a date ever happens.

      Well, they were in different states, and after two weeks he flew to see her, on her dime. So there you go – women are willing to share the cost.

  • http://www.4stargazer.wordpress.com Anacaona

    Men today are also more irrational/violent, have higher voices, take personal offense at everything, and are more sensitive and moody? I have no idea if that’s related to estrogen though (I don’t like estrogen being associated with “negative” traits, and testosterone with positive/neutral traits. Both are great in moderation).

    I don’t think so that is a good description of Dominican men and back in the country we have enough water to consume it fresh and condoms is the preferred BC method no pills (for some reason most dominican women I know get really sick with hormonal BC) and they have all the markings of high testosterone so there most be something else, IMO.

    Actually, that’s brilliant. A site where you do nothing but show off your kids, share parenting links, promote mommy blogs, etc. Someone could make a lot of money doing that.
    THIS! +1,0000 I will totally join baby facebook or babybook I don’t share pics of my baby in my normal facebook because i had been hammered with the idea that new mothers are annoying everyone with the constant sharing of things of their “precious LO” if I had a safe place to put my pics I could just post it to my heart’s content and invite the interested friends the privateman’s of the world no need to apply ;)
    So any IT guy/gal hearing this should give it a shot.

  • JP

    @J:

    Here’s another one, that I’ve figured out works well between my wife and I.

    DW: “What are you thinking?”

    Me: “You don’t want to know.”

    (This seems to be one of those questions to which there is no good answer.)

  • JP

    “But, it’s no different than what Hope did – it could happen very fast, or slow, the point is no “Dates” until attraction is established, and that can happen online. You get to know each other before a date ever happens.”

    You really need to make sure that the person actually is who they say they are.

    This requires actually being in the same room with them.

    http://www.salon.com/2013/01/18/i_had_a_fake_online_girlfriend/

  • J

    But since this blog is aimed at college aged kids, telling men they need to accept a woman with a few mistakes (J and Susan),

    I’m not sure I’m saying that, especially to the very young. What I am saying is that the average college girl has been taken in by a cad at least once (that may or may not include intercourse). The idea that, outside of some deeply religious groups, there are many untouched women just waiting to be swooped by the average guy isn’t realistic. And those girls are generally looking for someone fairy low N himself.

    An entirely unrealistic argument for pretty much everyone under every metric but even more ludicrous to suggest that a 20 year old virgin guy should have to date a woman with multiple ONSs in her past.

    Whoa. That’s a big jump from one or two mistakes, that may or may not include intercourse, to multiple ONSs . Who advocated that?

  • http://www.4stargazer.wordpress.com Anacaona

    In summary, it seems to be a source of social validation (and gossip via the Q&A feature) that appeals primarily to girls. I believe the more “grown-up” version is Pinterest.

    Thanks Lisa! :)

  • J

    @DV re Facebook–Very accurate and funny

    @Ana–I don’t get Tumblr or Pinterst, sorry.

    @Lisa–Thanks for the explanation of Tumblr

  • SayWhaat

    @ Susan:

    Not really. I’m still the same person as I was with a hymen, I haven’t changed. That I was treated and judged as sub-human has left its mark.

    You’re channeling Shoshanna here! She feels that something is missing since she lost her hymen, lol.

    Really, you think so? I don’t know if I feel anything is “missing”, so much as I resent how I was treated (worthless sex object).

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @SayWhaat

      I was kidding around. I don’t think you’re anything like Shoshanna, but when I watched the scene in Season 1 where the guy from camp turns her down because she was a virgin, I thought of you immediately. I was glad you were vindicated by a hit show!

      The truth is that men filter for sexual promiscuity and experience when they’re not going for the LTR. They prefer the sluts, and that’s not surprising. So a guy who finds virginity a turnoff is a strictly STR kind of guy.

      You dodged a bullet there.

  • Ted D

    J – I wish you could have seen my wife’s face just now when I burst into full on laughter reading your story! Of course she asked what I was laughing about, but believed me when I told her I could NEVER explain it.

    My God my stomach hurts from laughing… Bless your soul I really needed that today.

  • Lokland

    @J

    “The idea that, outside of some deeply religious groups, there are many untouched women just waiting to be swooped by the average guy isn’t realistic. ”

    One out of every four girls in college is a virgin.
    One your average campus that can be anywhere form several hundred to literally thousands of woman.

    That is many. Not most but many.

    “That’s a big jump from one or two mistakes, that may or may not include intercourse, to multiple ONSs . Who advocated that?”

    Before this goes any further what qualifies as a mistake?

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “It’s the word date that has everyone so riled up?”

    Half the answer.

    The word date is merely the symbol of an ideal in which the man displays and the woman selects. It implies that the man has no choice and his decision has already been made on whether or not she is relationship worthy.

    Essentially, the man has to dance like a monkey until the woman decides its over which is of course inherently unattractive to the women.

    Hence dating is not possible. Its not the word but the idea behind the word which says the women has already secured the deal and is now taking time to decide.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      The word date is merely the symbol of an ideal in which the man displays and the woman selects.

      For sex. Not commitment. This has never meant anything more than sex. Men go on dates to get sex. Women go on dates to select men for LTRs. Damien’s saying was right on.

  • Passer_By

    Speaking of bursting out laughing, has anyone else occasionally burst out laughing in your sleep because something in your dream struck you as really funny? I’ve done that a few times over the years. Needless to say, it’s a bit startling to whoever your in bed with.

  • Mike C

    Hmmm, I wonder why he didn’t clarify then when I responded to it ***as a same-night implication, stating Charlotte was not down for casual sex.***

    LOL, you’ve got to be kidding me. Ask yourself this, why did PasserBy get it exactly right, and you didn’t. To be honest, I don’t have the time or inclination to “clarify” every time you misconstrue one of my comments ESPECIALLY when it results from your tendency to engage in mind reading. If you simply stuck to the words on the page, and stopped layering on your interpretation of what ***you think*** I meant, then no clarification on my part would be necessary. I’m not going to chase my tail in comment after comment clarifying your misinterpretation/misunderstanding of what I said. Seriously, for once own up here. You’ve done this in this thread with a bunch of stuff that BroHamlet and OTC said. OTC is more diplomatic and patient to work through your misinterpretation.

    I said Charlotte was attracted. That’s it. Nothing more, nothing less. I didn’t say or imply anything about her willingness at that initial moment to have a ONS with the guy at the end of the night. I started off with her sentence that she noticed the handsome guy immediately. Except for Bizarro land, that means she had some initial attraction. Period. Full stop. It doesn’t say anything about whether she is interested in going to the bathroom 10 minutes later and banging his brains out. By “losing the game” I’m not saying he lost his chance for a ONS. I’m saying his personality killed off any initial attraction his looks had created. And I’d have to go back and read Charlotte’s comment and I don’t have access to the comment right now, but even after all the awkwardness of the interaction, up until the point he propositioned her to come back to his place, it sounded like she still would have gone out on a “date” or “hung out” with him if he has simply gotten her number and left it at that instead of going for the same night pull back to his place.

    Anyway, here is the comment:

    As soon as she walked in. She was obviously attracted right away. Now the guy lost the game over the course of the night due to the mistakes he made, but he had the attraction right off the bat.

    She did not state that she was sexually attracted, she simply observed that he was very good looking. When she spoke with him, no tingle. He did not necessarily lack game, she thought he had a bad personality, and she didn’t like his cocky attitude.

    Yes, there is the comment. I said “attracted”. Not sure why you substituted “sexually attracted” below rather then stick with what I said.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Mike C

      How does attraction differ from sexual attraction? Seriously, your robotic use of language is just too restrictive. Take out the “sexually.” She did not say that she was attracted to him. Better now?

      Anyway, this was the point Charlotte wanted to make:

      “This poor kid is banking on his looks to bypass dating. Absolutely ridiculous. a lot of young men have NO idea how to date in the real world. Most girls don’t go home with random strangers, no matter how handsome you are. SORRY BUDDY.”

      She gave him a shot and he was a dick. I guess not all chicks dig jerks after all!

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “I regret making the judgment call over who is relationship worthy. But then, my own sociosexuality is much less restricted than some here.”

    If you have not yet realized the pattern but every time a woman tries to determine what constitutes beauty and/or relationship worthiness of women they are generally given at minimum a rabid snarl.

    It is not a woman’s place to try and set the standards of beauty or relationship worthiness (unless you know she dates girls). The same can be said of men in the reverse direction, obvs.

    The equivalent to your statement would have been for me to state something along the lines of trying to change what constitutes male attractiveness.
    Ex. That guy has gone bankrupt twice (resource provisioning, excuse my pathetic example) but now its all good so he is relationship worthy.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      It is not a woman’s place to try and set the standards of beauty or relationship worthiness

      Which I have said many times, and why I apologized for having done it there.

      Jesus.

      FTR, standards of beauty are cues of fertility, and they’re not exactly a secret. You’d be better off taking on the gay men who are trying to redefine them. We just watch and buy whatever you guys like to see us wearing.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “Ya Really! I feel truly bad for you.”

    Though I realize this is one of the gravest insults a woman can bestow upon another, feelings and all, it honestly is LOL material in how little it matters to men.

    JSYK.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Though I realize this is one of the gravest insults a woman can bestow upon another, feelings and all, it honestly is LOL material in how little it matters to men.

      I was only mirroring what yareallypua said, which is that he feels truly bad for Shani because she is 30, nothing but a piece of ass to all men, and that her life will now start going downhill fast.

      He’s a little bitch.

  • JP

    “Though I realize this is one of the gravest insults a woman can bestow upon another, feelings and all, it honestly is LOL material in how little it matters to men.”

    It is kind of weak as insults go.

    It was really intended as a grave insult?

  • JP

    @Lokland:

    “You are amoral. You’ve said that the ends justify the means. I reject that utterly. That makes you a bad guy, in fact.”

    This is the part of it that I found biting, myself.

  • J

    @INTJ

    One or two poor choices is okay. But I’m not a “reformed” alpha so I don’t deserve a “reformed” slut.

    Who said THAT?

  • J

    @Ted

    Glad I could brighten your day.

  • J

    @JP #598

    I just tell DH that it’s too convoluted to explain. Having heard his share of convoluted explanations of my thought processes, he just shrugs and says OK.

  • Passer_By

    Susan, Mike was not posting specifically about Charlotte, so you are focusing on that too much. He was using her experience in support of this statement in his comment:

    “Yup, there is that old joke about a woman knowing in 30-60 seconds if she if she would sleep with you. That’s not to say in 60 seconds she has made an affirmative decision, but she can disqualify you for good inside 60 seconds.”

    In other words, she hadn’t affirmatively decided to sleep with him, let alone that night, but he had instantly cleared a hurdle that probably 95% of men or more don’t clear for her. At least, that’s his point.

    Now, I don’t know if it’s true that women make that assessment in 30 to 60 seconds, but there is probably a very strong bias one way or another after a very short period. The point of the joke is that if you are on the wrong side of that assessment, don’t bother to try to win her over, it’s not worth it. In fact, it probably won’t be worth it even if you do win her over, because she won’t be very enthusiastic.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Passer By

      Now, I don’t know if it’s true that women make that assessment in 30 to 60 seconds, but there is probably a very strong bias one way or another after a very short period. The point of the joke is that if you are on the wrong side of that assessment, don’t bother to try to win her over, it’s not worth it. In fact, it probably won’t be worth it even if you do win her over, because she won’t be very enthusiastic.

      Where does that old saying come from? Old Game blogs?

      As I’ve already stated, there is considerable evidence, including female anecdotes here, that attraction can and does grow over time, not infrequently resulting in a 180. Whether the guy thinks it’s worth it or not is his business. He is more likely to improve his status is he stops trying to win her over and just does his own thing.

  • Mike C

    @Mike C

    How does attraction differ from sexual attraction? Seriously, your robotic use of language is just too restrictive.

    Unreal….you’ve got to be fucking kidding me. This is surreal. ***YOU ARE THE ONE*** who has sold to me this notion that a woman can be “attracted” without it being sexual. I accepted that at face value. That a woman can be “attracted” to a man without it eliciting sexual desire. Are you now telling me that is not the case and two are equivalent? I’ve been using them as two different terms because of what YOU HAVE TOLD ME HERE which is that women can find a man “attractive” but have zero immediate sexual feelings. I repeat, the distinction in terminology is a result of what you’ve told me is the case for women. So please, which is it?

    She did not say that she was attracted to him. Better now?

    LOL…who’s being “robotic” now? Seriously, she said she noticed the handsome man right away on entering. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to infer there was at least some “attraction”. You don’t walk into the grocery store, and notice someone “right away” unless you are attracted.

    As a side point, because of the way you previously have used the word “attraction” especially in a non-sexual context (unless you are changing your mind here) I like to use the distinction between “attraction” and “arousal”. That way a guy can clearly understand the difference between the sort of asexual “attraction” certain traits might elicit, and the ones that might be more inclined to make a woman want to have sex with you.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Mike C

      ***YOU ARE THE ONE*** who has sold to me this notion that a woman can be “attracted” without it being sexual. I accepted that at face value. That a woman can be “attracted” to a man without it eliciting sexual desire.

      Sexual attraction does not mean sexual desire. You are not defining these terms correctly. Of course attraction is sexual attraction. When a woman says, “I am really attracted to him,” that is a statement having to do with mating, yes? It does not mean “I want to fuck him now.” Desire is not necessarily present at the first blush of sexual attraction. In fact, I would say it rarely is.

      You keep projecting male sexuality onto women. A few women have sex like men, but not many. You don’t seem to understand that female attraction is complex and variable. And it differs depending on whether a woman is seeking a fling or a relationship.

      Charlotte said he was handsome, also that he initially seemed “nice and cute.” She was clearly interested in talking with him as a prospective new dating possibility. She was not thinking about having sex with him. Maybe she’ll come by and explain this herself.

      Maybe you should actually read some evo psych, as I have obviously not gotten the ideas through despite typing them out for you dozens of times.

  • BroHamlet

    @Susan

    “It is in no way personal to you.”

    When you start saying things like “and to earn a date, she has to put out?” I have to wonder about your tone. That’s like me implying someone here is a gold digger. No harm no foul, but when you seem to be jumping to conclusions it comes off as a frame grab.

    Firstly, and I have said this before: Let’s leave PUA out of this because I’m not one, nor have I ever been. They have their own ways of framing things that I don’t always agree with, and per your convo with MikeC, I see that you automatically make some association between having decent game and “The Mystery Method”. If that is the frame of reference we are starting with, I’m not interested in wasting my time telling you much, because you have already drawn your own conclusions. I shouldn’t have to explain that there are many schools of thought on these things, and it’s clear that you haven’t really considered many of them in any depth.

    The long and the short of it is this. I already mentioned that I can get attraction up front. I keep it light and low-investment for her and me up front, preferably suggesting a meetup centered around something unique that shows her something about me (like an interest of mine). Usually it progresses to the physical shortly after that because I never “start over” from the point we were at when we first met (sparks). After that point I’ll suggest something more date-like. Keep in mind, I play to my audience. I know the types that like me the most, and I escalate. Whether she wants to “emotionally escalate” is up to her. I don’t feel I’m that atypical, but it’s been suggested before that I come off as very sure of myself and not like the type that would wait around to “see where it goes”.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @BroHamlet

      I have to wonder about your tone. That’s like me implying someone here is a gold digger. No harm no foul, but when you seem to be jumping to conclusions it comes off as a frame grab.

      Fair criticism. I apologize for getting snarky. It happens, and when it does it is often a cumulative sort of effect that is not all about you even if it is in a comment to you. I’m not excusing it, just explaining how that happens on my end sometimes.

      I shouldn’t have to explain that there are many schools of thought on these things, and it’s clear that you haven’t really considered many of them in any depth.

      I have only ever read two books on Game. The Game and Mystery Method. Roissy is a MM disciple. The “Game” blogs in the manosphere are very much in that realm. I have no further knowledge of Game or the various offshoots, and to be honest, I feel that Mystery pretty much had it covered. I personally haven’t ever come across a game concept that could not be explained by MM first, with evo psych to back it up. But I am not a Game blogger and have never claimed to be.

      Thank you for clarifying how you form relationships. It sounds like you have formulated a strategy that works very well for you and I’m sure your gf would say the same.

  • J

    Thanks, Say Whaat.

    I’ve learned to live with my stuff, but I sometimes wonder if my older boy would benefit from meds. He is a very fussy eater and is already pretty slender, so I’m reluctant to put him on a med that would cut his appetite. I’m also wary of anything that would make him less of who he is, but he might be more productive on meds. It’s a trade-off. Anyway, he’s almost 18, so he will soon need to figure out what he wants to do.

  • Passer_By

    @susan

    “Where does that old saying come from? Old Game blogs?”

    Beats the hell out of me.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “For sex. Not commitment. This has never meant anything more than sex. Men go on dates to get sex. Women go on dates to select men for LTRs. ”

    Omg please say your kidding.

    Men go on dates to get sex.

    Women go on dates to select men for LTRs.
    No.
    Women go on dates to be selected for LTRs. You have this entire concept backwards. Women are the ones displaying commitment worthiness when dating. Men are displaying sexual worthiness.

    Women do not select for both though not selecting a man for sex typically means no commitment women are not choosing whether or not commitment occurs.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Lokland

      Men go on dates to get sex.

      Women go on dates to select men for LTRs.
      No.
      Women go on dates to be selected for LTRs. You have this entire concept backwards. Women are the ones displaying commitment worthiness when dating. Men are displaying sexual worthiness.

      Um, you are right. I worded that all wrong.

      What I meant was that women determine sexual worthiness, yes, but presumably based on the man’s mating potential as indicated by resources, good genes, and the propensity to stick around. So she’s thinking LTR when she determines who she has sex with.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “Which I have said many times, and why I apologized for having done it there.
    Jesus.”

    Though I realize your fighting on multiple fronts atm and must be quite preoccupied I feel the need to inform you that I carry no weapons.

    Or in more normal terms,

    I’m not trying to be a PITA or piss you off.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Lokland

      Though I realize your fighting on multiple fronts atm and must be quite preoccupied I feel the need to inform you that I carry no weapons.

      It’s true you caught me with a short fuse, but I didn’t understand why you were admonishing me about something I’d already apologized for. Since I’d said that it is not my place to judge what men find worthy, it seemed rather aggressive for you to give me and FYI that it is not my place to judge what men find worthy.

  • Lokland

    @J

    “Who said THAT?”

    You did.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “What I meant was that women determine sexual worthiness, yes, but presumably based on the man’s mating potential as indicated by resources, good genes, and the propensity to stick around. So she’s thinking LTR when she determines who she has sex with.”

    Glad thats clarified.

    The original definition you gave is the one most people have in mind when dating. Aka men tries to prove both sexual and commitment while the woman displays nothing.

    Which is why ‘dating’ in the commonly used description does not work whereas hanging out does.

  • Mike C

    Sexual attraction does not mean sexual desire.

    The intrinsic contradictory absurdity of this statement is self -evident.

    This is like saying I am attracted to the chocolate cake on the table, but I don’t really want to eat it.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      The intrinsic contradictory absurdity of this statement is self -evident.

      This is like saying I am attracted to the chocolate cake on the table, but I don’t really want to eat it.

      Let me lay this out in the simplest terms possible.

      Attraction —–> Intensifying attraction during period of acquaintance (length varies depending on female) —–> Physical contact —–> Arousal —–> Desire —–> Sex —–> Orgasm

      If you still don’t get it, I suggest you google female arousal. The “tingle,” which is really a clit twinge, is part of arousal and leads to desire. Arousal takes a while in women.

      We do NOT tingle at first sight, we do not mind fuck strangers. Even when women eye fuck they are exiting the attraction phase and attempting to kickstart intensifying attraction. They do not feel anything below the waist during this phase. It’s still cerebral.

      1. Attractive in an asexual sense such as saying you find the carpet in a living room “attractive” or the “mural” on a wall

      or

      2. You feel some sexual feelings for the man.

      LOL at #1. Women often do experience this. For example, I know that many women find Matthew McConaughey handsome and sexy. I find him repulsive. But I am able to recognize his fine jawline and awesome pecs. He does not do it for me but I understand that in an objective sense he is attractive. I would say, “I do not find him attractive.” There is no potential for sexual feelings.

      When I say, “I find so and so very attractive,” I am speaking of sexual attraction. His is the kind of appearance I find sexy. However, still I have no sexual feelings in the sense that I have no physiological, “feeling” response. I am simply observing that if he were single and I were single I would be interested in exploring whether there was a basis for sustained attraction, in which case sexual feelings might occur. It’s very possible that one conversation would gross me out, which is what happened to Charlotte. Or the conversation might increase the attraction, at which point I would be in the “intensifying attraction” stage.

      In any case, women do not, can not skip the arousal stage, which is where the sexual feelings occur.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “Since I’d said that it is not my place to judge what men find worthy, it seemed rather aggressive for you to give me and FYI that it is not my place to judge what men find worthy.”

    Silly Americans.

  • JP

    I love the Internet.

  • Lokland

    @JP

    “I love the Internet.”

    Me too!

  • JP

    @J, SayWhaat [The medical / non-confrontational Portion of this thread]

    It seems odd that Vyvanse would cause mood drops.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lisdexamfetamine

    What about the old standby, Adderall?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adderral

    (I note treatment-induced psychosis, here. INtersting.)

  • BroHamlet

    Pretty sure my last one got stuck in moderation. Susan, you wanted your answer as to (not) dating. That’s it for me for the weekend. If my comment got lost, what Lokland is saying is along the same lines. In a nutshell, Nothing that smells of a “date”, more like a meetup for something I’d be doing anyway (whether that’s alone or with friends), until it gets somewhat physical. Obviously, chemistry is key here.

  • J

    No, Lokland, I didn’t. I said that the majority of college women were likely to have at least one cad-related experience they regret. That’s a far cry from saying “Settle for a reformed slut,” unless one mis-step a slut makes. Nothing in between madonna and whore in your book?

  • Mike C

    Susan,

    Very simple question…pick #1 or pick #2. When *YOU* use the term attractive to refer to a man do you mean:

    1. Attractive in an asexual sense such as saying you find the carpet in a living room “attractive” or the “mural” on a wall

    or

    2. You feel some sexual feelings for the man.

    Again, to be clear, that doesn’t mean you’d necessarily go fuck the guy right then and there. Even if I was sexually attracted to a woman, it doesn’t mean if she is sitting in my office cube, and says “hey, let’s fuck right here right now” that I would do it. But to be sexually attracted means on some level, one would find the idea of having sex with that person a pleasurable thought.

    Up to this point, you’ve used the term attractive a number of times to refer to purely asexual feelings like finding a man “attractive” is like admiring a painting in a museum. The logical assumption is you don’t mean sexual feelings when you say “attraction”. I’m fine with that which is again I like the word arousal to refer to strictly sexual feelings. So a woman could find a man attractive but not arousing.

    So is attractive 1 or 2 as you use the term?

  • SayWhaat

    @ J (and JP):

    I’m also wary of anything that would make him less of who he is, but he might be more productive on meds. It’s a trade-off.

    FWIW, you don’t have to worry about this. It’s a myth that the meds will alter his personality (and a myth that rather pisses me off). All the meds do is correct the dopamine imbalance in the brain. Extended release medications will wear off after a few hours.

    I don’t think I am any “less” of who I am when I am on meds; actually, I’m probably the best version of who I am. The meds allow my mind to settle and focus for a time. The meds are a tool, not a cure.

    That being said, I didn’t start medication until after I graduated college. I hit a wall at work, which led to my diagnosis. I pretty much coasted in life until then. ADD varies from individual to individual, and I have no idea what the variation is between sexes, so if you’re really concerned I’d get him evaluated by a psychologist/psychiatrist first. I do think that ADD is overprescribed, but I had to go through a battery of tests in order to confirm it, and the meds are controlled substances so there’s at least a degree of seriousness in the prescription.

    @ JP:

    I think it has to do with the nature of amphetamines. Like I said, I’m considering an alternate medication. I’m fairly recently diagnosed so I don’t have experience with any other meds besides Vyvanse.

  • SayWhaat

    @ Susan:

    I was kidding around. I don’t think you’re anything like Shoshanna, but when I watched the scene in Season 1 where the guy from camp turns her down because she was a virgin, I thought of you immediately. I was glad you were vindicated by a hit show!

    Haha, I remember that scene. And I was glad to be vindicated as well! :P

    The truth is that men filter for sexual promiscuity and experience when they’re not going for the LTR. They prefer the sluts, and that’s not surprising. So a guy who finds virginity a turnoff is a strictly STR kind of guy.

    You dodged a bullet there.

    Yes, I know. I keep reminding myself of that. And some of my LTR-oriented male friends give me hope in that respect. : )

  • J

    so if you’re really concerned I’d get him evaluated by a psychologist/psychiatrist first.

    The school psychologist didn’t see evidence of ADD, perhaps because he’s not hyperactive. I actually think what is going on is a bit more subtle than that. He has a lot of wonky stuff, like the extreme fussy eating, that points in a different direction (perhaps sensory integration issues), but he doesn’t quite fit that picture either.

  • Mike C

    No, Lokland, I didn’t. I said that the majority of college women were likely to have at least one cad-related experience they regret. That’s a far cry from saying “Settle for a reformed slut,” unless one mis-step a slut makes. Nothing in between madonna and whore in your book?

    J,

    I absolutely agree with you here that there is a middle ground between these two extremes, and in my opinion, I don’t think it makes sense to paint the girl with 1 or 2 mistakes as “settling for a reformed slut” It is a caricature. But I want to point out that you did the exact same thing in other comment, creating an extreme caricature, with your comment about a guy expecting a woman to put out for the price of a single dinner. That is the extreme position of a guy reasonably assuming some natural progression of physical escalation if dating investment is increased

  • SayWhaat

    @ J:

    This video may be of interest to you re: ADHD

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LyDliT0GZpE

    (Carve out 30 minutes! Or six five-minute breaks. :))

  • SayWhaat

    J,

    You don’t need to be hyperactive to have ADHD. That’s a more common symptom in children than in adults.

    The school psychologist didn’t think I was smart enough to be placed into the gifted program (probably because I intentionally failed the test — there was a really creepy painting in his office and I just wanted to gtfo as fast as I could, lol). My parents took me to another psychologist and I scored very well. I was zipped off to the gifted program after that.

  • JP

    “I actually think what is going on is a bit more subtle than that. He has a lot of wonky stuff, like the extreme fussy eating, that points in a different direction (perhaps sensory integration issues), but he doesn’t quite fit that picture either.”

    What other “wonky” stuff.

  • SayWhaat

    He has a lot of wonky stuff, like the extreme fussy eating, that points in a different direction (perhaps sensory integration issues), but he doesn’t quite fit that picture either.

    Yeah, another psychologist might be best to figure this out. I don’t trust school staff to do anything right.

  • JP

    “Yeah, another psychologist might be best to figure this out. I don’t trust school staff to do anything right.”

    The other issue might be that if his grades are good, then he can’t be add or something like that.

    (We have a family friend who is clearly quite spacey, but they’ve got him down as add)

  • SayWhaat

    Sexual attraction does not mean sexual desire.

    This is like saying I am attracted to the chocolate cake on the table, but I don’t really want to eat it.

    Lol. Women *can* do that, though.

    Especially if we are trying to fit into a nice dress later. :P

  • JP

    “The school psychologist didn’t think I was smart enough to be placed into the gifted program (probably because I intentionally failed the test — there was a really creepy painting in his office and I just wanted to gtfo as fast as I could, lol). My parents took me to another psychologist and I scored very well. I was zipped off to the gifted program after that.”

    I’m not sure how much of the entire “absent minded professor” is being really, really intelligent vs. the add thingy.

    It’s something else, somehow.

    As my BIL psychiatrist says, “Adderall makes boring tasks fun!”

  • SayWhaat

    The other issue might be that if his grades are good, then he can’t be add or something like that.

    Yeah, that’s also BS. ADHD is poorly-named. The inability to focus is a symptom, but the PROBLEM is inability to judge time.

  • Mike C

    Lol. Women *can* do that, though.

    Especially if we are trying to fit into a nice dress later. :P

    You are talking about willpower to override the desire for some longer-term goal….future time orientation.

    The base desire to eat the cake still exists.

    BTW, men can do this as well.

  • SayWhaat

    Lol. Women *can* do that, though.

    Especially if we are trying to fit into a nice dress later.

    You are talking about willpower to override the desire for some longer-term goal….future time orientation.

    The base desire to eat the cake still exists.

    Actually, no. Especially not if we’re already full.

    Other women have shared here that they can find a guy attractive while having no sexual desire for him. I think this is difficult for men to grok.

  • JP

    “Yeah, that’s also BS. ADHD is poorly-named. The inability to focus is a symptom, but the PROBLEM is inability to judge time.”

    I think my problem is generally being generally bored and disinterested with normal day to day life.

  • Mike C

    Other women have shared here that they can find a guy attractive while having no sexual desire for him. I think this is difficult for men to grok.

    That’s fine. So “attraction” is asexual then for women, and there is something else X that describes having sexual desire for a man. In any case, my original point stands which was it was ludicrous to call me out for distinguishing attraction and sexual desire since that is the position Susan has taken in the past which you are affirming to be the case here.

    Bottom line, attraction either is sexual (relating to sexual desire) or it isn’t….otherwise we are using the same word to describe TWO VERY DIFFERENT EFFECTS. Call me paranoid, but I always question what someone’s motive is when instead of trying to draw clear distinctions, they try to muddle things up in a ball of mixed meanings and ambiguity.

    For me as a man who often tries to help guys out, it is important to clearly understand what is meant when a woman says she finds a man “attractive” since a guy’s interest is often sexual. It really doesn’t help a guy to say do or be A or B to become more “attractive” if “attractive” doesn’t mean eliciting sexual desire.

    Bottom line, as you’ve stated here and Susan has mentioned in the past being “attractive” really doesn’t have anything to do with sexual desire per your statement above.

  • SayWhaat

    So “attraction” is asexual then for women, and there is something else X that describes having sexual desire for a man.

    No. Susan explained it best at #660.

  • SayWhaat

    Especially this part:

    We do NOT tingle at first sight, we do not mind fuck strangers. Even when women eye fuck they are exiting the attraction phase and attempting to kickstart intensifying attraction. They do not feel anything below the waist during this phase. It’s still cerebral.

  • Madelena

    @ Scipio
    The men I tend to date tend to be well-established for the most part. These are the sort of men who frown when I reach for my purse.
    I’m not dating young college graduates just starting out.

    I can’t even imagine their response should I offer to re-imburse them if the date doesn’t work out.

    My focus is to get to know the man through light, breezy venues and I feel less pressure and obligation myself when we go for drinks or ice cream or a nice cozy hole in the wall vs the flashy big date. I do offer to pay, at least for dessert, etc, but again, it’s not a struggle nor an issue for the sort of men I date. Some of them will just blow past my suggestions and take me to their venues of choice.

    @Passer By
    I don’t feel comfortable actually asking a man out although I don’t make it difficult for him. And inviting a man up to my home so early in the courtship probably sends a signal that I am not quite ready for.

    @SayWhaat
    Good idea re baking cookies but didn’t a commenter once say a girl baked him muffins after the first date and he viewed it as desperate and off putting? And the others agreed with him? My recollection could be faulty, of course.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      I can’t even imagine their response should I offer to re-imburse them if the date doesn’t work out.

      I think that might constitute the female version of creepy.

  • Mike C

    When I say, “I find so and so very attractive,” I am speaking of sexual attraction. His is the kind of appearance I find sexy. However, still I have no sexual feelings in the sense that I have no physiological, “feeling” response. I am simply observing that if he were single and I were single I would be interested in exploring whether there was a basis for sustained attraction, in which case sexual feelings might occur.

    If you don’t have sexual feelings yet, then it isn’t sexual attraction. Clearly, it doesn’t make sense to use the same word to describe two different “states”. The state you are describing seems to be more of a “middle limbo” state where it can go either way, either you will sexually desire the man or you won’t. It is possible, but not yet a certainty. That is all well and good…but then a different term is necessary to describe the state where you think “I want to fuck his brains out”. Surely you see it makes zero sense to use the term “sexually attracted” to apply to both states…the one where “maybe something could happen” versus “I want him to fuck me”.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Mike C

      If you don’t have sexual feelings yet, then it isn’t sexual attraction.

      The presumption of this statement astounds me. You clearly know nothing about female sexuality. I’m telling you how we operate. Disregard it at your peril.

      Here is the definition of the word attraction: The action or power of evoking interest, pleasure, or liking for someone or something

      Sexual attraction comprises interest, a pleasure response, and an early sense of liking. It need not include sexual feelings of arousal. It is the first of several stages of sexual feeling for a woman.

      then a different term is necessary to describe the state where you think “I want to fuck his brains out”.

      That state occurs late in the arousal phase – it’s intense desire. Women do not experience that in a visceral way until they have reached that point. Women may say that jokingly, but the wanting – that happens only after arousal has occurred via physical contact.

  • SayWhaat

    Good idea re baking cookies but didn’t a commenter once say a girl baked him muffins after the first date and he viewed it as desperate and off putting? And the others agreed with him? My recollection could be faulty, of course.

    Sounds like an STR group of guys. :P

    Well, I haven’t had success with baking/cooking for men (last time I baked brownies, and he disappeared on me before I could give them), so take what I say with a grain of salt. I think baked goods should happen somewhere around the 4th or 5th date. YMMV, as usual.

  • YaReallyId

    “Though I realize this is one of the gravest insults a woman can bestow upon another, feelings and all, it honestly is LOL material in how little it matters to men.”

    lol I’m not really concerned with most people’s opinion of me. I stopped basing my self-esteem on other people’s opinions back when I was learning to approach strangers and start up conversations…you don’t last long if you take every awkward approach to heart.

    What concerns me is when I’m censored for simply stating an unpopular opinion. Guaranteed I’m THE most qualified and well-versed gamer on this site, and I know everything about pickup from the early PUA days to the modern stuff, and have been practicing it regularly for years. I have more experience at this stuff than most of the guys here combined, and definitely more than any of the women.

    It’s silly to delete my shit just because it makes you feel “icky” to hear the reality of how this all works when you actually hit the pavement in the field. It’s like wanting the News to only report good things and not tell you about bad events. How are you supposed to make any actual progress in teaching women to protect themselves from guys like me, when you won’t let guys like me explain our beliefs, motives, thought process and strategies?

    “which is that he feels truly bad for Shani because she is 30, nothing but a piece of ass to all men, and that her life will now start going downhill fast. ”

    Not all men, but more than in her early 20s, and more as she approaches 35 and men realize she can’t have their kids because they’ll come out with health issues and such if she can even still get pregnant. If her goal is to get married and have kids, then yes, her life would be going downhill fast as that goal suddenly starts becoming less and less attainable.

    Which part of that do you disagree with enough to personally insult me and call me a little bitch?

    “He is more likely to improve his status is he stops trying to win her over and just does his own thing.”

    Wait, so should he take her out on a date trying to win her over, or should he just do his own thing and txt her to come join him and his friends drinking? I’m confused here.

  • Madelena

    @SayWhaat

    I think baked goods should happen somewhere around the 4th or 5th date. YMMV, as usual.

    My response:
    I agree. Inviting them up to one’s place for a nice home made meal or making them muffins probably ought to happen a little later in the courtship ritual.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Beta guy:
    Without meaning to offend you , it looks like that you’ve never fallen in love with a woman as of today. I don’t mean to be ironic but do you just simply realize how much you’ve stated about yourself in just one sentence?

    @Saywhaat.
    And I could adress you the same remark as for ADBG as well….People are so self absorbed there…..
    Anyway, I more than know what you’re talking about, as I witnessed it first hand with my host family back in those days.
    It looks like you managed to go through/overcome it (at least I hope). Those red pill hog/guys should be a distant memory by now…
    Although, I admitt that the American MDH was indeed a strange concert hall.

  • Damien Vulaume

    In all seriousness despite the lols I write, I truly feel bad for her

    YareallyLOL, I thought you had already gotten yourself grinded to LOLdeath by now. Why popping here like a mongolian every once in a while if everything is so perfect? Picking up bimbos , destitutes or submissive girls in shanty bars are apparently not enough? Zzzzz.

  • BroHamlet

    @Susan

    “I apologize for getting snarky”

    Accepted. I realize you are juggling many threads here.

    “I have only ever read two books on Game. The Game and Mystery Method. Roissy is a MM disciple. The “Game” blogs in the manosphere are very much in that realm. I have no further knowledge of Game or the various offshoots, and to be honest, I feel that Mystery pretty much had it covered. I personally haven’t ever come across a game concept that could not be explained by MM first, with evo psych to back it up. But I am not a Game blogger and have never claimed to be.”

    I can respect MM, but I never really liked the idea of going from the outside in, or blindly buying into a system that after I started doing some real introspection, I discovered was ultimately just a reaction to mainstream feminism and acted as a mirror to what feminists are about. I have never, and will never, want to be reactive and play someone else’s game without considering my own interests and principles first. I felt it was better to focus on me from a fundamental level.

    I will let you know that my girl took a bit more of an active role in the relationship process than most, and thanks to that I never had any doubts that she would be one to keep. I kicked things off up front as usual, but she engaged me further and it was clear she wasn’t just probing to see if I was “one of the cool kids”- she had her own version of cool. That goes a long way for a woman. The biggest thing most girls can learn is that they will not have much control over what to expect, if they are not willing to take any control to help create a relationship beyond just expecting things. It takes more than just showing up. I have said before that there’s so much emphasis on filtering, that it seems like all of the advice given to women is “What Not to Do” and “If he does these things he’s not worth it”. I think “What to Do” is a far better way to go about things, because at the end of the day, being reactive will only get you so far.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @BroHamlet

      I have said before that there’s so much emphasis on filtering, that it seems like all of the advice given to women is “What Not to Do” and “If he does these things he’s not worth it”. I think “What to Do” is a far better way to go about things, because at the end of the day, being reactive will only get you so far.

      I hear what you’re saying, and I agree with you that self-development plus taking full responsibility for one’s own part is ideal. I see it as a two step process, and for women at least it is dangerous to emotionally escalate before filtering.

      Unfortunately, there are a lot of cads out there, men who will not hesitate to use whatever means necessary to get sex, including lying about their degree of feeling as well as what they are open to in terms of where things are headed.

      Without knowing how you operate and what kinds of signals you give off, I couldn’t possibly judge you in this regard, but the fact is that when a man’s game plan is sex within a couple of weeks before dating, then every woman who has sex with you either doesn’t care about the outcome or is crossing her fingers and accepting the risk that you are one of those men, i.e. P&D’er. That is precisely how women can rack up partners in the double digits very quickly, and while you may not feel strongly about that, many men do. Delaying sex until feeling informed and secure about a man’s interest beyond sex is the only way of preventing this.

      Having said that, once that hurdle is cleared, then both sexual escalation and emotional escalation can occur without undue risk from a female POV, and the woman who wants a lasting relationship will definitely benefit from giving her all rather than just expecting to be courted. I have no quarrel with your assessment of wacked female expectations, and of course you’re filtering those women out, as you should.

  • http://www.4stargazer.wordpress.com Anacaona

    Dating sites are for losers and sluts.
    This ‘slut’ married a very good ‘loser’ thank you very much.
    Really why everyone is shitting so much on dating sites? If 17% of people that married meet through them it shouldn’t be considered the cesspool people seems to be implying.
    Really being single is like being unemployed you try every method to get a job, you try every method to get a mate, is as simple as that.

    I traced my train of thought for him. The possibility of having a sty reminded me of sty ointment. That reminded me of a pharmacy in Brooklyn where I bought ointment when I was visiting my aunt. Thinking about visiting my aunt led me to a quick mental review of several previous vacations, including the one in which my younger son delighted us by saying his third word, “Doggies!” upon seeing some dachshunds. This in turn reminded that my older boy used to call any large four-legged animal a “doggie.” I then pondered how the Native Americans in the novel “Hanta Yo” called horses “big dogs” or “mystery dogs.” That made me think of Western movies and how Alex Carras punched out a horse in “Blazing Saddles.” I then envisioned the scene in which Cleavon Little was seated atop the tricked out palomino. You can guess the rest.

    Hi Pinky, how is the Brain doing? ;)

    We do NOT tingle at first sight, we do not mind fuck strangers. Even when women eye fuck they are exiting the attraction phase and attempting to kickstart intensifying attraction. They do not feel anything below the waist during this phase. It’s still cerebral.

    Cosign this. It seems like women have some sort of switch where attraction can go from cerebral to visceral. The cake example of Mike some cakes look really good and smell really good but you still don’t want to eat. And this is a cake lover talking sometimes you just want to stare at it, maybe take a pic and some other cakes are so pretty that you don’t want to cut them. Same for men a woman can find you attractive and not get her panties wet for you for many reasons.

    Speaking of bursting out laughing, has anyone else occasionally burst out laughing in your sleep because something in your dream struck you as really funny? I’ve done that a few times over the years. Needless to say, it’s a bit startling to whoever your in bed with.

    My baby does that. He laughs like a tiny baby awake and like someone said the funniest joke in his sleep and he sounds like he is 40 or something. It was kind of scary at the beginning but now I wonder why he never laughs like that awake.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Really why everyone is shitting so much on dating sites? If 17% of people that married meet through them it shouldn’t be considered the cesspool people seems to be implying.

      I agree. Furthermore, your odds of meeting an attractive and eligible mate of similar age and compatibility on a photography site have got to be way, way lower than meeting the same purpose on a dating site. You could be shmoozing online with a guy at Digital Photography School for two months before you realize he’s 67 and broke.

  • JP

    “Really being single is like being unemployed you try every method to get a job, you try every method to get a mate, is as simple as that”

    And sometimes, you can only get that part-time minimum-wage mate when what you were trying to do was get a job that required the Ph.D. you just got.

    It just depends on the SMP at the time.

    (This market analogy is bad; it really is).

  • Madelena

    @Anacoana

    Dating sites are for losers and sluts.
    This ‘slut’ married a very good ‘loser’ thank you very much.

    My response:
    I laughed out loud at your response cause I had the same mental answer.

    When I first initially came upon this site and clicked on other assorted sites, relating more to game, I was dismayed at some of the toxic content.

    However, the best medicine against a lot of garbage out in PUA and game sites is to go out and meet real men, in real life. Go on dates. Interact and be sociable. Work on yourself, up your girl game.

    The best nuggets of advice were the ones relating to self-improvement. Improving your looks, be more sociable, practice flirting, etc.
    Ultimately, you use what you can, and throw out the rest.

  • Damien Vulaume

    That goes a long way for a woman. The biggest thing most girls can learn is that they will not have much control over what to expect, if they are not willing to take any control to help create a relationship beyond just expecting things. It takes more than just showing up.

    Indeed Hamlet, but it takes two to tango…

  • VeriSeeker

    “Attraction cues exist to facilitate mating, which is about reproduction via love and companionship. That is how we have evolved. ”

    This sounds like a text book. What are you trying to say? Reproduction exists for it’s own sake. This is basic evolutionary theory.

    “Women today do not need resources from men. But they do like a man of high status, in answer to your question.”

    Really? Why? Why are women entitled to a “man of high status”? Why are men of low status entitled to women too?

    “Are you Michael, Piper, et al? Are you also Gutless Wonder? There’s a lot of trolling going on today.”

    Who are these individuals and why do they matter to the discussion at hand?

  • BroHamlet

    @Damien

    “Indeed Hamlet, but it takes two to tango…”

    It’s interesting that you feel that this has to be mentioned, because to me it goes without saying. A man is automatically expected to step up and be worthy to get his foot in the door, and men are by and large willing to do what they need to do to get and keep women (just like I have done to get the one I’m with). Not sure where you are from, but in the US, most people will look at you strange if you suggest outright that a girl have to be worthy of a man. Lokland has already covered it- the predominant traditional frame is that the man display (for both sex and commitment), and the woman not at all. That mentality and the social movement that caused it, is why we are even having this discussion. I appreciate the comment, but I don’t really see why it’s worth mentioning given the context that we are living in. To me, women are looking out for themselves just fine from the context of having a list (although some of those requirements might be misguided, which Susan has written about). It’s fine to have such a list, but you have to be proactive enough to make it happen, which is something this blog seems to be pretty good at breaking down.

  • Damien Vulaume

    @Hamlet #678

    Well, I mentioned it precisely because I don’t live in the US, and the fact that it should be something that every single culture in the world should be able to remember of, or not?…. If not, well, we might just as well call it a day when it comes to life on earth, to grossly exagerate.
    I might very well be out of touch with today’s standards of genders’ interactions there (North America) already. But I find it (as I found it before) a culture so dismissive of women (who in turn where themselves rarely naturally feminine) that it gets at times more than perplexing, and the fact that it is basically the only place in the said “western world” where feminism is still in full swing as of today, and way out of the roof…..just like that Mysogynous legion on the other hand. You seem to breed nutters from all sides there, sorry to say. And not just when it comes to genders.
    I’m from France, I lived in the USA, the Netherlands and now in the Czech Republic, meaning that I have a composite experience of what the male/female experience looks like on earth, but why is it that the dance hall is there at times so hopeless, jaundiced, and, most of all, fake? It goes beyond the gender war, unfortunately. Otherwise Susan’s blog alone and a few other good will ambassadors would have solved the problem.

  • Jimmy Hendricks

    I have only ever read two books on Game. The Game and Mystery Method. Roissy is a MM disciple. The “Game” blogs in the manosphere are very much in that realm. I have no further knowledge of Game or the various offshoots, and to be honest, I feel that Mystery pretty much had it covered. I personally haven’t ever come across a game concept that could not be explained by MM first, with evo psych to back it up. But I am not a Game blogger and have never claimed to be.

    Susan, you’re really making it too complicated here. “Game” is honestly just a guy’s skill in using active behaviors to create attraction. Nothing more, nothing less. The term’s been around long before Mystery wrote a single word on the Internet. You could visit the projects in Memphis and hear “Dude’s got game” from guys that have never heard of Mystery, David Buss, etc. and could have heard the same thing 20 years ago.

    Game =/= Mystery Method or PUA

    Think of all the douchebags on college campuses who get laid like tile. When we say they have good “game,” do you really think we mean they’re sitting down and reading MM? That’s just such a narrow application of the subject matter and the population…

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Jimmy Hendricks

      I believe I’ve read that the term Game comes from the AA community to describe guys who are naturals. So yes, of course I’m aware that these concepts are nothing new. There were cavemen who had game, and of course many famous womanizers through history who bedded many women without the help of Erik von Markovik. Mystery’s contribution was to codify the advice for nerds, plain and simple. Douchebags on college campuses are mostly naturals, something that is a lot easier post Sex Rev than it ever was before. But all the Pretend Assholes? They’re not reading MM, they’re just taking the shortcut of Asshole Game.

      Having said that, if you ask any 16 year old boy in America if he’s aware of Game, he’ll think of that capital G. Certainly, Roissy writes about Capital G Game, derived entirely from PUA. So my familiarity with Game online is very much tied into specific techniques, e.g. negging, push pull, takeaway, anti-slut defense, last minute resistance, etc. And the most successful Game bloggers, like Roosh, came up that way, though they have of course put their own imprint on Game.

  • Jimmy Hendricks

    Guess I’m in moderation. If I said anything wrong, my bad.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Jimmy

      Sorry about the mod. I have no clue why that occurred. The spam filter has been wonky this week. I’m trying to keep an eye on it, but obviously can’t do that 24/7.

  • Lokland

    @J

    “I said that the majority of college women were likely to have at least one cad-related experience they regret. That’s a far cry from saying “Settle for a reformed slut,” unless one mis-step a slut makes. Nothing in between madonna and whore in your book?”

    Where do you reach the conclusion that it is a majority? What evidence or data draws you to assume most as opposed to some?

    What mistakes are most men making that draws them down to this level? Or is this merely a matter of if their is no other choice he has to take whats available?

    “unless one mis-step a slut makes.”

    No but it does make one less than those who do not make a mistake.
    Which leads back to my first question, if most women make this mistake, what mistakes are men making to bring them onto equal footing? (Note: If your conclusion is that men are not making mistakes we are left with two options, neither of which is pleasant.)

    “Nothing in between madonna and whore in your book?””

    If you want an answer unload this question.

  • Iggles

    @ OTC:

    Example: you meet online, and have some flirty banter in a Facebook post. Switch to PMs, talk. Eventually you get her mobile number, and you text. The topic of eventually sex comes up. She sends a pic of a “dress” asking if you like the “dress”. Some well placed remarks, and soon you both are exchanging racy semi-clothed pictures that you wouldn’t show Mom.

    That’s a script for the unrestricted!

    I wouldn’t talk sex or exchange racy photos with someone I’ve never met in PERSON! No matter how cute their photo may look or how sweet their texts, this person is still a stranger. In the early stages, its way too easy for things to fall apart. People flake, even moreso online! From a practically standpoint, you could do this dance several times before you meet someone that actually agrees to go on a date and find that several strangers now have racy photos of you!

  • Iggles

    @ SW:

    Planning stuff together is dating. I think people should stop using the word date to indicate linen tablecloths and hushed restaurants. Dating is doing stuff as a pair that is non-sexual in nature. It doesn’t have to cost anything. It works best when men suggest the plans in the beginning.

    + 100

    If you’re spending 1 on 1 time together it’s a date. Doesn’t matter it if as informal as watching a movie together. If there’s romantic interest but you’re not officially a couple then it’s a date. Now, if you have a crush on a platonic friend, that’s different. If this is a girl you recently met and started “hanging with”, then no question!

  • Iggles

    @ SW:

    Sexual attraction does not mean sexual desire. You are not defining these terms correctly. Of course attraction is sexual attraction. When a woman says, “I am really attracted to him,” that is a statement having to do with mating, yes? It does not mean “I want to fuck him now.” Desire is not necessarily present at the first blush of sexual attraction. In fact, I would say it rarely is.

    + 1000!

    I don’t understand why this concept seems so hard to grasp. Sexual attraction and sexual desire is NOT inherently linked for women. We see a guy we’re attracted to and do NOT automatically envision f***ing him.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Iggles

      I don’t understand why this concept seems so hard to grasp. Sexual attraction and sexual desire is NOT inherently linked for women.

      There’s some massive projection going on. As the owner of the equipment, I feel like a Ford Taurus is trying to tell a rocket how to launch from Cape Canaveral.

      Of course, if you think about it, it makes sense that women would be profoundly orgasmic only with men who have cleared all the hurdles that should be a part of gatekeeping. We can slut it up, but we can’t fool our nerve endings.

  • Iggles

    @ Ana:

    Dating sites are for losers and sluts.
    This ‘slut’ married a very good ‘loser’ thank you very much.Really why everyone is shitting so much on dating sites? If 17% of people that married meet through them it shouldn’t be considered the cesspool people seems to be implying.Really being single is like being unemployed you try every method to get a job, you try every method to get a mate, is as simple as that.

    Word!

    I pay the detractors no mind. I met my bf online and I don’t see how we would have met otherwise!

    Not everyone is cut out for online dating I suppose. You have to be able to filter like mad and have an eye for recognizing character. Ignoring the time wasters and bad apples are key. People would can’t do this rack up a lot of stories about the crazies and probably quit due to their mostly negative experiences.

  • Iggles

    @ Ana:

    My baby does that. He laughs like a tiny baby awake and like someone said the funniest joke in his sleep and he sounds like he is 40 or something. It was kind of scary at the beginning but now I wonder why he never laughs like that awake.

    Aww! That is so adorable! Though slightly disconcerting, haha. Babies are mystery at times. My nephew went through a phase where his baby babbling sounds like Mandarin Chinese! (It spooked the workers in a Chinese restaurant one time)

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      My nephew went through a phase where his baby babbling sounds like Mandarin Chinese! (It spooked the workers in a Chinese restaurant one time)

      Haha, that’s hilarious!

  • https://en.gravatar.com/pioneervalleywoman pvw

    Iggles: I don’t understand why this concept seems so hard to grasp. Sexual attraction and sexual desire is NOT inherently linked for women. We see a guy we’re attracted to and do NOT automatically envision f***ing him.

    Me: Years ago, when I was single, when I saw a man who was sexually attractive, I used to wonder what it would be like to date him, what kind of boyfriend/husband/daddy he would be. My curiousity wasn’t about sex with him, but what a relationship with him would be like. That is what attracted me to Mr. PVW–yes, he was handsome, but most importantly, he had the kind of energy that I found appealing.

    Iggles: My nephew went through a phase where his baby babbling sounds like Mandarin Chinese! (It spooked the workers in a Chinese restaurant one time)

    Me: I remember learning in a child psychology class that babies through their babbling express vocal sounds that span the whole array of languages they might speak as they get older. It is through interacting with those around them that they start to mimic and reinforce the sounds they hear, ie., American English, etc.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      Years ago, when I was single, when I saw a man who was sexually attractive, I used to wonder what it would be like to date him, what kind of boyfriend/husband/daddy he would be.

      Yes, I think this is typical for women. It also explains why women get weak in the knees when they observe a man interacting well with children. I’ve written before about young women I know swooning over dads walking around the city with babies in Snugli’s. They all said, “That’s what I want!” Obviously, they didn’t mean that particular man, they meant a man they find attractive who will happily inhabit that role.

  • SayWhaat

    @ Damien:

    I confess I didn’t understand your entire comment…did you say I am self-absorbed? Can you expand on that? I’d just like to know what to work on.

  • Maggie

    ” her ego was smashed by the realization that at 30+ despite her accomplishments in life, men will now start looking at her as only a piece of ass instead of as anything worth taking on a traditional date.”

    Why all the vitriol for 30+ single women? I know some lovely single women. One lost her fiance in Afghanistan, another has spent years putting herself through law school and spending summers doing volunteer work with her church group in Africa. Hardly ball-busting man eaters; it just hasn’t worked out for them yet. They are still worthy of respect and, yes, worthy of taking on a traditional date.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Maggie

      Why all the vitriol for 30+ single women? I know some lovely single women. One lost her fiance in Afghanistan, another has spent years putting herself through law school and spending summers doing volunteer work with her church group in Africa. Hardly ball-busting man eaters; it just hasn’t worked out for them yet. They are still worthy of respect and, yes, worthy of taking on a traditional date.

      Thank you for saying that. I find it deeply offensive that every woman who hits age 30 without a wedding is branded a desperate former carousel rider. There’s more than a little schadenfreude here on that guy’s part. He needs to know that women are suffering in order to balance the scales for the many years that women found him unattractive. That is what puts a spring in his step.

  • Sai

    “The topic of eventually sex comes up. She sends a pic of a “dress” asking if you like the “dress”. Some well placed remarks, and soon you both are exchanging racy semi-clothed pictures that you wouldn’t show Mom.”

    This reminds me of a Criminal Minds episode. (Wait, no, that happened in an episode of this show my mother likes featuring a special team with the first black president from 24.) This is not for me, I can think of multiple bad outcomes.

    “Why popping here like a mongolian every once in a while if everything is so perfect?”

    http://youtu.be/GuFIobFocIg
    According to the exhibit I just went to, Mongols gave us lots of things (other than death and mayhem).

  • JP

    “another has spent years putting herself through law school and spending summers doing volunteer work with her church group in Africa.”

    Law school = red flag in and of itself.

    Not just for dating; I’m talking about life in general.

    What I would tell my 20-year old self? “Don’t go to law school.”

  • Maggie

    @JP
    “What I would tell my 20-year old self? “Don’t go to law school”

    Yes, it’s really tough out there, but luckily she got a job at the firm where she had an internship.

  • JP

    “Yes, it’s really tough out there, but luckily she got a job at the firm where she had an internship.”

    The problem with law is once you hit the 10 year mark.

    You basically have no future at that point if you are not partner.

    It’s one of those careers where it’s quite possible that your first few years will be the most you will ever make in any years in your career.

    Normal career paths don’t work on an up or out system, where you become *less* valuable and employable the older you get (beyond the first 5 years or so).

  • Maggie

    “You basically have no future at that point if you are not partner.”

    My husband worked for a law firm for a while and then went to corporate/consulting work. He could have made a lot more money if he had made partner, but the stress and long hours would have made him miserable.

  • JP

    ” He could have made a lot more money if he had made partner, but the stress and long hours would have made him miserable.”

    It’s not particularly stable, anyway.

    One of the partners I know just got de-partnered.

    Lots of that going around nowadays.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    FWIW, when blue-pill men say “chicks dig jerks” and lament over it, it doesn’t always mean “chicks like murderers,” though it can mean that.

    Sometimes I think of my blue-pill, sweet-as-sugar co-worker, who also has a single digit body fat % and is quite attractive, but has never had a GF. He has always gotten friend-zoned. He is also INCREDIBLY positive and cheery, the male version of “bubbly,” loves babies, etc.

    No girls are interested in him. At all.

    On the other hand, I have quite a bit of female attention, and I am uniformly acknowledged as quite a narcissistic guy, though I am genuinely nice too. More than once some girl has been playfully been calling me a jerk, though there is quite an element of truth to that, too.

    Yet he has to work on himself and I am just fine.

    That’s what would have irked me as a blue-pill guy. Why should HE have to work on himself? He’s literally one of the nicest guys in the world, yet HE has to work on himself to be “meaner.”

    I doubt that I would be the kind of guy who blocks a girl online after she says no to sex (depending on how she responded), but I am still a huge, massive, DICK to blue-pill ADBG.

    PS: I hope no one says that this guy should “Hold Out” for a nice girl, or that eventually girls will see what a nice guy he is. I will probably go ape-shit. He needs a personality trait correction, and he will see it as being a dick.

    @ DV:

    I think I already wrote to Ted about that once, but dating/courtship is girls’ domain, where THEY choose what to do next. Just accept it. I don’t understand this impatience and sheer intolerance at girls games (well, the reasonable ones, those they pull because they like you and are scared to be disappointed), as if it should be like your own rational script, and it seems in a bit of a boorish way. Even if a girl likes you from the start, one wrong move in the process and you’re out. So there’s a minimum you are required to do if you want to make a better impression than the average Chuck or Dave.

    DV, that’s why most guys are going to reject this courtship script and only going to enter it with girls who have already signaled interest and have been screened/qualified in some way. It’s a bad deal for guys and is a big time and money sink.
    I don’t object to the courtship script after a girl has already been screened and displayed interest. I think that’s where a lot of the misunderstanding in this whole thread came from, along with guys chafing at the idea of dual-script girls charging current guys a “higher” price and not upping their offer accordingly.

    Also FWIW, I am a genuinely generous guy, and quite emotional. I pay outright for friend’s meals, so it’s not “money” issue. However, I am hesitant to go near girls in this script, as virtually ALL of the girls I know IRL have abused their dating power like wanna-be Stalins. Cheating, dumping with no notice or explanation or attempt to improve, treating men in general as disposable or ego-boosting objects, free meal tickets, etc.

    Maybe it’s necessary. Sure. If I have to go back on the market, I am not objectionable to dates. But again, the girls have to demonstrate quality BEFORE this whole courtship nonsense begins. Otherwise it’s a low-return game, and I’m from 3 generations of accountants: we don’t play low-return games.

  • Lokland

    @Susan

    “He needs to know that women are suffering in order to balance the scales for the many years that women found him unattractive.”

    Probably but he also needs to deride their value so he doesn’t end up being stuck with them.

    “Really why everyone is shitting so much on dating sites? If 17% of people that married meet through them it shouldn’t be considered the cesspool people seems to be implying.”

    Couple reasons,
    i) it is based entirely on appearance and quantification
    ii) massive amount of options

    Which combined lead to iii) typically more of a ONS finder than commitment (speaking from anecdotal advice from others, not myself) or gold digging.

    Also, unless one looks really good on paper its entirely pointless for most men. Its really hard to jump up and down and say how awesome something is when your entirely excluded from it.

  • pvw

    @Susan: Obviously, they didn’t mean that particular man, they meant a man they find attractive who will happily inhabit that role.

    Me: This is what I was getting at; single guys who seemed to be of the type who would happily inhabit the role were appealing. Taken or married guys could be inspirational, of course, but they weren’t interesting to me. Their single friends were, though! ;

  • JP

    @ADBG:

    “Maybe it’s necessary. Sure. If I have to go back on the market, I am not objectionable to dates. But again, the girls have to demonstrate quality BEFORE this whole courtship nonsense begins. Otherwise it’s a low-return game, and I’m from 3 generations of accountants: we don’t play low-return games.”

    This is where the entire issue of boundaries comes into play.

    Do you purposefully force yourself to play a low-return game because it’s the objectively morally appropriate action, essentially consciously allowing yourself to be taken advantage of *or* do you force the quality evaluation first regardless of whether it is the right thing to do?

  • INTJ

    @ Maggie

    Why all the vitriol for 30+ single women? I know some lovely single women. One lost her fiance in Afghanistan, another has spent years putting herself through law school and spending summers doing volunteer work with her church group in Africa. Hardly ball-busting man eaters; it just hasn’t worked out for them yet. They are still worthy of respect and, yes, worthy of taking on a traditional date.

    Nothing wrong with the first woman. However, law school and lots of voluntary work seems like the kind of woman that I would not want to settle down with.

  • JP

    “However, law school and lots of voluntary work seems like the kind of woman that I would not want to settle down with.”

    What’s wrong with the voluntary work?

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    Also, the problem that I think SOME guys are having with this thread is the “take-away.”

    The take-away can very easily be:
    Some guys are good looking. They can spark attraction right away, and SOME girls are promiscuous and will sleep with those guys quickly. Even some “good” girls made some mistakes and that’s something you’ll probably have to accept.
    College is an especially heady time where there is no dating and there is a lot of hooking up.
    But then guys can start taking girls out on dates after college, and work on developing attraction for those girls. It’s like in those rom-coms or those wacky stories, where the girl doesn’t REALLY like him at first, but starts to like him over time, and then they get married and have a family!

    If you don’t understand why 90% of guys chafe against this, then you haven’t been reading anything on this website for at least a year!

    I do understand intellectually that this isn’t what Susan is supporting, but goddam if it doesn’t hit me in the “DESTROY THE BLUE PILL” spot hidden in my brain.

    Take-away for girls should be:
    -If he never spends time alone with you, he isn’t interested in a relationship
    -Hooking Up Smart means hooking up with guys who care you about and you are in a relationship with

    Plan accordingly

    Take-away for guys is always the same. Work harder to boost your quick-acting attraction triggers. Dress well, hit the gym. Work on your conversation game so you don’t entirely lose the game the moment you open your mouth. Work your social circles and pre-screen girls before dates. Don’t invest too much into girls that haven’t been screened, because it will exhaust you and attraction almost NEVER grows over time. Be prepared to pay for a first “date,” but maintain the frame so it seems like you are hanging out, and be prepared to pay for that first “date” or else you are running a good chance of missing the girl.

    Blue pill destroyed

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @ADBG

      Take-away for girls should be:
      -If he never spends time alone with you, he isn’t interested in a relationship
      -Hooking Up Smart means hooking up with guys who care you about and you are in a relationship with

      Plan accordingly

      Take-away for guys is always the same. Work harder to boost your quick-acting attraction triggers. Dress well, hit the gym. Work on your conversation game so you don’t entirely lose the game the moment you open your mouth. Work your social circles and pre-screen girls before dates. Don’t invest too much into girls that haven’t been screened, because it will exhaust you and attraction almost NEVER grows over time. Be prepared to pay for a first “date,” but maintain the frame so it seems like you are hanging out, and be prepared to pay for that first “date” or else you are running a good chance of missing the girl.

      Brilliant summary, thanks.

  • JP

    @ADBG:

    “Take-away for guys is always the same. Work harder to boost your quick-acting attraction triggers. Dress well, hit the gym.”

    It depends on what kind of woman you are seeking and how prevalent they are in your area.

    For the average man, this is good advice. For the outlier, not so good.

  • Maggie

    “However, law school and lots of voluntary work seems like the kind of woman that I would not want to settle down with.”

    She’s a “church girl” in the best sense of the word. Not a crazy dances-with-rattlesnake type or a “you love gays so you are going to he-ell” type but a “how have I been called to serve?” type. She’s best off with a “church guy” so her options are limited.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    JP

    It depends on what kind of woman you are seeking and how prevalent they are in your area.

    For the average man, this is good advice. For the outlier, not so good.

    True this is, it’s advice for average men seeking to get an average woman in the 20s without trying to becoming Mystery-level PUA.

  • FeralEmployee

    Missing term from glossary on HUS: DQ. I have no idea what it means.

    Also, think it might be possible to make a webpage pooling all the research articles relevant to the HUS mission/knowledge/… ? I would greatly appreciate it, I’m losing track.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @Feral Employee

      DQ = disqualify

      I think. I actually just figured that out myself.

      Your suggestion about a page for resources is a great one. It will take some doing, though. I’ve made a note.

  • A Definite Beta Guy

    @ JP

    Do you purposefully force yourself to play a low-return game because it’s the objectively morally appropriate action, essentially consciously allowing yourself to be taken advantage of *or* do you force the quality evaluation first regardless of whether it is the right thing to do?

    Anyone who insists you have to play a game that’s rigged against you does not have your best interest at heart and probably doesn’t know a lot about “morality.” More, they are invested in “status quo” and their own privileges.

    My parents are very invested in dating. But they are also 100% against le casual sex. The very idea of it strikes them as confusing. Literally. My mother sat down to watch an episode of Girls and could not understand what was happening.

  • JP

    “Anyone who insists you have to play a game that’s rigged against you does not have your best interest at heart and probably doesn’t know a lot about “morality.” More, they are invested in “status quo” and their own privileges.”

    I was just taking “turn the other cheek” to it’s logical extreme.

    Basically, the concept that if someone wants to kill you, you have the duty to die.

  • http://7thseriesgongshow.blogspot.com Mr. Nervous Toes

    DQ is presumably Disqualified.

  • BroHamlet

    @Susan

    “Without knowing how you operate and what kinds of signals you give off, I couldn’t possibly judge you in this regard, but the fact is that when a man’s game plan is sex within a couple of weeks before dating, then every woman who has sex with you either doesn’t care about the outcome or is crossing her fingers and accepting the risk that you are one of those men, i.e. P&D’er. That is precisely how women can rack up partners in the double digits very quickly, and while you may not feel strongly about that, many men do. Delaying sex until feeling informed and secure about a man’s interest beyond sex is the only way of preventing this.”

    My approach is to be authentic, so I probably don’t flip a lot of red flags, because as I said, I’m not out to be a “taker”, and don’t run from girl to girl. I really don’t want every girl, I only want the ones I really like, and who I think will be open minded enough to get my interests. I’m usually either in a relationship or not at all these days, because I am genuinely very busy even without someone in my life.

    Re: sex risk. I’m not going to be secretive about why I hold my viewpoint. Here is why I think the way I do:

    “Dating” as you describe it really implies that a guy is responsible for qualifying for BOTH sex and commitment. Without her wanting to have sex, there will be no commitment. It’s serial- no girl wants to date anyone she wouldn’t want to have sex with. Point. Blank. And, both before and after sex, she will also be evaluating whether she would want to spend any time with you outside of the bedroom (duh). When you say that guys are just “pitching sex “, you really don’t address what is actually happening, or how many bars a guy needs to clear. By the time we meet up, I have already done the work of being attractive enough to show up on her radar, sensing that I have showed up on it, and with that knowledge, been able to cut through whatever layers of resistance exist- her attitude at that moment, her friends approval, etc. (and for girls inside my social circle, I am aware that the dynamic is different, but still requires some finesse because there’s always the possibility of awkwardness for both of us if things don’t work out). And on top of that, I have managed to get past the inevitable slight drop in value that will happen in her mind, when I go from being that great guy that she met (or was introduced to) that she is now imagining, to that great guy that is now volunteering to spend his time with her when she sees a txt or call from me. The question is always, how did I leave the interaction, and that sets the tone for everything that follows. So you can see, that for the serial nature of this process alone, that “dating” puts a guy at a serious disadvantage, and girls subconsciously react to your willingness to follow the script in various ways- they are watching you closely during this stage. You can be “nice” and play by whatever rules she sets, or you can be authentic to what you are (a man), and play by your own rules (even if those rules are to be a bit more traditional in some ways). Trust me, most girls sense the difference in WHY you are doing what you are doing.

    So now you understand how the process itself mostly works against a guy. Before there is any intimacy, I am fighting an uphill battle, unless the girl is willing to invest something into the process beyond just showing up and looking nice (because I do that too). And I didn’t even mention this part: what if for whatever reason we don’t click in the bedroom? It’s going to be my fault, and it’s over and done. That is another hurdle I have to clear.

    Have you ever really thought about why pick up artistry was originally based on an hours-long timeframe to getting sex? It’s because in a practical sense those guys must have understood that they had to balance the scale of investment involved in the dating process. They saw (as even a layman like myself can see) that the culture itself was predicated upon having men go “all in” to make up for the supposed difference in their value, and that the cultural assumption was that male sexuality was literally worth nothing except from all but the top tier of men. With a process like that, how can a guy win even if he’s down for a relationship? This goes against the way women work- you don’t want what you don’t have to shell out for. Hence their rejection of the traditional ritual, the idea that male sexuality is inferior, and their idea to get sex out of the way as quickly as possible. It tips the scales so that a more even evaluation can be made.

    This brings up my last point. Here is how girls can make it worth dating by a female ruleset:

    The bottom line is that the investment in the process needs to be roughly EVENLY spread across both parties for it to be worth men entering the courtship ritual. I will use Madelena who has commented here as an example. She claims to be traditional and slow to feel attraction, which means that it will be costly in terms of time, effort and resources to date her, and due to the investment gap I described, her attraction will come even slower. When I asked her if she was the type to take the reigns and pay and plan, or just make something homemade for date 2 (cookies, etc., and you don’t have to invite him over), she said no. This is part of how a woman can take help make it worth it for guys to allow her to filter. A guy needs to see that you are also investing in the process in some real way because it speaks a lot to your intentions. I can hear some women balking at the idea of paying or spending extra time doing anything for a guy. I have news for them- time is money, and a guy is expected to spend both every time you go out, so you will get what you pay for when you balk at meeting someone halfway and play it passive. And I couldn’t care less if men “won’t let them pay”. Figure it out- there are ways. No guy who is aware of his value will agree to indefinitely spend time and effort to sponsor a girl’s filtering process. In fact, a lot of guys won’t even agree to that in the short term, even if they are relationship material. It’s not a dance worth doing, if your only move is to 2-step and I am supposed to spin and dip you.

    I just wrote this novel, because this is REALLY important, and girls need to know this if they want to make headway with guys who actually have options. They can either sit back and say that they are expected to risk a lot, or they can sit down and figure out how to get the same effect with acceptable risk. That is up to them to figure out, and that is all I really have left to say on the topic.

    • http://www.hookingupsmart.com Susan Walsh

      @BroHamlet

      Thanks for taking the time to explain your approach. It sounds like you are done responding, so I won’t ask questions, but I will leave some observations.

      My approach is to be authentic, so I probably don’t flip a lot of red flags, because as I said, I’m not out to be a “taker”, and don’t run from girl to girl.

      You know that you are authentic and trustworthy, but there is no way that a woman can know that with any assurance within two weeks of meeting you. If she has sex with you before ascertaining your interest in a commitment, which can only be accomplished by observing you over time, then she is taking all the risk. 100% of it. She risks another sex partner and all that implies re mental and physical health, as well as the hit she takes to her MMV. Whereas you risk nothing at all, as far as I can tell. Then again, market conditions are such, i.e. sex ratio in your favor, that female promiscuity and risk-taking increases. That has been well documented. So you are essentially playing with a “take it or leave it” approach, and that is working for you. Your strategy appears to be an effective one for you. However, I would advise women to decline to participate in such an approach. The risk/reward analysis would suggest that based on how often no-strings sex graduates to relationships (not very often ~ 12%), a woman would be better off filtering you out immediately and seeking a male more willing to share the risk.

      Dating” as you describe it really implies that a guy is responsible for qualifying for BOTH sex and commitment. Without her wanting to have sex, there will be no commitment…It’s serial- no girl wants to date anyone she wouldn’t want to have sex with.

      This is backward. The girl goes on dates specifically to determine whether you are someone she wants to have sex with, and should have sex with.

      Female attraction —-> date —-> intensifying attraction —-> date —-> physical contact —-> concurrent sexual escalation by male and emotional escalation by female —-> mutual commitment.

      Women do not know, in fact, whether they want to have sex with you at first meeting. Now, a woman who in general wants to have sex with a lot of people, and quickly, may be used to making that call very, very early. But by definition we are now describing women of very unrestricted sociosexuality. While you and I might have different opinions and perceptions over what most women are like, we know that sociosexuality lies on a spectrum. Your approach filters out restricted women, who appreciate a period of getting to know a man before having sex with him. An exception might be the woman behaving incongruently and throwing caution to the winds to sleep with you, but you are far more likely to find yourself with more sexually unrestricted and experienced women using your approach.

      Back to your claim about what girls want, I would point out that several of the restricted guys here have experienced having sex with women they hope to see again, only to find out they’re not going to get to Round 2. The woman wants to keep things casual. I gather you’re saying that’s fine with you – again, you have risked nothing.

      And on top of that, I have managed to get past the inevitable slight drop in value that will happen in her mind, when I go from being that great guy that she met (or was introduced to) that she is now imagining, to that great guy that is now volunteering to spend his time with her when she sees a txt or call from me.

      Nearly all of my original 24 focus group girls are now in serious relationships or actively dating, and this drop has not been common or inevitable in their experience.

      Isn’t it most authentic to display your interest with confidence and self-respect? To be a man who is not afraid to pursue a woman, who knows his own value and will therefore not pedestalize a woman, but who is also capable of signaling emotional availability and a willingness to share the risk?

      As for clicking in the bedroom, why must you know that before spending time as a pair? Your chances of having good sex (not to mention her chances of having good sex) are geometrically increased if there is acquaintance, intimacy and anticipation. All of that takes time. One is much more likely to get a “false negative” by having sex early, especially from the female’s perspective.

      This goes against the way women work- you don’t want what you don’t have to shell out for.

      Women should not be shelling out sex in order to get commitment. Ever. Because sex will not get them commitment, as many a hookup veteran can attest. Commitment is offered based on a whole host of things women must bring to the table, and sex is not the differentiator. The woman should focus on emotional escalation in order to win commitment from a male she perceives as quality.

      The immutable and biological truth is that women risk far more than men do every time they have sex. Your approach does not take that into account, it seems to me, as you seek to increase the female’s assumption of risk.

      I’