# Am I the only guy that actually wants a committment?



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

So I was reading a dating advice for men, http://www.girlschase.com/content/h...nostic&utm_medium=ebook&utm_campaign=beginner

Now that link talks about whether or not men should pay for the date. Personally I don't have any opnion here. Well I am against gender roles, but I guess in my situation I am not in a position to be picky, so I will do whatever works.

But there is something *else* in that article that really striked me in a bad way. The problem is not that they say don't pay, but the problem is the reason they gave. In particular, they said



> In other words, the more amazing you become, and the more women like you and appreciate you and see you as a wonderful guy, the more they're going to want to hang onto you as a potential boyfriend.
> 
> And the more they're going to want to hang onto you as a potential boyfriend, the more they're going to want to slow things down, put on their best faces, and make sure you see them as fully 100% commitment-worthy.


But wait a second, I thought the long term relationship is the price in and of itself, and this prospect would worth all the wait in the world! But apparently guys don't think so. Apparently they just want something short term and they don't care about wasted time (best case scenario) or heartbreak (worst case scenario). Could THAT be the reason why women don't trust me: there are all those idiots like the male giving aforementioned advice that they just don't believe me when I am telling them I am not one of htem?! And, apart from the fact that I can't get women to trust me, I can't get dating advice either: all of the male-directed dating advice is on how to get laid and I have to basically mentally substitute "getting laid" with "long term committment" which apparently doesn't seem to work; or when I am lucky enough to run into an advice of finding long term committment, then it is almost always directed to female audience and I have to mentally reverse genders. But the most frustrating thing of all is the possibility that maybe the reason girls never give me a chance is that they falsely assume I am just like those guys I just mentioned, which I am not.


----------



## iAmCodeMonkey (May 23, 2010)

No, you are not the only guy who actually wants commitment. :roll


----------



## Witchblade (Jun 17, 2017)

From all your posts, I don't think women are rejecting you because they think you're only after sex, that's not the impression I get at all. They're rejecting you because you do things that creep them out and are unattractive. They don't trust you, not because they think you only want sex, but because you rant and scream inappropriately, and show absolutely no social awareness.


----------



## SplendidBob (May 28, 2014)

Yup. You are the only guy that wants commitment and that is why women aren't interested.

1. All the other men don't want commitment
2. Women don't want men who don't want commitment

Therefore women aren't interested in you and pick other men.


----------



## nubly (Nov 2, 2006)

Honestly dude, if I were a chick and read your posts, I'd stay the hell away from you. You have to work on your views towards women.


----------



## Just Lurking (Feb 8, 2007)

nubly said:


> Honestly dude, if I were a chick and read your posts, I'd stay the hell away from you. You have to work on your views towards women.


Basically.

And get off sites like "girlschase.com".

Jesus f***.


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

Witchblade said:


> From all your posts, I don't think women are rejecting you because they think you're only after sex, that's not the impression I get at all. They're rejecting you because you do things that creep them out and are unattractive. They don't *trust* you, not because they think you only want sex, but because you rant and scream inappropriately, and show absolutely no *social awareness*.


You are actually drawing closer to one of the other questions I was always wondering about. Notice how you used the word "trust" and "social awarenness" in the same sentence? But to me they seem like different things: trust is whether they would feel safe to be with me alone, so that I won't grope her, and social awarenness is whether they will be okay to be with me around their friends so that I won't embarass her in front of them. Yet, for some reason, women seem to connect those two things and I don't understand why. I mean, from my point of view, I don't need to be socially aware in order to know not to grope a woman. As far as not wanting to grope a woman, to me it is something really basic in par with not wanting to jump out the window, while social awarenness is something far less basic that has to do with arbitrary rules I don't understand. Yet girls seem to connect those two things that to me seem very different from each other. Could it be that they assume that male biology would make one into a rapist and social awarenness is the only thing that can possibly prevent it? If so, that goes back to the original post where I said that other en being idiots is part of the eqution.


----------



## firewatch93 (May 7, 2017)

I would love to be in a committed relationship but girls don't like me and I can't blame them. Whats to like?

If I was in a relationship I would be scared of myself. When I had friends I was always jealous when they wanted to hang out with someone else. I just smiled and acted like it was fine but deep down I was filled with rage. I feel like that would happen if I ever got a girlfriend.


----------



## Witchblade (Jun 17, 2017)

firewatch93 said:


> I would love to be in a committed relationship but girls don't like me and I can't blame them. Whats to like?
> 
> If I was in a relationship I would be scared of myself. When I had friends I was always jealous when they wanted to hang out with someone else. I just smiled and acted like it was fine but deep down I was filled with rage. I feel like that would happen if I ever got a girlfriend.


Yeah, jealousy is a sign of weakness, being afraid that you'll lose them means you don't think you're good enough for them, and if that's the message you give, then that's the message they'll follow, and they will look elsewhere.


----------



## Persephone The Dread (Aug 28, 2010)

Interesting. You've made this post several times now, about men being the reason you can't get a girlfriend.

But no, you're not the only one.



causalset said:


> then it is almost always directed to female audience and I have to mentally reverse genders


Do you mean you pretend what you're reading is aimed at men? So you follow the advice aimed at women to get a long term male partner?


----------



## iAmCodeMonkey (May 23, 2010)

nubly said:


> Honestly dude, if I were a chick and read your posts, I'd stay the hell away from you. You have to work on your views towards women.


No kidding, eh?!? :lol


----------



## Witchblade (Jun 17, 2017)

Persephone The Dread said:


> Do you mean you pretend what you're reading is aimed at men? So you follow the advice aimed at women to get a long term male partner?


Lol, now I kinda want to see that


----------



## Dissonance (Dec 27, 2011)

Witchblade said:


> From all your posts, I don't think women are rejecting you because they think you're only after sex, that's not the impression I get at all. They're rejecting you because you do things that creep them out and are unattractive. They don't trust you, not because they think you only want sex, but because you rant and scream inappropriately, and show absolutely no social awareness.


How critical we are of each other and never self aware we are of our own flaws while magnifying everyone else's.


----------



## Persephone The Dread (Aug 28, 2010)

Witchblade said:


> Lol, now I kinda want to see that


Me too, although maybe I already have in a way.. Not 100% though.


----------



## Omni-slash (Feb 10, 2016)

When you start mapping out how to get women like a D&D campaign with an Autistic Roosh V (I can say that because I'm Autistic as ****), you've already lost. Just stop caring about women and they'll come to you. That worked for me.


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

firewatch93 said:


> I would love to be in a committed relationship but girls don't like me and I can't blame them. Whats to like?
> 
> If I was in a relationship I would be scared of myself. When I had friends I was always jealous when they wanted to hang out with someone else. I just smiled and acted like it was fine but deep down I was filled with rage. I feel like that would happen if I ever got a girlfriend.


It all depends on a context. If they have normal friends then jealosy is a sign of weakness or even posessiveness. But if they use their friendships in order to keep the distance from you, then you are right to be jealous.

I can give you two examples from my own life. My first ex was too ashamed to introduce me to their friends, and when I took it personally she finally brought me along when she was hanging out with her closest friends, but she didn't make any effort to facilitate my interaction with them: once we didn't click after initial hello, she decided to just let me sit there and talk to them as fi I am not around. I guess to be fair, I was doing physics while sitting in front of her friends, so that was a mistake on my part. But then again, even if I were to put physics away, I didn't know exactly how to talk to them, and she wasn't helping me. Now remember that was only a couple of her friends; there were other ones whom I never even physically met. Yet they were telling her things like "stop dating retard" and "why do you want to procreate retarded children" and when I confronted her regarding the girl that said the latter (whom I never met) and asked her if she actually said to her something about me that would of caused her to say it, she evaded answering that question, and when I asked her why she didn't confront her and stand up for me, she just said "stop".

And here is the other example was several years later. So I was trying to date a girl immediately after my last ex broke up with me. It was online relationship, we haven't met yet. So I was basically taking out on her my frustrations with the reasons my last ex broke up: I would tell her mean things I would want to tell to my ex and afterwords actually admit it its about my ex. She didn't show any sign of anger, but then few weeks later she became really disracted while talking to me: she would play video games instead of giving me undivided attention, and would be talking to people at those games at the same time as talking to me, making me wait for her to respond, etc. I had no idea it had anything to do wiht y temper tantrums untill she actualy told me that herself few weeks later. I would have assumed that she was just getting bored or something; but then, few weeks later, she told me that actually it wasn't about boredom but rather about a defense mechanism so that she won't get hurt if I lash out again.

So you see there are examples where it IS a bad thing when people are talking to their friends too much. But then again its also true that most people do have friends and its okay. Thats why I said it all depends on a context.


----------



## Witchblade (Jun 17, 2017)

Dissonance said:


> How critical we are of each other and never self aware we are of our own flaws while magnifying everyone else's.


I don't see how you can say I'm unaware of my own flaws, read my posts on this forum....and I was giving him advice, this thread is about him, not me.


----------



## Dissonance (Dec 27, 2011)

Witchblade said:


> I don't see how you can say I'm unaware of my own flaws, read my posts on this forum....and I was giving him advice, this thread is about him, not me.


It was just a general statement inspired by your post, I wasn't trying to call you miss perfect or defend him.


----------



## LonelyLurker (Sep 24, 2016)

Sheska said:


> You mentioned previously that you studied mathematics; I assume, therefore, that you are familiar with elementary set theory?...


I was just about to say that, only more mathsy. :nerd:


----------



## Witchblade (Jun 17, 2017)

causalset said:


> And here is the other example was several years later. So I was trying to date a girl immediately after my last ex broke up with me. It was online relationship, we haven't met yet. So I was basically taking out on her my frustrations with the reasons my last ex broke up: I would tell her mean things I would want to tell to my ex and afterwords actually admit it its about my ex. She didn't show any sign of anger, but then few weeks later she became really disracted while talking to me: she would play video games instead of giving me undivided attention, and would be talking to people at those games at the same time as talking to me, making me wait for her to respond, etc. I had no idea it had anything to do wiht y temper tantrums untill she actualy told me that herself few weeks later. I would have assumed that she was just getting bored or something; but then, few weeks later, she told me that actually it wasn't about boredom but rather about a defense mechanism so that she won't get hurt if I lash out again.


Honestly, I can't even imagine what it's like to be autistic and not be able to learn from social experiences. It's like you have to make every mistake yourself and then have each mistake explained to you afterwords. I don't know if you're seeing a therapist but you should, and you should really give up on dating unless and until you learn to manage this.


----------



## iAmCodeMonkey (May 23, 2010)

Witchblade said:


> Honestly, I can't even imagine what it's like to be autistic and not be able to learn from social experiences. It's like you have to make every mistake yourself and then have each mistake explained to you afterwards.


I know the feeling all too well. But yeah, if the OP is having temper tantrums over this, he needs to seek help before ever pursing a relationship.


----------



## caveman8 (Sep 3, 2012)

causalset said:


> You are actually drawing closer to one of the other questions I was always wondering about. Notice how you used the word "trust" and "social awarenness" in the same sentence? But to me they seem like different things: trust is whether they would feel safe to be with me alone, so that I won't grope her, and social awarenness is whether they will be okay to be with me around their friends so that I won't embarass her in front of them. Yet, for some reason, women seem to connect those two things and I don't understand why. I mean, from my point of view, I don't need to be socially aware in order to know not to grope a woman. As far as not wanting to grope a woman, to me it is something really basic in par with not wanting to jump out the window, while social awarenness is something far less basic that has to do with arbitrary rules I don't understand. Yet girls seem to connect those two things that to me seem very different from each other. Could it be that they assume that male biology would make one into a rapist and social awarenness is the only thing that can possibly prevent it? If so, that goes back to the original post where I said that other en being idiots is part of the eqution.


But - do you know how to have fun?

Trust and social awareness are different things. Using them in the same sentence doesn't mean anything per se.

Social awareness isn't about just not embarrassing her in front of friends. You are overlooking something very obvious, which is that your interaction with her requires social awareness too. Your lack of it makes her feel uncomfortable.

But you've got to stop thinking and start living. You seem to be trying to find some magic formula and/or thought process that will unlock the key to a great relationship, and my guess is you are analyzing everything if not microscopically at least over-doing it, while it occurs, and would say this results in stilted interactions. It isn't complicated, people want to be around those that make them feel better, and your EQ just doesn't allow that.

One word - fun. Not everything is about logic and the fact you won't grope her, and wanting long-term commitment doesn't make you any better than those "idiots" who just want to score. Those "idiots" know how to have fun - do you?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

caveman8 said:


> Social awareness isn't about just not embarrassing her in front of friends. You are overlooking something very obvious, which is that your interaction with her requires social awareness too. Your lack of it makes her feel uncomfortable.


But social awarenness is about social conventions. So if it is just the two of us interacting, why would conventions be important as long as we understand each other? In fact, isn't it a bonus that I am being a genuine individual as opposed to just playing some social game?



caveman8 said:


> But you've got to stop thinking and start living.


Totally agree. But how exactly am I to do it if no one invites me anywhere?



caveman8 said:


> One word - fun. Not everything is about logic and the fact you won't grope her, and wanting long-term commitment doesn't make you any better than those "idiots" who just want to score. Those "idiots" know how to have fun - do you?


The reason I talk about groping is that I notice women speed up their walk and look away when I pass by. So why would they be so afraid of someone who simply doesn't know how to have fun? Does not being fun in their mind translate to dnagerous?

As far as knowing how to have fun its two way street. It would be easier to have fun if girls were to introduce me to fun. For example, my second ex taught me how to play an American Idol game where I sing and those four characters give me a feedback. I found it really funny to purposely sin bad in order to hear Simon character say nasty things about me. But you see if I didn't meet the second ex I wouldn't have known that game existed.

I guess maybe my mistake is that the kind of fun I do know how to do I tend not to share with others. But that might be because I anticipate others won't find it fun. You be the judge. So I like talking long walks and trying different restaurants at the outskirts of town. I assumed my second ex won't like it, and so I was actually building a resentment to her for supposedly keeping me from doing those things. But then, the day before I went to India, I decided to take her to one of the restaurants I used to go to by myself, and she actually liked it. So I felt bad ever since that I avoided doing something she would have liked. BUt then again that might be just her: I mean, when I *talk* about those things people tend to find it boring.

If by fun you mean smiling, then the typical feedback I get is that I never smile. Yet when I talk to girls that do act welcoming then they compliment me on my smile. So this leads me to say that the reason I don't smile most of the time is that I feel rejected most oF the time, so if that downward spiral was broken I would smile more.


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

iAmCodeMonkey said:


> I know the feeling all too well. But yeah, if the OP is having temper tantrums over this, he needs to seek help before ever pursing a relationship.


I just think my temper tantrums would stop once I am in a relationship. I mean it worked before during the honeymoon stages of my past three relationships. ALthough its also true that the tantrums came back once the honeymoon stages were over and some misunderstandings popped up. But if I were to put more effort into making things go well during the honeymoon stage so that it never goes sour then that would solve my tantrum problem.


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

Witchblade said:


> Honestly, I can't even imagine what it's like to be autistic and not be able to learn from social experiences. It's like you have to make every mistake yourself and then have each mistake explained to you afterwords. I don't know if you're seeing a therapist but you should, and you should really give up on dating unless and until you learn to manage this.


I do see the therapist but not very regularly since I see therapist on campus and they tend to be booked. As far as giving up on dating, thats like a giedgiving up on one of the major things that make me human: including social acceptance (which I don't know how to get without a girlfriend) and prospect to procreate in a distant future (thus basically dooming my genes to die out). Thats why I am desperate in trying to date despite those issues -- particularly since I am already 37. Not that I didn't try to date before, I did, but it didn't go well and I am now trying to make up.

As far as learning from my mistakes, I guess learning would be a lot easier if I had chances to apply what I learn in a positive way. For example I play chess online, and I am bad at chess so I make a lot of mistakes, but you see I can play as many chess games in a row as I want so I have plenty of opportunities to learn, thats why my rating went up from 600-range to 900-range, which is still below average but much better. In social interactions its different: socially I only get one opportunity in months, and if I screw it up, what else am I to do other than dwell on it? You see, learning takes lots of practice and repetitions. But if socially I am not offered an opportunity for practice and repetitions, thats why its a lot harder to learn. So I feel like if I were to have a girlfriend, who would introduce me to her friends, and make me interact with them regularly, then I would learn a lot better.


----------



## tehuti88 (Jun 19, 2005)

causalset said:


> I just think my temper tantrums would stop once I am in a relationship. I mean it worked before during the honeymoon stages of my past three relationships. ALthough its also true that the tantrums came back once the honeymoon stages were over and some misunderstandings popped up. *But if I were to put more effort into making things go well during the honeymoon stage so that it never goes sour then that would solve my tantrum problem.*


You say you have the ability to "put more work" into preventing your juvenile behavior. *Put more work into not having tantrums now.* See if that helps any. Nothing else you've tried has worked, so be scientific and try this for a change.

Relationships aren't around to fix your anger problems. And even you admit that when you had relationships, they didn't fix you. They just delayed the inevitable.

:blah I don't know why I bother. It's just odd to me that you outright admit you can improve your behavior yet you *choose* not to do so until somebody gives you a chance...that's not how life works. And that's probably a big part of why people won't give you a chance. (IMO it sounds like people have given you lots of chances, you just didn't make the best use of them, but whatever.) If you threw one of your screaming fits in front of me, or started saying mean things to me that you actually wanted to say to your ex (WTF?), I'd turn and run the other way and never look back. And I would be kicking myself for having given you that chance.


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

tehuti88 said:


> You say you have the ability to "put more work" into preventing your juvenile behavior. *Put more work into not having tantrums now.* See if that helps any. Nothing else you've tried has worked, so be scientific and try this for a change.
> 
> Relationships aren't around to fix your anger problems. And even you admit that when you had relationships, they didn't fix you. They just delayed the inevitable.
> 
> :blah I don't know why I bother. It's just odd to me that you outright admit you can improve your behavior yet you *choose* not to do so until somebody gives you a chance...that's not how life works. And that's probably a big part of why people won't give you a chance. (IMO it sounds like people have given you lots of chances, you just didn't make the best use of them, but whatever.) If you threw one of your screaming fits in front of me, or started saying mean things to me that you actually wanted to say to your ex (WTF?), I'd turn and run the other way and never look back. And I would be kicking myself for having given you that chance.


Well since I don't throw tantrums on daily basis but rather once in few weeks, the fact that people don't talk to me means that

either

1. There are other problems that cause those

or

2. During those few times I did throw tantrums people spread the rumors about it

In case of 1, I need to talk about those other issues which is what I do here. In case of 2, the question is: suppose I stop throwing tantrums, will people be able to forgive me for the past, despite all those rumors? That would be another example of giving me a chance. I am not saying there are rumors: obviously people won't talk about me in front of me, they are talking behind my back, so I have no idea one way or the other. I am just trying to look at different possibilities.


----------



## caveman8 (Sep 3, 2012)

causalset said:


> But social awarenness is about social conventions. So if it is just the two of us interacting, why would conventions be important as long as we understand each other? In fact, isn't it a bonus that I am being a genuine individual as opposed to just playing some social game?
> ....
> 
> If by fun you mean smiling, then the typical feedback I get is that I never smile. Yet when I talk to girls that do act welcoming then they compliment me on my smile. So this leads me to say that the reason I don't smile most of the time is that I feel rejected most oF the time, so if that downward spiral was broken I would smile more.


Social awareness is just that - awareness. Conventions aren't the same. Dynamics are different but awareness still applies whether it's two or twenty.

You don't have to say whatever's on your mind to be considered genuine (eg maybe allowing others to make mistakes, without commenting even though you might want to).

Fun in general, is all. Doesn't mean smiling all the time, but it helps to be less serious. I think though it's hard to comment on this without seeing you interact - do you try to present an image of perfection or something approaching that, or a hard outer shell type, something like that?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## caveman8 (Sep 3, 2012)

causalset said:


> .
> 
> In social interactions its different: socially I only get one opportunity in months, and if I screw it up, what else am I to do other than dwell on it? You see, learning takes lots of practice and repetitions. But if socially I am not offered an opportunity for practice and repetitions, thats why its a lot harder to learn. So I feel like if I were to have a girlfriend, who would introduce me to her friends, and make me interact with them regularly, then I would learn a lot better.


Interesting...just had a thought before I saw this. I was wondering how you interact with those you come into contact with daily, your class, the supermarket cashier, etc. Do you consider these to be social interactions? What I'm getting at is do you just try to turn on the charm with potential dates or relationships, or (on a different level, of course) do you do this with others who you have nothing to gain from?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

caveman8 said:


> Interesting...just had a thought before I saw this. I was wondering how you interact with those you come into contact with daily, your class, the supermarket cashier, etc. Do you consider these to be social interactions? What I'm getting at is do you just try to turn on the charm with potential dates or relationships, or (on a different level, of course) do you do this with others who you have nothing to gain from?


I would give different answers depending on what time period you talk about. Back when I was in my 20-s, I was thinking of dating sites as "social interactions" and ignoring everything else -- especially people in my classes but also anyone else I run into face to face. Looking back, I remember a waitress in a restant, a cashier at a grocery store, and another cashier at Jimmy Jones, who kept trying to chat me up, but I was ingoring them because I was behind on my schoolwork (in case of the waitress) or on my way to home to bed (in case of the other two). Why? Because I was making up for the time I wasted on dating sites! WHich is ironic: I was obsessing with dating sites and because of it ignoring girls right in front of me.

But like I said that was back in my 20s. Right now my attitude changed and, in fact, I am obsessing about people in my classes, cashiers, and so forth as I wish to get the chance I got back then. But, unfortunately, none of them talk to me. I don't, however, try to chat to them. Rather what I do is I stare at them waiting for them to talk to me first, and none of them do. THen eventually as weeks go by I give up trying and don't look at them any more, but still its pretty hard to hear them being friendly with each other while totally ignoring me.

But I gues your point still applies to me today, but with different examples: the people at my mom's house. Right now I am visitting my mom for summer break and she is nagging me to say hello to my grandmother, which I find quite annoying since my grandma is 99 year old and not very responsive, so to me it feels like being forced to say hello to a piece of furniture. Similarly, my mom also has to nag me to say hello to the people who take care of my grandmother, and those are typically females in their 40-s or 50-s, and one male in his 20-s. So I guess its entirely possible that there are other examples of people I ignore, I just can't think of them since my mom isn't around to point them out to me.

I don't, however, ignore all males: for example, when a male in a Christian group agreed with me I am not socially accepted I was throwing fits about other males in that group not talkign to me. It was also bothering me why my male roommates ignore me and why one of the male officemates gave me silent treatment. But, in all of those cases, I was simply using those males as representatives of humankind as a whole and then saying "thats also why girls don't talk to me". So I guess if it wasn't for the analogy with girls, this in itself wouldn't have bothered me as much but still would I guess. Maybe part of it is that I tend to focus more on people that ignore me more, which is why at my mom's place I don't care since over there I know no one will ostracize me.

Or maybe part of it is that I have different perception as to when its approrpiate and when it is inappropriate to say hello, and I tend to think its inappropriate unless people say it first. And that underlying issue has different ramifications in case of people I am obsessing about (such as my classmates) and people I don't care about (such as people at my mom's place). In case of people I am obsessing about, each time I am given an advice "why don't you talk to them first" I take it as a cop-out and continue to obsess as to why don't THEY talk to me first. In case of people at my mom's place each time she tells me to say "hello" I am like "who cares about those pieces of furniture, why doesn't she leave me alone?!" But in both cases I am uncomfortable with an idea of being the first to say hello, for whatever reason, and everything else is in that context.

Oh wait a second. I guess I could just think of one of my blind spots. So professors don't seem to avoid me, but I don't care about them, I just focus on my fellow graduate students as well as cashiers. Still however, I can't see how profesors can help my social life.


----------



## Twilightforce (Aug 7, 2016)

No


----------



## MobiusX (Nov 14, 2008)

I don't like the fact people in my life put this idea in my head that because I'm an adult that I should be dating and thinking otherwise is abnormal and somehow makes me incomplete. I'm going to be 33, never had a girlfriend. This dating stuff isn't for everyone. It's not even necessary for someone's survival in life to even have sex but yet they refer to it as " sex life " like it's an entirely separate life of its own that is separate from your regular life. " How is your sex life? " You never hear people asking this about other things, Let me give you some examples, " How is your eating life?", " How is your sleeping life?". Well sex is just something you do that doesn't last long like a hobby so let's try to apply this on hobby activities. " How is your skateboard life?", " How is your swimming life?" See, it doesn't make sense.


----------



## Dominico (Dec 14, 2016)

first, I LOVE the use of Philosophic Logic here god that's hot  BWAAHAHA still, my own quirks aside (I"m anything but a math nerd and doubt i look all that intelligent.. but in reality i'm deaf and no one cares to talk to me in a way that i can listen.... Go figure)

second to my dear persephone the dread my interpretation on that topic of him mentally gender switching... he's trying to take advice period, and to be advised... but the advice he gets from those of a like position(in other words as a guy from guys) that advice isn't what he wants... so he'll take the advice that is given to women over the advice that is given to men, and when i say given to women, it SOUNDS something like a case of reading cosmopolitan to get hints on how woman think/what they want etc.....it's not the case that he's taking advice meant to allow women to attract men into a long term relationship... it IS the case that he is trying to do something other than what his initial inclination to do was, and he went about it in a logical enough manner in the sense of 'researching' it if you will, seeking out the opinions of others based on their experiences, because he was inexperienced in this particular manner as it was (hey we're ALL inexperienced once right?) so ultimately it's not that he's applying tactics that women use to get men, it's that between what the men tell him to do (when theirs and his objectives are so completely different as to render said advice completely.... irrelevant)
and what the women tell him to do, at least if he does what the women tell him to do, then hypothetiically he should actually be a step ahead, after all if he does what the women do to get guys, but does it to women... then he is only treating them how they would treat him if they followed the same advice... so he'd be giving as good as he got, but in this particular scenario i'm willing to bet that that isn't what he's getting from women, and thus i would applaud him his efforts to be an example, and i would encourage him to be different in his approach to this as he is when it comes to the mindset at least.... so long as he is sincerely thinking this way and not just secretly a chauvinist right? still... it's not that he's doing it as backwards as you suggest he actually has a pretty sound foundation after all, is that not what we are all taught, to do unto others what you would have them do unto you?


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

MobiusX said:


> I don't like the fact people in my life put this idea in my head that because I'm an adult that I should be dating and thinking otherwise is abnormal and somehow makes me incomplete


And I resent people for telling me the opposite: not to care about it. I mean, like you said, they know full well its important. So when they are telling me it isn't, they are basically lying because they think I am not deserving any better. I guess we should trade places: you get people to leave you alone and I get people to emphasize with my needs.



MobiusX said:


> It's not even necessary for someone's survival in life to even have sex


Yes it is: you want your genes passed so it is the form of survival. But, to be clear, I don't believe in sex before marriage. So what I just said refers to sex after marriage. Basically I have to have sex at some point in life, even if it is at the age of 50, but I have to get my genes passed. So when people assume I won't ever get my genes passed its like they think my genes don't deserve surviving.



MobiusX said:


> but yet they refer to it as " sex life " like it's an entirely separate life of its own that is separate from your regular life. " How is your sex life? " You never hear people asking this about other things, Let me give you some examples, " How is your eating life?", " How is your sleeping life?". Well sex is just something you do that doesn't last long like a hobby so let's try to apply this on hobby activities. " How is your skateboard life?", " How is your swimming life?" See, it doesn't make sense.


Fact: they think its important for whatever reason (as evident from what you just said). Now, it doesn't even matter if they are right or wrong. If they think it is important but they are telling me its not, it means they are lying to me, which is why I get offended. So consider yourself lucky: at least they aren't trying to exclude you the wya they are trying to exclude me. So at least they don't think of you as much of a loser as they think of me.


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

Dominico said:


> first, I LOVE the use of Philosophic Logic here god that's hot  BWAAHAHA still, my own quirks aside (I"m anything but a math nerd and doubt i look all that intelligent.. but in reality i'm deaf and no one cares to talk to me in a way that i can listen.... Go figure)
> 
> second to my dear persephone the dread my interpretation on that topic of him mentally gender switching... he's trying to take advice period, and to be advised... but the advice he gets from those of a like position(in other words as a guy from guys) that advice isn't what he wants... so he'll take the advice that is given to women over the advice that is given to men, and when i say given to women, it SOUNDS something like a case of reading cosmopolitan to get hints on how woman think/what they want etc.....it's not the case that he's taking advice meant to allow women to attract men into a long term relationship... it IS the case that he is trying to do something other than what his initial inclination to do was, and he went about it in a logical enough manner in the sense of 'researching' it if you will, seeking out the opinions of others based on their experiences, because he was inexperienced in this particular manner as it was (hey we're ALL inexperienced once right?) so ultimately it's not that he's applying tactics that women use to get men, it's that between what the men tell him to do (when theirs and his objectives are so completely different as to render said advice completely.... irrelevant)
> and what the women tell him to do, at least if he does what the women tell him to do, then hypothetiically he should actually be a step ahead, after all if he does what the women do to get guys, but does it to women... then he is only treating them how they would treat him if they followed the same advice... so he'd be giving as good as he got, but in this particular scenario i'm willing to bet that that isn't what he's getting from women, and thus i would applaud him his efforts to be an example, and i would encourage him to be different in his approach to this as he is when it comes to the mindset at least.... so long as he is sincerely thinking this way and not just secretly a chauvinist right? still... it's not that he's doing it as backwards as you suggest he actually has a pretty sound foundation after all, is that not what we are all taught, to do unto others what you would have them do unto you?


Yes exactly. There are two separate reasons why I would take female advice more seriously. First, like I mentioned in OP, it tends to be geared more to serious relationship rather than getting laid. And, secondly, since I am trying to understand women better, obviously its more reliable to let women speak for themselves rather than for males to try to read their mind. Speaking of "speaking for oneself" it would be even more effective to let the specific women I have issues with to talk about it, but since they refuse to talk then I guess listening to other women is a next best option. I guess in general it would be more effective for males to give advice to females and for females to give advice to males, that way each gender will actually know the thought processes of the other gender. But then again, having males inform females that males just want to get laid won't really help me since I am that rare male that wants committed relationship. So I guess letting individuals speak for themselves is even better than dating advice. But I guess if one "has" to get a dating advice for whatever reason, probably the advice from the opposite gender would be helpful.


----------



## LonelyLurker (Sep 24, 2016)

causalset said:


> Yes it is: you want your genes passed so it is the form of survival.


Out of interest why is it so important for you to be able to pass on your genes? I couldn't care less, in fact I think it would probably be for the best if I didn't. I'm not suggesting you shouldn't feel the way you do, just wondering if you've ever taken the time to think about why.



causalset said:


> Yes exactly. There are two separate reasons why I would take female advice more seriously. First, like I mentioned in OP, it tends to be geared more to serious relationship rather than getting laid. And, secondly, since I am trying to understand women better, obviously its more reliable to let women speak for themselves rather than for males to try to read their mind. Speaking of "speaking for oneself" it would be even more effective to let the specific women I have issues with to talk about it, but since they refuse to talk then I guess listening to other women is a next best option. I guess in general it would be more effective for males to give advice to females and for females to give advice to males, that way each gender will actually know the thought processes of the other gender. But then again, having males inform females that males just want to get laid won't really help me since I am that rare male that wants committed relationship. So I guess letting individuals speak for themselves is even better than dating advice. But I guess if one "has" to get a dating advice for whatever reason, probably the advice from the opposite gender would be helpful.


This outlook is logically flawed on a number of levels, it's like researching trains to learn how to swim, I mean they're both forms of travel and trains are faster too, right?

Plus, while you may want to hear what women have to say you don't appear to want to actually understand what they say. This is evidenced by your dismissal of what women in your past have told you.

And just in case you haven't made the link, being attractive to a woman is the road to both sex and relationships (most women like to be in relationships with men they're attracted to, what they're attracted to will of course vary depending on the individual).

You should also be aware that the idea that most men don't want relationships is just something that some bitter women say. It's no different from "all women are gold diggers". It's not hard to find supporting evidence but it isn't representative of the whole group. I won't try to speak for all men either but I suspect most of us want both sex *and* a good relationship.


----------



## MobiusX (Nov 14, 2008)

causalset said:


> And I resent people for telling me the opposite: not to care about it. I mean, like you said, they know full well its important. So when they are telling me it isn't, they are basically lying because they think I am not deserving any better. I guess we should trade places: you get people to leave you alone and I get people to emphasize with my needs.
> 
> Yes it is: you want your genes passed so it is the form of survival. But, to be clear, I don't believe in sex before marriage. So what I just said refers to sex after marriage. Basically I have to have sex at some point in life, even if it is at the age of 50, but I have to get my genes passed. So when people assume I won't ever get my genes passed its like they think my genes don't deserve surviving.
> 
> Fact: they think its important for whatever reason (as evident from what you just said). Now, it doesn't even matter if they are right or wrong. If they think it is important but they are telling me its not, it means they are lying to me, which is why I get offended. So consider yourself lucky: at least they aren't trying to exclude you the wya they are trying to exclude me. So at least they don't think of you as much of a loser as they think of me.


Its not important for that individual to do to remain alive, plus we have advance technology now. I want sex but dont want to bother being in a relationship then I just use a fleshlight.


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

LonelyLurker said:


> Out of interest why is it so important for you to be able to pass on your genes? I couldn't care less, in fact I think it would probably be for the best if I didn't. I'm not suggesting you shouldn't feel the way you do, just wondering if you've ever taken the time to think about why.


Because I am not going to live forever, but if my genes pass then they will live forever. So not letting my genes passed is a slow version of execution in long-time scale. The fact that people care about things that keep me alive but they don't care about enabling me to pass my genes implies that they think I should be executted but they want to execute me in a "humane" way so that I have a good time during the 70 years it takes to execute me.



LonelyLurker said:


> This outlook is logically flawed on a number of levels, it's like researching trains to learn how to swim, I mean they're both forms of travel and trains are faster too, right?


What are you referring to by that analogy? Are you talking about my reading advice directed at women? But you weren't quoting that part of my text, you were quoting something else, thats why I am a bit confused.



LonelyLurker said:


> Plus, while you may want to hear what women have to say you don't appear to want to actually understand what they say. This is evidenced by your dismissal of what women in your past have told you.


OF COURSE I want to know what women think. If women reject me, it would hurt less if at least I understand their thinking processes. Thats not to say I want to accept rejection either: I do want to find a girlfriend. But I still want to know the thinking processes of women that rejected me (as evident from the way , when I did have girlfriends, I was asking them to explain me why women prior to htem rejected me).

Now, here is where miscommunication might have been. If I have a question, and I get an answer, then oftentimes I find that answer unsatisfactory and I want additional answer that would explain to me why the parts of the first answer that I found unsatisfactory actually make sense. In this case the other person often feels I am being dismissive; but I am not: on the contrary I am trying to get them to elaborate on their answer some more. And I am not saying I want them to change their answer either: no, I want them to stick to the original one since, obviously, whatever it is they originally said is the most honest answer (while changing it would basically mean saying whatever I want to get me off the back). Rather what I want them to do is further justify various parts of original answer and/or refute my reasons as to why they don't make sense.

I guess the only exception to this would be a woman whom I want to date (as opposed to a woman whom I an trying to get an advice regarding ohter women). In this case, obviously, I do want her to change her mind since I want her to date me. But that doesn't mean that I want to dismiss her concerns either. Rather I want to address them -- and addressing is very different from dismissing them. For example, if she says I talk about myself too much, then I agree with her: its bad to talk about myself; BUT I can address it: namely, I will stop talking about myself once I am in a relationship because going out and doing stuf will put me in a more healthy state of mind. But then she is welcome to tell me why she doesn't think I can change and I will respond as to why I think I can. See? What I want is a dialog when neither side dismisses the other.



LonelyLurker said:


> And just in case you haven't made the link, being attractive to a woman is the road to both sex and relationships (most women like to be in relationships with men they're attracted to, what they're attracted to will of course vary depending on the individual).


I am well aware of that, and yes I do want to be attractive to women. But, if you re-read my original post, what I was complaining about was an advice not to pay for meals because, presumably, that would make a relationship "more" likely and instant sex "less" likely. Now I don't have any opinion on who should pay for meals, nor do I have an opinion on whether or not the implication of paying or not paying is the one that site says it is; but what I disagree with is the whole premise that sex is more important than long term relationship. If they assume that doing something makes relationship more likely and sex less likely, they conclude its a bad idea. So that thought process indicates they just want to get laid. And another example, again from that site, was the "test" I took. So one of the questions was: if a woman wants long term relationship and I am not inclided to it, what should I do? And the answer that I wanted to pick (namely, agree to have relationship wiht her anyway) just wasn't there.



LonelyLurker said:


> You should also be aware that the idea that most men don't want relationships is just something that some bitter women say. It's no different from "all women are gold diggers". It's not hard to find supporting evidence but it isn't representative of the whole group. I won't try to speak for all men either but I suspect most of us want both sex *and* a good relationship.


I have personally wittnessed guys talking about girls as if they are piece of emeat, such as my former tenet talking about a certain woman in a coffee shop with my former landlord ex-boyfriend. I also read on some site where woman was explaining that female profiles on dating sites get hit on a lot, with dirty remarks in the very first messages. Now I realize that it doesn't represent all men, but the fact thtat there are "enough" of those jerks around is what creates the "bitter women" you were referring to and, therefore, ruins things for nice guys.


----------



## LonelyLurker (Sep 24, 2016)

causalset said:


> Because I am not going to live forever, but if my genes pass then they will live forever. So not letting my genes passed is a slow version of execution in long-time scale.


That's like saying not winning the lottery is a slow form of robbery. You're being overly dramatic.



causalset said:


> The fact that people care about things that keep me alive but they don't care about enabling me to pass my genes implies that they think I should be executted but they want to execute me in a "humane" way so that I have a good time during the 70 years it takes to execute me.


Or, maybe they have other things to worry about and aren't all that concerned about whether you have children or not. The truth is that most people neither love you nor hate you, most people are indifferent towards you.



causalset said:


> What are you referring to by that analogy? Are you talking about my reading advice directed at women? But you weren't quoting that part of my text, you were quoting something else, thats why I am a bit confused.


Yes, that's what I'm referring to. You're not a woman, you aren't trying to attract men, there are different social expectations etc. Actually, tell me 2 or 3 things you've learnt from looking at advice aimed at women, I may be judging too quickly.



causalset said:


> OF COURSE I want to know what women think. If women reject me, it would hurt less if at least I understand their thinking processes. Thats not to say I want to accept rejection either: I do want to find a girlfriend. But I still want to know the thinking processes of women that rejected me (as evident from the way , when I did have girlfriends, I was asking them to explain me why women prior to htem rejected me).


To give an example, one woman essentially told you to stop shouting. The correct response to that is to either stop shouting or decide that shouting is too important to you and stop talking to her. Not get upset at her entirely understandable reaction of being annoyed at you displaying a lack of consideration and ignoring her.



causalset said:


> Now, here is where miscommunication might have been. If I have a question, and I get an answer, then oftentimes I find that answer unsatisfactory and I want additional answer that would explain to me why the parts of the first answer that I found unsatisfactory actually make sense. In this case the other person often feels I am being dismissive; but I am not: on the contrary I am trying to get them to elaborate on their answer some more. And I am not saying I want them to change their answer either: no, I want them to stick to the original one since, obviously, whatever it is they originally said is the most honest answer (while changing it would basically mean saying whatever I want to get me off the back). Rather what I want them to do is further justify various parts of original answer and/or refute my reasons as to why they don't make sense.


That might be what you want but clearly that's not what they want. Given that they can find men that don't require that and by the sounds of things you struggle to find women that want to do it your way, you will have to make the effort, not them. You will have to figure things out independently, you will have to monitor your behaviour, you will need to be the one who explains not them.

You could get lucky and find someone who is willing to do the heavy lifting but that plan doesn't seem to be working out for you. Is it fair? Maybe not. Does that unfairness change anything? Not in the slightest.



causalset said:


> For example, if she says I talk about myself too much, then I agree with her: its bad to talk about myself; BUT I can address it: namely, I will stop talking about myself once I am in a relationship because going out and doing stuf will put me in a more healthy state of mind.


The reason you're supposed to stop doing things that upset/annoy your partner (within reason) is because it upsets/annoys them, not because circumstances have changed and you don't feel a desire to do it any longer. That's a very selfish way of viewing a relationship as everything would revolve around how you feel and what you want to do.



causalset said:


> I am well aware of that, and yes I do want to be attractive to women. But, if you re-read my original post, what I was complaining about was an advice not to pay for meals because, presumably, that would make a relationship "more" likely and instant sex "less" likely.


That sounds like some PUA advice, that is directed at a certain type of man trying to attract a certain type of woman. If you aren't that kind of man and aren't looking for that kind of woman then why do you care about what they have to say? Personally, any woman who would fall for the kind of tricks suggested by these people would instantly disqualify herself from my interest.



causalset said:


> I have personally wittnessed guys talking about girls as if they are piece of emeat, such as my former tenet talking about a certain woman in a coffee shop with my former landlord ex-boyfriend. I also read on some site where woman was explaining that female profiles on dating sites get hit on a lot, with dirty remarks in the very first messages. Now I realize that it doesn't represent all men, but the fact thtat there are "enough" of those jerks around is what creates the "bitter women" you were referring to and, therefore, ruins things for nice guys.


Are there plenty of men who want relationships and are able to have them? Yes, therefore it is possible for men to find relationships. That's all you need to know, that isn't the reason you are being rejected.


----------



## Witchblade (Jun 17, 2017)

causalset said:


> Now, here is where miscommunication might have been. If I have a question, and I get an answer, then oftentimes I find that answer unsatisfactory and I want additional answer that would explain to me why the parts of the first answer that I found unsatisfactory actually make sense. In this case the other person often feels I am being dismissive; but I am not: on the contrary I am trying to get them to elaborate on their answer some more. And I am not saying I want them to change their answer either: no, I want them to stick to the original one since, obviously, whatever it is they originally said is the most honest answer (while changing it would basically mean saying whatever I want to get me off the back). Rather what I want them to do is further justify various parts of original answer and/or refute my reasons as to why they don't make sense.


Most of the time your dissatisfaction doesn't seem to be because the answer doesn't make sense, but because you just emotionally don't like it.


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

Witchblade said:


> Most of the time your dissatisfaction doesn't seem to be because the answer doesn't make sense, but because you just emotionally don't like it.


The two things are related. Most people don't like to think of themselves as shallow, so whatever they do, they find emotional justification for it. So the fact that I feel its unfair and they feel its perfectly fair means that I don't entirely understand where they are coming from.


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

LonelyLurker said:


> That's like saying not winning the lottery is a slow form of robbery. You're being overly dramatic.


The only people lottery "robs" are the ones who bought lottery ticket, and it is entirely volunterely: if you don't want to be robbed, don't buy the ticket. But in case of passing genes its not volunterily: simply deciding that you don't care about children isn't going to save you from dying.



LonelyLurker said:


> Or, maybe they have other things to worry about and aren't all that concerned about whether you have children or not. The truth is that most people neither love you nor hate you, most people are indifferent towards you.


I can think of a couple of people that do care about me:

1. My mom's landlord's granddaughter. Even though we only get to talk once in few years, she kept asking her dad how I was doing and was telling him she was missing me and was excited to talk to me each time both herself and me visit my mom at the same time. Now, she asked me how is my relationship with my last ex, I told her she broke up with me quite a while ago, but then I mentioned that I hope to find someone to date eventually because I need to have children. And she said "how can you have children if you don't know how to treat them nicely" and then she made a reference to how I was using F word just for the heck of it like 20 years ago when I was a teen, thus assuming I can't change. Now its true she only sees me once in few years, but still its pretty frustrating that she assumes I haven't changed from the time she knew me several years ago and also that I will never change several years into future.

2. I met a girl in church who remembers me from 15 years ago back when I went to a different school. She was really excited that she ran into me and she was telling all her friends about it. As of now, she is married, she married a year ago. But, for some reason, she never asked me whether or not I am dating someone, thus merely assuming that I am not. She invited me to the bible studies she holds at her home. We were going over some verse that somehow she applied to how well she gets along with her husband. In response to that, I tried to apply what she said to my past relationships, and she, as well as everyone else in the room, totally ignored my point, which makes me wonder whether or not they assumed that my ex-s were imaginary since I am undatable.

As you see both of those people care about me since they are both excited to see me. Yet they somehow assume I won't have children.



LonelyLurker said:


> Yes, that's what I'm referring to. You're not a woman, you aren't trying to attract men, there are different social expectations etc. Actually, tell me 2 or 3 things you've learnt from looking at advice aimed at women, I may be judging too quickly.


I was googling "why do people assume you are not ready for a relationship" and "why do people say you have to be happy with yourself before you are happy with someone else". And in both of those searches I was running almost exclusively on advice directed to women. This, by the way, also makes me wonder why do the females who reject me tell me I should be happy with myself first, yet no *sincere* advice of this type is directed towards men. So this makes me think they were just trying to get me off their back.



LonelyLurker said:


> To give an example, one woman essentially told you to stop shouting. The correct response to that is to either stop shouting or decide that shouting is too important to you and stop talking to her. Not get upset at her entirely understandable reaction of being annoyed at you displaying a lack of consideration and ignoring her.


You are referring to @tehuti88 aren't you? In this case, I was never upset with her telling me to stop showting. You are probably confusing it with one of the other things listed below:

1. Long before she ever told me to stop showting, she was saying something completely different: that it is useless to explain things to me because of my diagnosis. Apart from saying it to me, she was also saying it to other members that tried to explain anything to me. Of course, I got angry for that. But that was a long time ago, and it had nothing to do with showting. As far as what she says about showting, I have no issues with that because its a pretty reasonable advice.

2. In the context of my talking about showting, I mentioned that I was angry at various people OTHER THAN her (I was saying people did this or that to make me mad thats why I showted, and also I am mad at the way they over-reacted to my showting). But those people are NOT @tehuti88 (as a matter of fact they aren't participating in this forum on the first place) so being angry at THEM is not the same as bing angry at @tehuti88

3. I was pointing out to her that my issues are more complicated than just the showting thing. But thats not the same as being angry either. I was telling this to her very calmly. If it came across differently then it must have beem misphrasing or miscommunication of some sort.

That might be what you want but clearly that's not what they want. Given that they can find men that don't require that and by the sounds of things you struggle to find women that want to do it your way, you will have to make the effort, not them. You will have to figure things out independently, you will have to monitor your behaviour, you will need to be the one who explains not them.

You could get lucky and find someone who is willing to do the heavy lifting but that plan doesn't seem to be working out for you. Is it fair? Maybe not. Does that unfairness change anything? Not in the slightest.



LonelyLurker said:


> The reason you're supposed to stop doing things that upset/annoy your partner (within reason) is because it upsets/annoys them, not because circumstances have changed and you don't feel a desire to do it any longer. That's a very selfish way of viewing a relationship as everything would revolve around how you feel and what you want to do.


Its not either/or, its both. And yes I DID tell the girls that were rejecting me that I would be making those changes FOR THEM, but to that they were responding "oh no you shouldn't change for other people, you should change for yourself", and then I would say "alright I am changing for myself, here is how those changes would benefit me" but then they would just dismiss it. But you are right, I shouldn't be selfish: but that only raises the question as to why do girls tell me to be selfish if selfishness is such a bad idea? Do they hold to the philosophy that if someone has bad habbit that they believe can never change, then they have to encourage that person to stick to that habbit? So, if they were to meet a habitual drinker who says he wants to stop drinking, but they don't believe him he can, will they tell him to continue to drink just so that he can "be himself"?!



LonelyLurker said:


> That sounds like some PUA advice, that is directed at a certain type of man trying to attract a certain type of woman. If you aren't that kind of man and aren't looking for that kind of woman then why do you care about what they have to say? Personally, any woman who would fall for the kind of tricks suggested by these people would instantly disqualify herself from my interest.


And where can I find advice for men that is *not* PUA?



LonelyLurker said:


> Are there plenty of men who want relationships and are able to have them? Yes, therefore it is possible for men to find relationships. That's all you need to know, that isn't the reason you are being rejected.


Okay, then maybe men with poor social skills are used as a scapegoats for all the male problems. Because the last girl I talked to online DID mention her problems with trusting men as a reason she won't date me. So maybe girls start off with "correct" statement that "some men cheat and others don't" but then they have to figure out what man is which, and that is the part they do wrongly: they decide that hte men they aren't attracted to are the ones that cheat, which isn't true.

Okay I guess with that last girl her "real" reason for rejecting me was that I talked about ex-s too much so maybe talking about ex-s is a sign of cheater. But still, there were other girls who rejected me becuase they didn't believe me that I like them or mistrusted me in other ways. Plus look at all the women that speed up their walk, look away and/or cross the street when they pass me by. Thats what makes me think I am scapegoat for all the male problems.


----------



## Malek (Oct 4, 2012)

It's called reverse psychology. Both men and women want a challenge.

The refusing to pay thing on the 1st date is a good test.

You owe her nothing, if she values your company, she'll pay to hangout, a cheap place would be wise though.
If she agrees to a second date, means she had fun talking with you and wants to get to know you more, regardless of having to pay for a movie ticket or whatever. Again, good test, you don't want a girl who uses men for free meals and movies, I've dated a couple in the past and learned the hard way to always go even steven on the first few dates to see if she's worthy.

Studies indicate that more women today are earning much more than men, they can afford to pay for themselves.

An entitled princess and a desperate guy willing to pay for everything is not a fun date at all. Two equals enjoying a night out would be preferable, no?


All I ever wanted was a committed relationship, yet this world is riddled with liars and cheaters, most people don't have morals or values, it's hard to tell the difference between friends and foes. Most women are sirens who will drown you and most men stab their supposed best friend in the back with a rusty dagger if it meant he could hookup with said siren. Don't believe me?---Well look around yeh. Nine out of ten people act entitled and don't want to take responsibility for their actions, they all desire to have their cake, and eat it too. They want the best perks in life, yet none of the obligations that come with said perks.

People all around have forgotten the golden rule: This world owes you nothing. You want something?--Learn what it is you need to do, and work hard for it. Even then you might not get it, why?---Because this world owes everyone nothing. Even life itself is a gift and you should be grateful you draw breath. Yet we all constantly forget, tis human nature, our ego.


----------



## LonelyLurker (Sep 24, 2016)

causalset said:


> The only people lottery "robs" are the ones who bought lottery ticket, and it is entirely volunterely: if you don't want to be robbed, don't buy the ticket. But in case of passing genes its not volunterily: simply deciding that you don't care about children isn't going to save you from dying.


My point is that not getting something isn't the same as having something taken from you.

Of course passing on genes is voluntary, if it wasn't you'd have nothing to worry about.

Having children won't stop you from dying either, I don't fear death, maybe that's the difference between you and I when it comes to this subject.



causalset said:


> As you see both of those people care about me since they are both excited to see me. Yet they somehow assume I won't have children.


The first woman didn't say you won't have children, she _perhaps_ suggested that you shouldn't unless you change your behaviour. The second one simply didn't ask you the question, you're not a mind reader, stop attributing motives. The group probably ignored you as you essentially tried to make it about yourself. I think you were probably just trying to relate and therefore build rapport, but there are certain ways to do these things (otherwise you come off as a narcissist).



causalset said:


> This, by the way, also makes me wonder why do the females who reject me tell me I should be happy with myself first, yet no *sincere* advice of this type is directed towards men. So this makes me think they were just trying to get me off their back.


That's fairly standard clichéd advice and as is the case for most clichés, people say it because they've heard others say it.

What you probably *have* seen directed to men is that women are attracted to confidence, if you like yourself you're more likely to be confident.



causalset said:


> You are referring to @tehuti88 aren't you?


No, I'm referring to your story about being on a date with someone, her telling you not speak so loudly, you ignoring her, her repeatedly telling you and your take home point being that she rudely kept interrupting you.



causalset said:


> Its not either/or, its both. And yes I DID tell the girls that were rejecting me that I would be making those changes FOR THEM...


The way you phrase it is that you will change once they have given you a reason to do so. It's like saying "you don't have to worry about me cheating because you can lose weight, then I will find you attractive again and I will be willing to sleep with you exclusively". This also suggests that you will return to your original behaviour if anything changes.



causalset said:


> But you are right, I shouldn't be selfish: but that only raises the question as to why do girls tell me to be selfish if selfishness is such a bad idea?


It's not that binary, sometimes you should be selfish (only dating women you actually like for instance) and sometimes you should be considerate (making an effort not to knowingly upset her for instance).



causalset said:


> And where can I find advice for men that is *not* PUA?


Find men who have what you want and ask them or find the women you want and see what they respond to (not what they *say* they respond to but what you *see* them responding to), magazines (or online articles) are notorious for providing terrible relationship advice (including women's ones), there's no shortage of comedy on the subject.



causalset said:


> Okay I guess with that last girl her "real" reason for rejecting me was that I talked about ex-s too much so maybe talking about ex-s is a sign of cheater. But still, there were other girls who rejected me becuase they didn't believe me that I like them or mistrusted me in other ways. Plus look at all the women that speed up their walk, look away and/or cross the street when they pass me by. Thats what makes me think I am scapegoat for all the male problems.


Talking about your ex all the time isn't the sign of a cheater it's a sign that you haven't put that relationship behind you. Why would she want to live in the shadow of your previous relationship, this is where your empathy should have kicked in, maybe you could work on that.

Or, maybe you are the one doing things that put them off. You need to accept personal responsibility. Not so I can beat up on you, but so you can begin to address those problems.

That's the only way you'll be able to make your future differ from your past.


----------



## Witchblade (Jun 17, 2017)

Malek said:


> An entitled princess and a desperate guy willing to pay for everything is not a fun date at all. Two equals enjoying a night out would be preferable, no?


I can't agree that paying for a date is being desperate, or that it makes you not equals. It's a way to show her that you're a real man and you take the date and her seriously. It's showing that you're invested in seeing her again, maybe later on she'll buy you something, you don't care about the money because you plan to keep seeing her. It's also very unsexy to sit there dividing bills and figuring out the amount each of you owe, better to be a leader and just pay it, which is of course sending the message that you can take care of her which is sexy even if she doesn't need it.


----------



## Malek (Oct 4, 2012)

Witchblade said:


> I can't agree that paying for a date is being desperate, or that it makes you not equals. It's a way to* show her that you're a real man* and you take the date and her seriously. It's showing that you're invested in seeing her again, maybe later on she'll buy you something, you don't care about the money because you plan to keep seeing her. It's also very unsexy to sit there dividing bills and figuring out the amount each of you owe, better to be a leader and just pay it, which is of course sending the message that you can take care of her which is sexy even if she doesn't need it.


Yawn, I treated a few girls to dates and none of them appreciated me even though I work 60 hours a week. It isn't about the money, I just learned the hard way, and quite frankly I'm tired of being played. This is a guy's personal **** test to see if she's genuinely interested or only values you for your $, which can evaporate at any time. At least this way a guy will "know" where he stands on the attractive scale if she's still willing to hangout after "she" is the one investing in the relationship as well. Yeah? Mutual trust is a window that works both ways, c'mon people. What the heck is a simple meal or a movie ticket to her anyways? That's nothing, it's the principle of the matter.

The girls I treat like **** want me more and the ones that I wanted to treat right all cheated on me, led me on, hooked up with my ex-friends.

Sorry but I respectfully disagree.






I pick her up, isn't that enough? After date four or so and she's still flirting back with me, then I'll pay for whatever the hell she wants, that is if it's reasonable and isn't taking advantage of me. Rare as hell these days.


----------



## Witchblade (Jun 17, 2017)

Malek said:


> Yawn


I suspect your bitterness shines through more than you realize, and that's why you're having such a lack of success in dating; not because you've paid for dates. I'm not sure how you measure "want you more" when you still complain about being a virgin, obviously none of them have ever wanted you.


----------



## ImperfectCircle (Jun 1, 2017)

Witchblade said:


> I suspect your bitterness shines through more than you realize, and that's why you're having such a lack of success in dating; not because you've paid for dates. I'm not sure how you measure "want you more" when you still complain about being a virgin, obviously none of them have ever wanted you.


No, you forgot the golden rule of getting laid: It's always her fault.


----------



## sad1231234 (Jul 10, 2016)

You probably arent the only one lol


----------



## Qolselanu (Feb 15, 2006)

causalset, I recommend reading some articles from therationalmale.com. It'll show you a different way of looking at relationships and dating that I think will be useful for you. At least check out the Year One "best of" here: https://therationalmale.com/the-best-of-rational-male-year-one/

I would start with the articles "The Desire Dynamic," "Imagination," and "Just Be Yourself."


----------



## Malek (Oct 4, 2012)

Witchblade said:


> I can't agree that paying for a date is being desperate, or that it makes you not equals. It's a way to show her *that you're a real man* and you take the date and her seriously. It's showing that you're invested in seeing her again, maybe later on she'll buy you something, you don't care about the money because you plan to keep seeing her. It's also very unsexy to sit there dividing bills and figuring out the amount each of you owe, better to be a leader and just pay it, which is of course sending the message that you can take care of her which is sexy even if she doesn't need it.


Listening to women like you is pointless. This statement alone illustrates how you view men, as nothing more than tools to utilize and toss aside once they're broken.

Also you make too many assumptions. I'm not a virgin anymore sadly, though I honestly wish I was, I was saving that for someone special and the girl who stole it from me was lying behind my back and seeing two other guys. I used to be Catholic yet now I'm agnostic, seems wiser to realize that blind kindness is deemed as a weakness in this manipulative world.

I used to love and respect women but now I feel like they are incapable of love, women like you only further prove my suspicions, as messed up and heartless as it may be.

I used to be so happy and full of hope and believe in the concept of love, now it's all gone and I see the world for what it is, a bunch of entitled users who have no remorse whatsoever for wasting someone's time.

I did the things you described multiple times, not expecting anything save for loyalty from a girl, I paid for everything and thought I was happy just for having her company, yet I realized after finding out they actually didn't care about me, that I was being unwise chasing these bad girls.

Why the hell do you think you're qualified to lecture men on here about "being a real man" when you don't know what it's like at all to ask girls out on a date whatsoever? 





I'm giving genuine advice to men on here who are getting screwed over constantly and people like you are telling them they need to "man up" and just pay for everything and get played lol. "Alrighty then..."





I really despise this hot and cold games that people my age always play, yet that's part of the game I guess. I'm average looking or sometimes handsome yet obviously my personality is jaded, I'll admit that. I can get dates but never a loyal girlfriend, third wave feminism is destroying society and what I find appalling is everyone around me, women, and men support it blindly.





If you had a son who kept getting manipulated by girlfriends over and over again, cheated on, being taken for everything, financially, emotionally, everything--- then you'd "maybe" sympathize a tiny bit for men? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

If women don't want me, then why do they constantly tell me I'm good looking, stare at me, and sometimes flirt subtly every other week?---This **** is confusing. The false glimmer of hope that someone out there actually genuinely cares about you as a person is a rather disheartening and depressing cycle to constantly endure time and time again, yet it's an imperative experience of life and teaches people how to see for things for what they truly are.

The other day at work, the bakery girl flirted with me, ergo obviously "some" women want me despite my horrible personality and view towards dating.

I stated "I feel like buying something sweet." and she replied "Sorry, I'm not for sale!" then giggled. She constantly says Hi to me: "Hey Kung Fu fighter!" and stares at me when she thinks I'm not looking.

Yet I'm "shallow" and don't find her attractive because she's a single mom and overweight and I'm skinny yet always chasing girls who desire muscular men---I know this, it's clear as day and yet I'm never allowed to talk about this in real life cause it would tarnish my reputation.

Yet online I can be honest about my thoughts and ruin my reputation on here by stating the truth, or my personal beliefs and perceptions of my specific environment rather.

I constantly pray for someone to show me the light and prove me wrong about my way of thinking, hasn't happened just yet.

I suspect I'm gonna have to work much harder and get more muscle, money, and experience dealing with dating manipulative women and read the signs better, perhaps you're right, perhaps not all women are like that, yet 9/10 times they are in today's world, and what's messed up is it's deemed justified and no one ever calls em out on it lol.

We have laws in western civilization that give women the tools to ruin a good man's life completely just because she fell out of "love" and wasn't satisfied anymore with the marriage and feel like they could do better, that they "deserve" better.





Let's agree to disagree, shall we?


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

Witchblade said:


> I can't agree that paying for a date is being desperate, or that it makes you not equals. It's a way to show her that you're a real man and you take the date and her seriously. It's showing that you're invested in seeing her again, maybe later on she'll buy you something, you don't care about the money because you plan to keep seeing her. It's also very unsexy to sit there dividing bills and figuring out the amount each of you owe, better to be a leader and just pay it, which is of course sending the message that you can take care of her which is sexy even if she doesn't need it.


Ask yourself this question: why is it the men have to prove to the women that they are serious, rather than the other way around? Is it because of a stereotype that men just want to get laid, so they have to prove that they are not "that" type of guy? But then again, men paying for dates is an age-old tradition that is much older than men trying to get laid. So could i be that people just stick totraditions, while providing different justifications to them, which is why, ironically, feminism and patriarchy end up agreeing on men being the ones that are paying (along with asking woman out and so forth)?

In any case, I personally am against gender roles because they prevent each gender from seeing the other gender as human. And it goes both ways: men want to use women for sex, and women are telling men to "man up" when they have real genuine emotional needs that have nothing to do with sex. If gender roles were out of the way then perhaps that would help each gender to see the other as a genuine human.


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

Malek said:


> It's called reverse psychology. Both men and women want a challenge.
> 
> The refusing to pay thing on the 1st date is a good test.
> 
> ...


If you re-read my original post, you will see that I clarified how I didn't disagree with the "statement" that man shouldn't pay, I disagreed with the "reason" behind that satement. Now, your reason is a lot more sound than theirs. You are saying you want to be equal. I agree: in fact thats why I am also against men paying. But they said something entirely different. They said men shouldn't pay because they didn't want the woman to have long term interest in them since that interest would disract her from short term goals. THATS the reason I strongly disagree with, since long term is the main thing I am after.

In any case, I, personally, would either pay or not pay depending on woman's preferences. I am not in a position to be picky about it, since there are too many other things that turn women off, so I don't want to add one more to the list when I don't have to.


----------



## Malek (Oct 4, 2012)

causalset said:


> If you re-read my original post, you will see that I clarified how I didn't disagree with the "statement" that man shouldn't pay, I disagreed with the "reason" behind that satement. Now, your reason is a lot more sound than theirs. You are saying you want to be equal. I agree: in fact thats why I am also against men paying. But they said something entirely different. They said men shouldn't pay because they didn't want the woman to have long term interest in them since that interest would disract her from short term goals. THATS the reason I strongly disagree with, since long term is the main thing I am after.
> 
> In any case, I, personally, would either pay or not pay depending on woman's preferences. I am not in a position to be picky about it, since there are too many other things that turn women off, so I don't want to add one more to the list when I don't have to.


I'm not against paying on dates if the girl is legitimately into you, I'm just saying it's less pressure and wiser to be smart with your money the first few dates. You wanna get a feel on what type of girl you are dealing with, you don't want to be in a relationship with a woman who expects you to pay for everything even though they work too. A first date shouldn't cost more than $20, it's mostly getting to know someone and based on their demeanor you both decide whether or not you wanna see each other again, was the date fun or not?---A date shouldn't cost a man $50-$100, that's what rich men do.... You have to be wise with your money, you'll be able to afford more dates that way lol.

If a woman genuinely appreciates your company, she'll spend a couple bucks to see you, this isn't rocket science. Supply and demand, women desire men who can be a challenge, if you agree to anything and everything, pay for everything right off the bat, then you are illustrating that you don't respect yourself or love yourself. The first key to being successful in life is loving yourself and knowing that your time and money are valuable and not to be given freely to everyone, not even a pretty face.

It's the personality underneath and the actions that defines people as being good worthwhile investments or bad relationship investments.

Be aware of the indicators of interest, if she stares at you a lot, smiles, and gets nervous around you, laughs at your lame jokes, that means she finds you physically attractive if she seems indifferent, cold, gives short answers and literally contributes nothing yet blunt answers to a conversation, then that means she's a user if she agrees to dates with you. It's quite obvious and socially anxious men need to learn how to pick up on the social cues and differentiate between these two types of individuals. This train of thought can be applied to making friends as well, people who appreciate your presence will make a genuine effort to be with you.

People will always take what you say out of context and use it as ammunition against you, just ignore those people and focus on the positive people who actually have the capability of caring about others aside from themselves, as rare as they may be.

Go ahead and pay for everything, yet don't be surprised when you get burned time and time again and the girl dumps you via text claiming: "you're too nice" (doormats are boring)

Desperation signals lack of self-respect


----------



## Neal (Jan 14, 2012)

Witchblade said:


> I can't agree that paying for a date is being desperate, or that it makes you not equals. It's a way to show her that you're a real man and you take the date and her seriously. It's showing that you're invested in seeing her again, maybe later on she'll buy you something, you don't care about the money because you plan to keep seeing her. It's also very unsexy to sit there dividing bills and figuring out the amount each of you owe, better to be a leader and just pay it, which is of course sending the message that you can take care of her which is sexy even if she doesn't need it.


You mean like how women have to prove how they're real women on the first date?


----------



## nothing else (Oct 27, 2013)

Dude, seriously I think you're over analyzing this dating crap way too hard. Take a chill pill, relax, and don't overthink it.


----------



## SofaKing (May 9, 2014)

Good gravy, men. Get a job...pay for the early dates, expecting nothing but being a gentleman...and accept that this is the way it is for mixed gender dating.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using Tapatalk


----------



## tehuti88 (Jun 19, 2005)

Malek said:


> I used to love and respect women but now I feel like they are incapable of love...


 ...



> If women don't want me, then why do they constantly tell me I'm good looking, stare at me, and sometimes flirt subtly every other week?---This **** is confusing. The false glimmer of hope that someone out there actually genuinely cares about you as a person is a rather disheartening and depressing cycle to constantly endure time and time again, yet it's an imperative experience of life and teaches people how to see for things for what they truly are.


At least women have shown some interest in you...even if it hasn't gotten you anywhere yet. At least you know that on _some_ level, in _some_ way, you're desirable, so maybe you can hope for something in the future. I've never even gotten that. All I get is "You're not my type but there's _somebody_ out there for you!" (bull****), and insults. Constant confirmation of how _undesirable_ I am, and how I should have _no_ hope for the future. Not even a glimmer of false hope. There's no room for doubt, I'm fully aware of my place in men's minds.

I haven't resorted to feeling that men are incapable of love, though...maybe I should?

...

No comment on anything else in this thread...I'm feeling rather bitter right now. I think maybe it's about time I've started being bitter. I've earned it.


----------



## Witchblade (Jun 17, 2017)

tehuti88 said:


> ...


I don't understand why malek and the men like him are even allowed to post on this site. All they do is create a hostile atmosphere especially for women. Why are we allowed to promote treating women like ****? And why aren't more people than just me bothered by that? As far as I'm concerned he's a troll no different than that "female" troll who posted about treating a guy like ****.


----------



## Malek (Oct 4, 2012)

tehuti88 said:


> ...
> 
> At least women have shown some interest in you...even if it hasn't gotten you anywhere yet. At least you know that on _some_ level, in _some_ way, you're desirable, so maybe you can hope for something in the future. I've never even gotten that. All I get is "You're not my type but there's _somebody_ out there for you!" (bull****), and insults. Constant confirmation of how _undesirable_ I am, and how I should have _no_ hope for the future. Not even a glimmer of false hope. There's no room for doubt, I'm fully aware of my place in men's minds.
> 
> ...


I'm not in a very right state of mind right now tehuti88, I feel like everyone around me is taking advantage of me and being a kind person is not paying off after all. I apologize for the hurtful remarks but this is honestly not how I feel, and I know it's messed up, I require therapy right now... I can't afford it though.

I just gave my mom $1000, it's clear to me she never wants me to have my own life, she wants a loyal innocent son to be by her forever.

I want to kill myself but I can't because that is weak, I've given up on the concept of marriage and having kids despite wanting that for at least two decades.

Every single women in my entire life has proven to me they never cared about me, my last "girlfriend" according to facebook status, said she loved me and yet she betrayed me. She lied to me. She betrayed my trust, I was a Catholic who believed in the concept of "true love" and yet it doesn't exist where I live. Life has taught me that being in love with the idea of love is fallacious and will not end well at all.

Her very own mother told my mother that she was seeing two other men behind my back.

She later told me that she had conflicted feelings and liked two guys, but liked me more.

So I made the decision easier for her and deleted her from my life, I ghosted her.

She tried to convince me to come back yet again, wasn't the first time she had second thoughts.

The damage is done....

I now don't trust women.

This is due to not trusting people in general, women are in fact people, I don't trust humans, ergo I don't trust women.

I don't trust men either, yet men are not the ones constantly manipulating me and toying with my heart, they don't use my mind, body, and soul, then leave.

I am fortunate enough to have maybe three or four real life friends who I play games with weekly, yet this is due to my older brother who kept in tabs with them socially, I've known these blokes since middle school.

My personality is rather jaded and I am incapable of trusting other human beings due to misanthrope train of thoughts.

I often get lied to that I'm intelligent, hardworking, handsome, and would make a great catch. Yet I go on dates with girls and they all disappoint me time and time again.

Every single month, some older woman will ask me: "Michael, do you have a girlfriend? You're very handsome and a hard worker, also charming and funny, why don't you have a girlfriend?"

I always lie and reply: "I don't know, just lucky I guess..." (sarcasm)

When in actuality my mind is thinking: ( there's no one out there for you, if there was, she's already killed herself, or became a lesbian... No one will ever love you Michael, time to grow up and become more selfish back, because this world is hell and will use you then toss you aside)

I don't want to care anymore, I wish God didn't place these desires to not be romantically alone yet time and time again I fall for the same song and dance, lol.

My sanity is dwindling.... ahahha omg I'm not full mgtow, but a lot of this propaganda is making a lot of sense to me, I'm still waiting for that girl who might prove me wrong, yet I'm definitely gonna have to build a safety net first. I find that I'm less nervous around people and girls if I expect nothing from them, it's healthier for me in the long term this way.

You're constantly pointing out the n.a.w.a.l.t. women, which I get, believe me I get it. (Not all women are like that) Yet where I live, there seems to be a rather high rate, 9/10 people. Statistically the odds are stacked against stereotypical "Nice guys"

I don't desire to be a "Nice guy" anymore, I want to evolve into someone I myself personally respect and love. Women can chase me if they truly appreciate me, I find it's better that way, it gets rid of most of the confusion in my life.

Dating for men is a numbers game. I've acquired at least over 40 numbers from girls around my age in their 20s. Out of all of these most were either already taken, lesbian, or bad girls. The handful I was able to date all used me, showed their friends our private texts to other girls, even though I made them laugh sometimes, was always considerate, payed for everything, and despite this they led me on. I even asked if they wanted me to stop asking them out, and they said no. When I found out that some of them were seeing my so called guy friends behind my back, I didn't even confront them about it, I just let it die and moved on to the next girl, right?-- Cause that is what being a mature adult is playing the dating game. When they ask me why I'm acting different and distant towards them, I reply because they don't find me attractive, what else is there to say, and they lie to me that yes they do---yet their actions say otherwise.

I have learned the hard way to never initially trust anyone and always expect nothing from them, because everyone out there is looking out for number one and you can't confront them or shame them for this because everyone else will come to their side. That would be like being mad at a lion for eating a gazelle, it's in their nature to act like such.

If I could fall in love with a woman who has a similar rational personality to Karen Straughan, then I think I would be the happiest man ever... Sure, she might be homely looking yet she has a kind compassionate heart and realizes how society truly is and how both men and women get screwed over time and time again.

There was a girl like that once in my life, yet she chose a different man, and that is that...

Everyone assumes they "know" me yet they don't know me at all, they all just assume.

Thems the breaks.


----------



## Witchblade (Jun 17, 2017)

Neal said:


> You mean like how women have to prove how they're real women on the first date?


If you aren't interested in her then just don't go out with her again, I don't know what your point is. You're free to have whatever standards you want, even if that leaves you completely alone.


----------



## Malek (Oct 4, 2012)

Even if he lowers his standards, even homely girls will lead him on. God speed. I implore you to date as much as possible sir, just don't spend too much $.


----------



## Malek (Oct 4, 2012)

Witchblade said:


> I don't understand why malek and the men like him are even allowed to post on this site. All they do is create a hostile atmosphere especially for women. Why are we allowed to promote treating women like ****? And why aren't more people than just me bothered by that? As far as I'm concerned he's a troll no different than that "female" troll who posted about treating a guy like ****.






Nah, I'm not a troll, just having a stressful week.

Hostile atmosphere? Telling a guy to "man up" and just pay for everything yet expect no reciprocation just seems counter intuitive to me is all, please enlighten me why instead of insulting me and calling me a bitter virgin who can't get laid?

Sex is the most overrated thing in this world almost. I've never fallen in love before, that is why I'm still bitter though I did have a couple sexual encounters despite my online personality. If you've met me in real life, you'd wouldn't have guessed I'd have such biased opinions towards the game called dating.

You're constantly poking fun at male users on here as well, the pot calling the kettle black.


----------



## Witchblade (Jun 17, 2017)

Malek said:


> Even if he lowers his standards, even homely girls will lead him on. God speed. I implore you to date as much as possible sir, just don't spend too much $.


You're just not the type of guy women consider worth dating, so I doubt your experiences are necessarily applicable to a better man.


----------



## Malek (Oct 4, 2012)

Witchblade said:


> You're just not the type of guy women consider worth dating, so I doubt your experiences are necessarily applicable to a better man.


You don't seem like the type of woman a guy should consider dating either, considering your view on how better men should be like.

Oddly enough I can get dates from the single girls I ask out most of the time, yet they all coincidentally don't want anything serious. They only would prefer a friend with benefits type of thing. Seems pointless when even the girls who claim they want a legitimate relationship cheat on you, what's the point in any dating whatsoever? Divorce rate is at an all time high and thanks to the invention of the internet and easy fast texting, people can cheat like clockwork. I understand your point of view = 



I personally find that view appalling and disheartening.

Men are damned if they do, damned if they don't follow these expectations.

http://www.veoh.com/watch/v83150639R4kztp9N


----------



## Witchblade (Jun 17, 2017)

Malek said:


> You don't seem like the type of woman a guy should consider dating either, considering your view on how better men should be like.
> 
> Oddly enough I can get dates from the single girls I ask out most of the time,* yet they all coincidentally don't want anything serious*. They only would prefer a friend with benefits type of thing. Seems pointless when even the girls who claim they want a legitimate relationship cheat on you, what's the point in any dating whatsoever? Divorce rate is at an all time high and thanks to the invention of the internet and easy fast texting, people can cheat like clockwork.


Yeah, with you. Because you're not a good person. I guess you must be physically attractive but once they see what's on the inside they lose interest.


----------



## Malek (Oct 4, 2012)

Witchblade said:


> Yeah, with you. Because you're not a good person. I guess you must be physically attractive but once they see what's on the inside they lose interest.


Oooh touche'

I used to be rather fat, 235 lbs was my lowest point, yet I worked hard and sweated that off, and for what?--Girls never looked at me before because I was fat, had acne, glasses, had no car or job---I knew this was my problem so I solved it. Face cleared, I wear blue contacts and girls tell me I have beautiful eyes, I laugh and say thanks, they only cost me $60, they touch my arms and my hair sometimes, why do they do this? Some girls like to tease because validation from men is fun to them occasionally. Finally I can get dates but now it's even worse, it's like my eyes are wide open now and I realize that no matter what I do, there's always something else demanded of me lol.

I talk to girls constantly about life, school, work, goals, anime, swimming, videogames, movies, shows. None of this never leads anywhere substantial. What is a guy supposed to do, online dating is even worse.

Don't you all realize the state of our economy now? lol Being wise with money is the right choice, personality quirks aside, I think a guy like the OP is gonna get screwed over, because he is essentially how I used to be in regards to the high expectations of dating. All that disney mumbo jumbo is crap, just toss it right out the window OP.

I'm telling yeh man, you'll get dates if you treat women like equals and not princesses, you just need to workout, save $ yet don't pay for everything, buy a car, and learn how to pickup on the signs of interest. Also you'll have better luck with women who are younger than you so only go for 18 year olds or higher, or those who are younger than your age because women your age will not be interested, they'd prefer men who are older and have more money, it's just how it seems to be, no reason to get mad at that, just accept it.

Never text long with girls, ever, that makes you get friendzoned, only use texts for setting up dates, if she's flaky, then ask out another girl, keep repeating this process until you find one that's actually appreciative of you.

I'm telling you man, I used to read on here for years and take advice from women, yet it all led me to getting screwed over time and time again, heed this warning and you have to lookout for yourself, especially in this dwindling economy.

I'm in no way advocating treating women like ****, I merely stated that women show more interest in me at work when I make it a point to actively ignore them, tease them, or come off as flat out rude.

It makes me wish I took advice from my Navy friend years ago, I would've not experienced a lot of heartache then had I heeded his advice from the get go.

I apologize if I've offended anyone, yet this is how I feel lately, if you've read my 1st posts in the past, you'd realize I had a 180 personality more or less on here, yet obviously that doesn't pan out.

Love just isn't in the cards for those who lack love for themselves, I'm sorry.

I suspect I won't be able to post on these forums anymore much longer maybe, might be better for me lol, that's fine. I'm on the longest streak of NoFap in my life and I think my social anxiety, at least at work is more or less cured, I actually talk too much now irl it's so weird and people say I have more energy and look different. If you look at porn OP, I would highly recommend you stop, it's literally poison and will wrought ruin upon your life, it might even be causing your anxiety and this idea of placing girls upon a pedestal. We shouldn't objectify women true, we shouldn't aspire to become their slaves either. Am I really a bad person? I'm in my 20s and taking care of an old sick mother while working my butt off at a demanding high stress job. None of you online know the real me, and I'll never know the real you, so lets leave it at that, yeah? I feel I'm right in this, maybe I'm wrong, but I honestly feel like I'm right, so go ahead and everyone hate me if you'd like, I couldn't care less, peace.


----------



## Persephone The Dread (Aug 28, 2010)

Malek said:


> It's called reverse psychology. Both men and women want a challenge.
> 
> The refusing to pay thing on the 1st date is a good test.
> 
> ...


If they actually like you, they'll do something with you that requires no money, or won't care about paying for themselves. But it's important to bear in mind that many women are sheeple who believe that a guy not paying means he cares less, or that if he doesn't pay they're worth less in the reproductive market compared to other women (they're easy,) because that's what culture tells them. A significant number of people don't just treat getting to know people as 'I find this person attractive, lets get to know each other.' They involve status seeking behaviour.


----------



## Malek (Oct 4, 2012)

Persephone The Dread said:


> If they actually like you, they'll do something with you that requires no money, or won't care about paying for themselves. But it's important to bear in mind that many women are sheeple who believe that a guy not paying means he cares less, or that if he doesn't pay they're worth less in the reproductive market compared to other women (they're easy,) because that's what culture tells them. A significant number of people don't just treat getting to know people as 'I find this person attractive, lets get to know each other.' They involve status seeking behaviour.


Thank you for restoring my faith in humanity briefly!!


----------



## thomasjune (Apr 7, 2012)

Witchblade said:


> I don't understand why malek and the men like him are even allowed to post on this site. All they do is create a hostile atmosphere especially for women. Why are we allowed to promote treating women like ****? And why aren't more people than just me bothered by that? As far as I'm concerned he's a troll no different than that "female" troll who posted about treating a guy like ****.


Lol. Sorry but you don't get to decide who's allowed to post on this site. I don't agree with people treating women like sh!t, especially when they're talking about women they have never even met before. But you're not any better than anyone else. 
You're complaining about creating a hostile atmosphere yet you're going around telling this guys who are obviously struggling with their issues that they're not "real men" and mocking them.
Why should you be allowed to make others feel like crap yet everyone else needs to behave and make sure not to offend you.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

@Malek, it seems like in many ways you are doing much better than me. It also seems that its not women that reject you but you reject them. In fact the way you reject women reminds me of the way women reject me. I mean I am sure women that reject me would claim its my fault (just like you claim its theirs). In any case, you are doing a lot better socially than I do since at least they express interest in you and no one expresses interest in me. Let me give you some examples.



Malek said:


> She later told me that she had conflicted feelings and liked two guys, but liked me more.


When I was in that situation I was sticking with that woman out of desperation. It didn't end well: she ended up rejecting me after the rollercoaster ride, but it was her rejecting me not the other way around.



Malek said:


> So I made the decision easier for her and deleted her from my life, I ghosted her.


See, thats what I am talking about. IN your case you are the ghost-er, but in my case I am a ghost-ee. There were a lot of women that ghosted me.



Malek said:


> She tried to convince me to come back yet again, wasn't the first time she had second thoughts.


In my case the women that cheated on me didn't try to convince me to come back. It was ME trying to convince THEM to come back, and they would first tell me its not worth it and then reluctantly come back.



Malek said:


> The damage is done....
> 
> I now don't trust women.


Yeah thats the line girls use with me when I try to apologize for my mistakes they tell me the damage is done. On my end I am more than willing to forgive if only they promise me to change their ways, but they refuse to do it no matter how many times I beg them to.



Malek said:


> I often get lied to that I'm intelligent, hardworking, handsome, and would make a great catch. Yet I go on dates with girls and they all disappoint me time and time again.


Nobody tells me that though.



Malek said:


> Every single month, some older woman will ask me: "Michael, do you have a girlfriend? You're very handsome and a hard worker, also charming and funny, why don't you have a girlfriend?"


Nobody asks me that either. In fact that is one of the things that bothers me the most: why nobody ever brings up the subject of my dating life, and when I mention it myself they ignore it assuming its imaginary girlfriends or something? Do I appear undatable? I mean I even pushed that issue with a couple of people and they were working REALLY hard to deflect it on "just serve the Lord" or "why do you need a girlfriend" or "just be happy with yourself". Yet in your case, not only they don't deflect it, but they bring up the subject themselves!



Malek said:


> Dating for men is a numbers game. I've acquired at least over 40 numbers from girls around my age in their 20s.


WOW, you got over 40 numbers! I have hard time getting any numbers at all. I probably get a couple of numers a year IF I am lucky!



Malek said:


> The handful I was able to date all used me, showed their friends our private texts to other girls,


And what is so bad about that one? I remember one of the girls I was trying to date who actually told me she shared with her friend that I said such and such. I took it as a compliment, that she was actually pround of talking to me and talked about me in a positive light. The only bad thing about her is that she backed off after I accidentally mentioned I throw temper tantrums. But if not for that, everything would have been positive, INCLUDING her sharing things with her friend.



Malek said:


> When I found out that some of them were seeing my so called guy friends behind my back, I didn't even confront them about it, I just let it die and moved on to the next girl, right?-- Cause that is what being a mature adult is playing the dating game. When they ask me why I'm acting different and distant towards them, I reply because they don't find me attractive, what else is there to say, and they lie to me that yes they do---yet their actions say otherwise.


See, that is EXACTLY what girls do to me, and that is what I find REALLY unfair, and I think your behavior is unfair as well. I mean, when girls disappear on me, it leaves me wondering for ages just what exactly did I say that caused them to disappear. Or when girls tell me I don't find them attractive, it makes me wonder how can they speak for me, are they mind readers? Now, in your case, all you had to do was to tell them that you saw this or that evidence that they cheated, mystery solved! Yet you just didn't bother doing it. Who knows, maybe in my case they also thought I cheated on them , how would I know if they never told me anything orther than the vague answers you qouted yourself saying? But I can tell you for a fact I was NOT cheating (not that I thin htey accused me of it: like I said they never told me anything, so it is forever a mystery). So if only they were to tell me what it is that they think I did, and confront me with evidence, I would be able to either confirm it or deny it. But they just don't bother. I mean, if they think its so obvious that I am guilty of whatever they think I am guilty of, what do they get to lose by double checking it anyway? Time? Well if it is THAT obvious it won't take more than 5 minutes. If it is not as obvious, then who knows maybe they were wrong, and if they were wrong then all that time would of been worth it. And in any case, they would save me time from wondering what it is that happened.



Malek said:


> I have learned the hard way to never initially trust anyone and always expect nothing from them, because everyone out there is looking out for number one and you can't confront them or shame them for this because everyone else will come to their side.


Nobody comes to MY side though -- and they know it -- in fact they probably treat me that way BECAUSE I am unpopular.



Malek said:


> That would be like being mad at a lion for eating a gazelle, it's in their nature to act like such.


Yeah, girls also think its my nature, and that is the exact thing I find unfair. I am not an animal, I am not bound by my nature, I am a human being who can grow, if only they tell me what to fix.


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

As far as paying goes, something else just occurred to me. There are girls who do "the opposite" to what @Malek described: if they are interested in a man they will make the man pay, if they are not interested they will pay their share. My second ex is an example of it: she told me she once went on a date with a guy, but she ended up disliking him because he was rude to the waitress, and her way of "sending him a message" that she doesn't want to date him was to pay her share. But then again, I am sure there are other types of girls that act closer to what @Malek described: when they are willing to pay mroe for someone they are interested in. So this all depends on the situation and the view of a girl at hand. Thats why when I personally see a girl paying her own share I always ask "does it mean you don't want to date me" and if she says "no, I just believe in splitting" then I am fine with that. But then again my last date, who paid her own share, acted disinterested in ohter ways (despite saying she believes in both sides paying) and ended up dumping me in order to go back to her ex who cheated on her.

In any case, once again, I don't believe in gender roles. But if girls do, then I am sort of forced to try to understand "their" language, whether I agree with it or not.


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

LonelyLurker said:


> My point is that not getting something isn't the same as having something taken from you.


What if you "don't get" food and you starve to death. Do you think your life will be taken from you, or do you think you simply "wont be getting" soething that stands in a way of natural death process (as in, we all naturally die within a month or two, and a food is just that unusual thing that prevents us from dying within a month or two like we should). I mean thats a perfect analogy of what happens with reproduction: our genes naturally die off within 80 years or so, but reproduction is what prolongs that natural death. So if you think deprivation of food is a form of slow execution, the same is true regarding deprivation of reproduction.



LonelyLurker said:


> Of course passing on genes is voluntary, if it wasn't you'd have nothing to worry about.


In case of lottery you give something up (in particular the cost of lottery ticket) in order to participate, and its up to you to either pay for lottery ticket or not. In case of reproduction you have already given up your immortality regardless, and you have no say in it.



LonelyLurker said:


> Having children won't stop you from dying either, I don't fear death, maybe that's the difference between you and I when it comes to this subject.


Having children would stop your genes from dying, faith in Jesus would stop your soul from dying. Those are two separate things. The fear of death pertains to soul realm, and is dealt with through Jesus. The thing about not passing your genes is entirely different animal, and it is dealt with through reproduction.



LonelyLurker said:


> The first woman didn't say you won't have children, she _perhaps_ suggested that you shouldn't unless you change your behaviour.


Then why didn't she say "unless" part?



LonelyLurker said:


> The second one simply didn't ask you the question, you're not a mind reader, stop attributing motives. The group probably ignored you as you essentially tried to make it about yourself. I think you were probably just trying to relate and therefore build rapport, but there are certain ways to do these things (otherwise you come off as a narcissist).


But remember, she talked about her and her husband BEFORE I talked about my ex-s, so why is her talking about her love life more appropriate than my talking about mine? I guess now that you drew my attention to that, nobody responded to her either (other than myself of course). But still, at least in HER mind her talking about her own love life was okay; and if so why didn't SHE respond to me then? Is it because, as a leader of a group, she was entitled to more and/or because her relationship was more successful than mine (as evident from her still being married)?



LonelyLurker said:


> That's fairly standard clichéd advice and as is the case for most clichés, people say it because they've heard others say it.


And what if they give me that cliche in response to my promise to change: as in I say I will change (in order for her to give me a chance) and she says no I have to be myself (in order to justify herself not giving me a chance). Do you think this cliche is partially to blame? What would have happened if this cliche wasn't around, would I get more chances or would htey find some other reason not to give me the chance?



LonelyLurker said:


> What you probably *have* seen directed to men is that women are attracted to confidence, if you like yourself you're more likely to be confident.


This is unfair because for the men that are confident the relationship is just an icing on a cake, whereas for the men that lack confidence it is their desperate need. I guess today's culture is all about icing on a cake: confident men having a girlfriend and men that lack confidence "being themselves", both are icing on a cake, yet both take priority over the REAL need of men that lack confidence to have a girlfriend. ANd the women justify their rejection of men that lack confidence by saying two separate things:

1. If somone isn't happy with himself no one else can make him happy

2. There is presumably some way to become happy with himself all by himself

What they don't seem to realize is that 2 is a lot harder than 1, so to say that 2 is possible and 1 is impossible is like saying you have to learn to lift 100 pounds before learning to lift 10 pounds.



LonelyLurker said:


> No, I'm referring to your story about being on a date with someone, her telling you not speak so loudly, you ignoring her, her reogenuilly upeatedly telling you and your take home point being that she rudely kept interrupting you.


Well, if I want to understand what women think (which I do) then in this case I should pay attention to ALL aspects of it, INCLUDING the one that the way in which she was telling me not to speak loudly looked like she was messing with me. And in fact I would like to understand whether she derived some perverse pleasure out of messing with me,or what was going on? True, its also possible she wasn't messing with me and I misread her that she was. But then I should look at all possibilities which is what I am trying to do.

On a separate note, its true that when I am in the process of doing something (such as in the process of finishing the sentence in her case) then I tend to ignore anything I am being told until I finish what I was trying to do. Just to give you a couple of other examples, there was a time when a woman wanted to get me to come to her house late at night, but I refused because I had to call my mom, and another example of a woman trying to chat me up but I interrupted her to apologize for something else I did a while ago. So "ignoring" a woman telling me "not so loud" because I "have" to finish a sentence, that is another example of that same sort of thing. But you see, in case of the other two examples (the woman that tried to get me to come to her house and the woman that tried to talk to me), I wasn't "dismissing" them, as evident from the fact that I was then obsessing for several weeks as to how I "should have" responded to them more positive. I simply dismissed them that second because my mind didn't have time to adjust, but then regretted it. In case of "not so loud" siutaition I dind't regret it because it looked like that girl was rude to me. But still, since I regretted it in the other two cases, the point is that when I ignore someone its not because I mean to ignore them, its because my mind doesn't respond as fast as it should, so that is something I have to work on.

*I hit character limit so see the rest in the next reply*


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

*I exceeded character limit, so here is my continuation of the reply*



LonelyLurker said:


> The way you phrase it is that you will change once they have given you a reason to do so. It's like saying "you don't have to worry about me cheating because you can lose weight, then I will find you attractive again and I will be willing to sleep with you exclusively". This also suggests that you will return to your original behaviour if anything changes.


Actually, my first attempt tends to be to say "since you don't like it I won't do it" but then when it doesn't fly (as in they say I have to be who I am or something such) then I am like "okay since you don't believe it I can do it for you, here is some other, more selfish reason, why I can do it". The truth is that there are multiple reasons why I can change, so if one of them "doesn't work" in convicing the girl, I bring up the other one. But I am truthful in both cases since like I said there are multiple reasons.



LonelyLurker said:


> It's not that binary, sometimes you should be selfish (only dating women you actually like for instance) and sometimes you should be considerate (making an effort not to knowingly upset her for instance).


I agree. Too bad women shoot me down when I claim I can be flexible in this way: and they respond to me by insisting that I have to "be myself" no matter what, which is ridiculous.



LonelyLurker said:


> Find men who have what you want and ask them or find the women you want and see what they respond to (not what they *say* they respond to but what you *see* them responding to), magazines (or online articles) are notorious for providing terrible relationship advice (including women's ones), there's no shortage of comedy on the subject.


The fact that I have to ask men in person because all of the online advice is PUA is what suggests that maybe its because majorit of men are players and, if so, that would explain why women don't trust me.



LonelyLurker said:


> Talking about your ex all the time isn't the sign of a cheater it's a sign that you haven't put that relationship behind you.


Then what did that woman mean when she mentioned those other guys that "broke her heart" as a reason why she has hard time trusting men in general and me in particular? I mean, the context within which she said it is when she first admitted that I turned her off by talking about my ex-s, and then when I tried to tell her I won't do it again, she said that other thing. So somehow she did draw a connection between my talkin gabout ex-s and men "breaking her heart" (wahtever she meant by those words).



LonelyLurker said:


> Or, maybe you are the one doing things that put them off. You need to accept personal responsibility.


So what is it I did that would remind her of men that "broke her heart"?

Okay the other think she mentioned apart from ex-s is that I told her I go for second ph.d. in order to avoid getting real job and she suspected I will always be getting more and more ph.d.-s. And she also said that she knows women that dated older men and it alway "ended badly" (without being any more concrete about it, but PERHAPS she meant they cheated, although she didn't say it). So do you think being older and/or going for multiple ph.d-s is in line with somoene that would "break her heart"? But then again her first answer was talking about ex-s, yet you said that the ex-s stuff doesn't indicate a cheater, so are you saying the other two things do?


----------



## Witchblade (Jun 17, 2017)

thomasjune said:


> Lol. Sorry but you don't get to decide who's allowed to post on this site. I don't agree with people treating women like sh!t, especially when they're talking about women they have never even met before. But you're not any better than anyone else.
> You're complaining about creating a hostile atmosphere yet you're going around telling this guys who are obviously struggling with their issues that they're not "real men" and mocking them.
> Why should you be allowed to make others feel like crap yet everyone else needs to behave and make sure not to offend you.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


Obviously I don't get to decide, because if I did then I wouldn't allow those guys here. But, this site does have rules, and those rules do forbid things like bigotry, insulting, genderwars, etc. I don't see how saying that guys should treat women like **** doesn't qualify and break those rules.

I've given advice to guys here. I'm not someone who's going to say they're perfect as they are and those women are just *****es for not realizing it...I'm going to tell the guys what they're doing wrong because men need to take responsibility and not cry about how unfair women are. The only guys I mock are the *******s who post hateful things about women, like malek.


----------



## LonelyLurker (Sep 24, 2016)

Malek said:


> I used to be rather fat, 235 lbs was my lowest point, yet I worked hard and sweated that off...


Congratulations on the weight loss.

I understand where you're coming from, the "equality at all times apart from when I expect you to do more than me" is highly hypocritical and annoying and falls squarely into my "stupid games I'm unwilling to play" box.

However don't go too far in the other direction, if a woman expects you to play the game (essentially auditioning for her attention) and you are unwilling to do so, you don't need to play games yourself, just reject her and move on.

I've long been of the opinion that I would rather be alone forever than play those games myself, but if I meet someone I like that doesn't feel entitled to more than she provides I'd happily see where it went (as I *actually* believe in equality). I wouldn't hold the actions of others against her.



causalset said:


> ...I mean thats a perfect analogy of what happens with reproduction: our genes naturally die off within 80 years or so, but reproduction is what prolongs that natural death. So if you think deprivation of food is a form of slow execution, the same is true regarding deprivation of reproduction.


*I'm only going to respond to parts of your post as I'm not on a laptop, I did read the whole thing though. *

Deprivation of food would only be an execution if someone was actively making sure you couldn't eat anything. This isn't analogous to your reproductive situation as nobody is making sure you can't reproduce with everybody. The true comparison would be someone who deprives you of their food but doesn't stop you from eating elsewhere.



causalset said:


> In case of lottery you give something up (in particular the cost of lottery ticket) in order to participate, and its up to you to either pay for lottery ticket or not. In case of reproduction you have already given up your immortality regardless, and you have no say in it.


Let me show you the comparison, replace the words "lottery" and "lottery ticket" with "dating". You usually have to pay to play but there is no guarantee of success, fortunately the odds are better than winning the lottery. 



causalset said:


> Having children would stop your genes from dying...


I have no concern for allowing my genes to be propagated. It's not entirely meaningless to me as I suspect that I would feel differently about a biological child than I would about a non biological one. But outside of that I don't care about it.



causalset said:


> Then why didn't she say "unless" part?


Because she doesn't explain things with that level of clarity or because I'm wrong, I'm not a mind reader either. 



causalset said:


> But still, at least in HER mind her talking about her own love life was okay; and if so why didn't SHE respond to me then? Is it because, as a leader of a group, she was entitled to more and/or because her relationship was more successful than mine (as evident from her still being married)?


My life experiences have shown me that the vast majority of people think their lives are more valuable/interesting/important than other people's, it probably had nothing to do with you.



causalset said:


> Do you think this cliche is partially to blame? What would have happened if this cliche wasn't around, would I get more chances or would htey find some other reason not to give me the chance?


It's obviously hard to say without context but it sounds like they just weren't interested so they would probably just find another reason to reject you.



causalset said:


> This is unfair...


Sure, and women have certain roles that are unfair also. However, as long as most men and women are willing to play these roles I don't think they have much grounds for complaint, though they complain about it all the time (I'm aware I'm an anomaly in this respect as I outright refuse to play the game).



causalset said:


> ...the point is that when I ignore someone its not because I mean to ignore them, its because my mind doesn't respond as fast as it should, so that is something I have to work on.


That would be a good idea, this is one of the areas where perception is reality. Whether you mean to ignore them is far less important than whether they felt ignored.



causalset said:


> The fact that I have to ask men in person because all of the online advice is PUA is what suggests that maybe its because majorit of men are players and, if so, that would explain why women don't trust me.


That's a non sequitur, just because most of the advice is of that nature does not mean that most men are. It's like diet and exercise advice, selling a miracle cure is far more appealing than telling people the truth.

Telling men to target women with low self esteem and exploit their low self esteem to make them seek your validation is easier than looking at each person as an individual and having to think, to actually enquire rather than assuming.



causalset said:


> So do you think being older and/or going for multiple ph.d-s is in line with somoene that would "break her heart"? But then again her first answer was talking about ex-s, yet you said that the ex-s stuff doesn't indicate a cheater, so are you saying the other two things do?


She's either just looking for a way to let you down gently or she's making her own non sequitur, the humans favourite logical fallacy.


----------



## ImperfectCircle (Jun 1, 2017)

No, you're not the only guy who wants a commitment. Most of us are just babies (including me). I have found a way to get over the fear though. It's not fun or easy.


----------



## Witchblade (Jun 17, 2017)

causalset said:


> This is unfair


Your posts are too long to read them all or respond, I just want to say: you need to eliminate the word unfair from your vocabulary. Go take your dictionary, flip to that page, and cross it out with black marker. No one cares about fairness, that has no relevance in dating or life in general. At some point as a kid your parents must have used the age-old line "life's not fair" when they didn't give you something you wanted. Well, they're right.


----------



## Neal (Jan 14, 2012)

Witchblade said:


> If you aren't interested in her then just don't go out with her again, I don't know what your point is. You're free to have whatever standards you want, even if that leaves you completely alone.


My point was that you're taking your personal opinion on gender roles and using it as advice, which won't do anything but reenforce the animosity between men and women here. Me and my girlfriend split the bill our first date. She doesn't hold me by 1950s standards and I don't do the same to her. In other words I don't demand that she wash my underwear and fix me dinner lol. We do things for each other because we want to, not because it's what's expected. If that's what you want then that's fine, but you're saying it like it's gospel.


----------



## Witchblade (Jun 17, 2017)

Neal said:


> My point was that you're taking your personal opinion on gender roles and using as advice, which won't do anything but reenforce the animosity between men and women here. Me and my girlfriend split the bill our first date. She doesn't hold me by 1950s standards and I don't do the same to her. In other words I don't demand that she wash my underwear and fix me dinner lol. We do things for each other because we want to, not because it's what's expected. If that's what you want then that's fine, but you're saying it looked it's gospel.


Obviously not everyone is going to feel the exact same way, but it's definitely a majority, and it certainly doesn't hurt your chances to pay, so it's good advice. Even if a woman doesn't care whether you pay or not, it will still make her feel good and have a higher opinion of you if you take the lead and pay.


----------



## LonelyLurker (Sep 24, 2016)

Neal said:


> My point was that you're taking your personal opinion on gender roles and using it as advice, which won't do anything but reenforce the animosity between men and women here. Me and my girlfriend split the bill our first date. She doesn't hold me by 1950s standards and I don't do the same to her. In other words I don't demand that she wash my underwear and fix me dinner lol. We do things for each other because we want to, not because it's what's expected. If that's what you want then that's fine, but you're saying it like it's gospel.


Always good to see that there are people with more equal relationships (sounds like a good balance), gives you a little more hope. I hope it works out for you.


----------



## Neal (Jan 14, 2012)

Witchblade said:


> Obviously not everyone is going to feel the exact same way, but it's definitely a majority, and it certainly doesn't hurt your chances to pay, so it's good advice. Even if a woman doesn't care whether you pay or not, it will still make her feel good and have a higher opinion of you if you take the lead and pay.


Yeah if the guys goal is to get dates as soon as possible then yeah he'll probably want to do whatever is necessary. And true it won't necessarily hurt his chances.


LonelyLurker said:


> Always good to see that there are people with more equal relationships (sounds like a good balance), gives you a little more hope. I hope it works out for you.


Thanks I hope so too. Yeah there are women like that. Though it may take a little more time to find them.


----------



## ImperfectCircle (Jun 1, 2017)

Neal said:


> Yeah if the guys goal is to get dates as soon as possible then yeah he'll probably want to do whatever is necessary. And true it won't necessarily hurt his chances.
> 
> Thanks I hope so too. Yeah there are women like that. Though it may take a little more time to find them.


This doesn't make sense to me. Wouldn't you want to do whatever is necessary if you really like the person? Especially if you've waited for a long time. I've waited for several years to even think about any type of relationship whatsoever, so that I could work on myself. If I get a chance to date someone who I feel comfortable with I sure as hell don't want to screw it up. If I'm easily able to pay for the date, I think it is a sign of how far I've come emotionally, not just financially. It's pretty hard to make much money if you're emotionally unstable. But that's just me. I'm constantly trying to improve myself because I used to be such a mess.


----------



## Neal (Jan 14, 2012)

ImperfectCircle said:


> This doesn't make sense to me. Wouldn't you want to do whatever is necessary if you really like the person? Especially if you've waited for a long time. I've waited for several years to even think about any type of relationship whatsoever, so that I could work on myself. If I get a chance to date someone who I feel comfortable with I sure as hell don't want to screw it up. If I'm easily able to pay for the date, I think it is a sign of how far I've come emotionally, not just financially. It's pretty hard to make much money if you're emotionally unstable. But that's just me. I'm constantly trying to improve myself because I used to be such a mess.


Yeah if they like you back. They may just want someone to take them out and pay for their dinner. That's the risk of the matter. The "rules" say you're obligated to ask them out and then pay, but they aren't obligated to do anything. If you have thick skin and are totally ok with that then that's great. Dating is risky business when it comes to your feelings. This whole splitting the bill thing is just an attempt to meet on neutral/fair grounds.


----------



## LonelyLurker (Sep 24, 2016)

ImperfectCircle said:


> This doesn't make sense to me. Wouldn't you want to do whatever is necessary if you really like the person? Especially if you've waited for a long time. I've waited for several years to even think about any type of relationship whatsoever, so that I could work on myself. If I get a chance to date someone who I feel comfortable with I sure as hell don't want to screw it up. If I'm easily able to pay for the date, I think it is a sign of how far I've come emotionally, not just financially. It's pretty hard to make much money if you're emotionally unstable. But that's just me. I'm constantly trying to improve myself because I used to be such a mess.


I guess it depends on whether you have standards and whether these expectations are incompatible with those standards.

Someone sitting back and waiting for me to prove my worth while she doesn't feel the need to do the same, that would mean I no longer feel she would be worth making any effort for much less everything within my power.

Different people want different things, only the individual can decide what they are prepared to put up with/do.

I certainly wouldn't agree that money is any indication of emotional stability. Money seems to be all you need to be a good person it seems (not suggesting that you are suggesting this personally). I'd say it's just a sign that you're willing to do it, nothing more. You might want to do it, you might not, but you're willing to.


----------



## Malek (Oct 4, 2012)

ImperfectCircle said:


> This doesn't make sense to me. *Wouldn't you want to do whatever is necessary* if you really like the person? Especially if you've waited for a long time. I've waited for several years to even think about any type of relationship whatsoever, so that I could work on myself. If I get a chance to date someone who I feel comfortable with I sure as hell don't want to screw it up. If I'm easily able to pay for the date, I think it is a sign of how far I've come emotionally, not just financially. It's pretty hard to make much money if you're emotionally unstable. But that's just me. I'm constantly trying to improve myself because I used to be such a mess.


 "Even then when you finally get dates, it's still another uphill battle from there, yet you'll be better prepared mentally to deal with rejection if you follow sound advice, I assure you. You have to open your damn eyes and realize that this fantasy world you've been spoon fed and told about as a kid is a complete made up lie and reality is much harsher. Life isn't fair, this world owes no one nothing. Happiness is fleeting and rare, life usually sucks, that's why you appreciate happiness much more when it finally does occur. A glass of water tastes much better in a harsh desert. Know your worth as a human being and disregard all the haters out there, you possess the capability to improve your life, it won't just fall into your lap---it'll take a lot of hard work and dedication to even have a chance at being happy, even then you might not ever experience it. Yet this is life. The most valuable resource is time, because you can't get it back, don't waste your time or time will waste you. Heed this advice or don't, your choice. If you don't love or respect for yourself and stand up for yourself---no one will, they're already too concerned with their own obstacles in life."

Most people date in their teens and 20s and by the time you feel "ready" it'll be too late. The only way to learn how to swim is to dive in and start kicking and paddling until you're not drowning anymore. You waiting for everything to just fall into your lap is just fallacious.

What you believe to be necessary actually is ironically the opposite. No one respects a pushover, especially women. Most people don't trust people, ergo most women don't trust men, thus men should learn to not easily trust new women in his life, if we're thinking about this logically. It's proven time and time again that you'll never get anywhere with people if you don't learn how to ask other people to compromise with you and negotiate. What is it they have to offer you?---What can you offer them? It's supposed to be a mutual beneficial relationship in which both parties come out ahead. What you're following is outdated traditional roles and it's never gonna get you anywhere. I don't understand what the big deal is, if a person genuinely likes you---they won't mind spending $10 to spend time with you. I find it quite amusing all this drama got caused over one little mundane thing. The girls that wanted to be with me yet I didn't find compatible, they all spent $ on me and I didn't have to ask. Just like all the girls I fawned over I spent $ on them and they eventually lost interest due to my eager to please attitude.

Eventually you gotta learn what works and what doesn't. I'm merely suggesting an alternative to learn how to differentiate quickly whether or not a girl is genuinely interested in you and deems you attractive, a few bucks won't matter to her as long as you make her happy and vice versa. When you're actually a real couple and you feel she isn't playing with you, then feel free to shower her with gifts in the form of materialistic things and money---yet true love isn't about that and you know it.

People always desire what they can't have, that's why being a challenge is more appealing than coming off as a doormat right off the bat. It's all about vibes and how other people feel about you, if you radiate an aura right away during first impressions that you allow everyone to walk all over you, then they'll never feel the need to respect nor care about you.

As an introvert who suffers from SA, I'd highly advise you be aware of the world around you and actually know "the games" that other people play to manipulate you due to your passive nature. 





"Do whatever is necessary" That never ends well, a person that can be bought by materialistic things doesn't have your best interests in mind. How about just focus on getting to know each other on a personal level by simply talking, communicating, and slowly but surely establishing a genuine rapport with one another. If someone is going to judge you poorly for not following the social norms based on trivial matters, it's like $5-$20 bucks we're talking about here, sheesh... Wake up please and learn to respect yourself more, otherwise you're constantly going to get burned because other people told you to fall in line and follow the rules, and you're lonely enough to listen. Who's more of a fool, a fool or a fool who follows the fool?


----------



## ImperfectCircle (Jun 1, 2017)

I didn't have the time to read much of your post, but I think you need to just get out there and give it a shot regardless of whether you fail or not. After a while you get used to rejection, then something right falls into your lap and you realize the others just weren't meant to be. Sure, you may lose them eventually, but the experience was worth it.

We're getting off topic so let's just stop arguing.


Malek said:


> "Even then when you finally get dates, it's still another uphill battle from there, yet you'll be better prepared mentally to deal with rejection if you follow sound advice, I assure you. You have to open your damn eyes and realize that this fantasy world you've been spoon fed and told about as a kid is a complete made up lie and reality is much harsher. Life isn't fair, this world owes no one nothing. Happiness is fleeting and rare, life usually sucks, that's why you appreciate happiness much more when it finally does occur. A glass of water tastes much better in a harsh desert. Know your worth as a human being and disregard all the haters out there, you possess the capability to improve your life, it won't just fall into your lap---it'll take a lot of hard work and dedication to even have a chance at being happy, even then you might not ever experience it. Yet this is life. The most valuable resource is time, because you can't get it back, don't waste your time or time will waste you. Heed this advice or don't, your choice. If you don't love or respect for yourself and stand up for yourself---no one will, they're already too concerned with their own obstacles in life."
> 
> Most people date in their teens and 20s and by the time you feel "ready" it'll be too late. The only way to learn how to swim is to dive in and start kicking and paddling until you're not drowning anymore. You waiting for everything to just fall into your lap is just fallacious.
> 
> ...


----------



## ImperfectCircle (Jun 1, 2017)

LonelyLurker said:


> I guess it depends on whether you have standards and whether these expectations are incompatible with those standards.
> 
> Someone sitting back and waiting for me to prove my worth while she doesn't feel the need to do the same, that would mean I no longer feel she would be worth making any effort for much less everything within my power.
> 
> ...


Women are constantly feeling pressured to prove their worth. Even on this forum. I'll just leave it at that.


----------



## ImperfectCircle (Jun 1, 2017)

Neal said:


> Yeah if they like you back. They may just want someone to take them out and pay for their dinner. That's the risk of the matter. The "rules" say you're obligated to ask them out and then pay, but they aren't obligated to do anything. If you have thick skin and are totally ok with that then that's great. Dating is risky business when it comes to your feelings. This whole splitting the bill thing is just an attempt to meet on neutral/fair grounds.


Well, you gotta choose between a potential relationship with her, or your pride. Which is more valuable to you? I know that many women think this way, and I love women, so I'm down for whatever.


----------



## Neal (Jan 14, 2012)

ImperfectCircle said:


> Well, you gotta choose between a potential relationship with her, or your pride. Which is more valuable to you? I know that many women think this way, and I love women, so I'm down for whatever.


My pride and my money are more important.


----------



## LonelyLurker (Sep 24, 2016)

ImperfectCircle said:


> Women are constantly feeling pressured to prove their worth. Even on this forum. I'll just leave it at that.


I'm sure all of the women appreciate you defending them from a non existent threat.

1) If I went on a date I wouldn't be bringing the rest of the forum with me so I'm not sure what relevance your comment holds. I would judge her actions and she should judge mine, neither of us would be proxies for our respective genders and the sins they may have committed.

2) Any woman who feels pressure to prove their worth should... stop. Unless you're one of the defenders that respects women so much you think they are incapable of basic decision making and personal responsibility.

I'll just leave it at that.


----------



## Malek (Oct 4, 2012)

I don't even... waa?


----------



## iAmCodeMonkey (May 23, 2010)

LonelyLurker said:


> I'm sure all of the women appreciate you defending them from a non existent threat.
> 
> 1) If I went on a date I wouldn't be bringing the rest of the forum with me so I'm not sure what relevance your comment holds. I would judge her actions and she should judge mine, neither of us would be proxies for our respective genders and the sins they may have committed.
> 
> ...


:clap

This post needs to be repeated for being the goddamn truth.


----------



## ImperfectCircle (Jun 1, 2017)

iAmCodeMonkey said:


> :clap
> 
> This post needs to be repeated for being the goddamn truth.





LonelyLurker said:


> ...


Yes, just magically stop feeling judged without any real method of doing it. I'll have to figure out how this type of magic works myself. If I could figure this out, I could save the entire planet from pain and suffering. Amazing!


----------



## Malek (Oct 4, 2012)




----------



## LonelyLurker (Sep 24, 2016)

ImperfectCircle said:


> Yes, just magically stop feeling judged without any real method of doing it. I'll have to figure out how this type of magic works myself. If I could figure this out, I could save the entire planet from pain and suffering. Amazing!


There's a difference between feeling/being judged and caring enough to try and win their approval by doing whatever is expected of you.

You appear to have as low a view of your own agency/abilities as you do of women. Sad really.

I sincerely hope you are able to build some real self esteem in time, you don't have to blindly follow what people tell you.


----------



## ImperfectCircle (Jun 1, 2017)

LonelyLurker said:


> There's a difference between feeling/being judged and caring enough to try and win their approval by doing whatever is expected of you.
> 
> You appear to have as low a view of your own agency/abilities as you do of women. Sad really.
> 
> I sincerely hope you are able to build some real self esteem in time, you don't have to blindly follow what people tell you.


You don't like my idea of saving the world with your magic tricks?


----------



## LonelyLurker (Sep 24, 2016)

ImperfectCircle said:


> You don't like my idea of saving the world with your magic tricks?


You sound like you might be a decent person so I'll retract the claws for now. 

So tell me, do you think people (of any gender) are capable of rejecting standards others seek to apply to them?

Personally I feel absolutely no pressure to meet the expectations of others, I have my own standards. I'll listen to other people but I will always be the one to decide whether to comply or reject their suggestion.

This hasn't always been the case, when I was younger I would try to fit in and be desperate to be accepted. So what changed? I built self esteem.

So going back to the original topic, if I meet a woman and I'm not enough for her (without having to play silly games because... tradition), that's perfectly fine, she's welcome to look elsewhere, no hard feelings I can survive without her.


----------



## ImperfectCircle (Jun 1, 2017)

LonelyLurker said:


> You sound like you might be a decent person so I'll retract the claws for now.
> 
> So tell me, do you think people (of any gender) are capable of rejecting standards others seek to apply to them?
> 
> ...


I got no problem with that. It's not really my personality, so I can't say I understand, but as long as women aren't complaining about being ganged up on and personally attacked, I just try to mind my own business and work on myself instead.

And yes, I think they're capable of being whoever they want to be. Some of them don't want to be who you want them to be though.


----------



## Witchblade (Jun 17, 2017)

LonelyLurker said:


> So going back to the original topic, if I meet a woman and I'm not enough for her (without having to play silly games because... tradition), that's perfectly fine, she's welcome to look elsewhere, no hard feelings I can survive without her.


That's fine, you're free to reject anyone you want for any reason, but I think it's ridiculous to think of paying for a date as playing games. If anything, splitting the bill and making this such a huge deal that you're practically treating a willingness to split as some litmus test for dating is playing games.


----------



## LonelyLurker (Sep 24, 2016)

ImperfectCircle said:


> Some of them don't want to be who you want them to be though.


But of course, if I'm allowed to reject their standards they're allowed to reject mine. I never expect from others that which I don't expect of myself.


----------



## LonelyLurker (Sep 24, 2016)

Witchblade said:


> That's fine, you're free to reject anyone you want for any reason, but I think it's ridiculous to think of paying for a date as playing games. If anything, splitting the bill and making this such a huge deal that you're practically treating a willingness to split as some litmus test for dating is playing games.


Paying for dates isn't the problem, the idea that it is my duty to do so simply because I'm a man is the problem.

Something tells me that if I were to assert that you must do certain things simply because you're a woman, your acceptance of the situation would decrease.

Plus, I didn't say I would use paying for a bill as a litmus test. People trying to tell me/guess what I think when they could simply ask me is another of the silly games I dislike.


----------



## Witchblade (Jun 17, 2017)

LonelyLurker said:


> Paying for dates isn't the problem, the idea that it is my duty to do so simply because I'm a man is the problem.


wow, ok, if a $7-$12 date is the hill you want to die on for 'equality' then go right ahead. Just don't deny that it's good advice for men to not play games with the bill, just paying it and not making a big issue of paying is much more likely to make her feel good about the date and you.


----------



## LonelyLurker (Sep 24, 2016)

Witchblade said:


> wow, ok, if a $7-$12 date is the hill you want to die on for 'equality' then go right ahead. Just don't deny that it's good advice for men to not play games with the bill, just paying it and not making a big issue of paying is much more likely to make her feel good about the date and you.


You're not very good at listening are you? Read my previous post to the end to see both why this isn't applicable to me as well as the irony.


----------



## iAmCodeMonkey (May 23, 2010)

opcorn


----------



## TheInvisibleHand (Sep 5, 2015)

LonelyLurker said:


> You're not very good at listening are you?


Listening is very hard for some people.


----------



## ImperfectCircle (Jun 1, 2017)

LonelyLurker said:


> You're not very good at listening are you? Read my previous post to the end to see both why this isn't applicable to me as well as the irony.


That's not a very smart thing to say to a woman either. Good luck with that.

Can we at least let women recover from the trauma of basically being in slavery to men since the beginning of time, before we start complaining about our lot in life as men?


----------



## LonelyLurker (Sep 24, 2016)

ImperfectCircle said:


> That's not a very smart thing to say to a woman either. Good luck with that.
> 
> Can we at least let women recover from the trauma of basically being in slavery to men since the beginning of time, before we start complaining about our lot in life as men?


Because I must be trying to seduce her? Come on man, they don't need you to protect them from someone disagreeing with them.

Do you realise that you sound like you think women are essentially children who must be protected as they aren't capable of doing it themselves?

You sound like you own shares in pedestals. :laugh:


----------



## ImperfectCircle (Jun 1, 2017)

LonelyLurker said:


> You're not very good at listening are you? Read my previous post to the end to see both why this isn't applicable to me as well as the irony.





LonelyLurker said:


> Because I must be trying to seduce her? Come on man, they don't need you to protect them from someone disagreeing with them.
> 
> Do you realise that you sound like you think women are essentially children who must be protected as they aren't capable of doing it themselves?
> 
> You sound like you own shares in pedestals. :laugh:


Like I said, good luck with that. If you can find someone who will love you for being an annoying little ****, I don't want to hear about the relationship.


----------



## LonelyLurker (Sep 24, 2016)

ImperfectCircle said:


> Like I said, good luck with that. If you can find someone who will love you for being an annoying little ****, I don't want to hear about the relationship.


Ooh, someone doesn't like hearing the truth. :laugh:


----------



## LonelyLurker (Sep 24, 2016)

Sheska said:


> Personally, I find this kind of 'treat women with kid gloves' approach belittling and patronizing. This is not a criticism of you as a person, I just want you to consider that your opinion may not be representative of what all women want.


Uh oh @ImperfectCircle, this woman doesn't fit into your framework, what will you do? Dismiss her as she disagrees with you, or fall upon your mighty sword of chivalry and accept defeat?

Gets tricky when you don't see people as individuals doesn't it?

And yes, the claws are back out. :laugh:


----------



## LonelyLurker (Sep 24, 2016)

Sheska said:


> LL, come on, you're a better person than that. No need to drive the point home with your claws (no matter how charming of a feline you are).


That's fair criticism. If someone wants to test me they better make sure they're ready to get tested back, but you're right.


----------



## ImperfectCircle (Jun 1, 2017)

Sheska said:


> As a woman, I have not experienced the slavery you refer to so do not feel it is appropriate for me to demand any kind of recompense or time for recovery. Living in the modern Western world, I strongly believe, as the scales go, things to be very much more skewed in my (as a woman) favour. Personally, I find this kind of 'treat women with kid gloves' approach belittling and patronizing. This is not a criticism of you as a person, I just want you to consider that your opinion may not be representative of what all women want.
> 
> You mentioned in another post here that "_Women are constantly feeling pressured to prove their worth._" The difference between us is that I would phrase this problem as "*we *_are constantly feeling pressured to prove_ *our *_worth_." In the first date scenario it is easy to see the unrealistic and often irrational expectations placed on *both *sides, on my part I try not to perpetuate these by somehow placing my need to secure a relationship above my personal standards. But this is me and my personal view, and I think that what @LonelyLurker was trying to say is that how we approach these things is subjective, a personal opinion or standard should not be forced upon an entire gender.
> 
> ...


Throughout history, who has had all the power and mistreated the opposite sex the most? This was my point. PTSD can be passed down genetically, as well as societal norms and pressures. I don't believe all women suffer from this. That wouldn't make sense. If a cop comes and arrests a man for hitting his wife, is he patronizing her because he thought she wasn't strong enough to fight back? No. He is protecting her from the risk of going to prison if she were to snap and do something to get rid of him. Since he has a far less chance of getting into trouble for it, due to his connections. It is common sense/logic based on observable evidence.



LonelyLurker said:


> Ooh, someone doesn't like hearing the truth. :laugh:


Which one of us? Me or you? I was trying to agree to disagree with you, since we both believe we're right. And you just keep going. That's why I implied you were an annoying little ****. And this is not meant to be a threat, but you really shouldn't say these things in public where it is more likely to get punched by someone's dad, husband, brother, or friend. I guess it is slightly easier to ignore you online. And you can't do quite as much damage. You do know that most of these ideas of yours are similar to what came out of the skinhead movement in the early 90's? It kind of triggers a reaction in some people who experienced that first hand.

This might interest you:
http://www.marieclaire.com/politics/a24163/white-supremacist-women/

I can't make it very far into the article yet without PTSD anxiety kicking in, but I'm working on it.

I'm not saying anyone here is a skinhead either, just that this has echos of what I grew up around.



LonelyLurker said:


> Uh oh @ImperfectCircle, this woman doesn't fit into your framework, what will you do? Dismiss her as she disagrees with you, or fall upon your mighty sword of chivalry and accept defeat?
> 
> Gets tricky when you don't see people as individuals doesn't it?
> 
> And yes, the claws are back out. :laugh:


Neither. I will present my point of view and see what happens. If anyone attacks me or the people I care about, I will probably respond as fairly as possible, if I see or hear about it.


Sheska said:


> LL, come on, you're a better person than that. No need to drive the point home with your claws (no matter how charming of a feline you are).


Don't worry, it doesn't bother me. I still haven't quite figured out his point yet anyway.


LonelyLurker said:


> That's fair criticism. If someone wants to test me they better make sure they're ready to get tested back, but you're right.


You're flipping things around again. You were here posting about this before I ever joined in. Your spin zone is crumbling. What will _you_ do? I have a good guess.


----------



## Witchblade (Jun 17, 2017)

ImperfectCircle said:


> PTSD can be passed down genetically


What? Obviously a predisposition for mental illness can be genetic but why do you think PTSD travels specifically on the sex-chromosomes? Women aren't a different species with different genes, a boy and a girl being born from the same parents would both be predisposed to developing the condition.


----------



## ImperfectCircle (Jun 1, 2017)

Witchblade said:


> What? Obviously a predisposition for mental illness can be genetic but why do you think PTSD travels specifically on the sex-chromosomes? Women aren't a different species with different genes, a boy and a girl being born from the same parents would both be predisposed to developing the condition.


That's why I mentioned societal norms as well. If you're predisposed to it, then society brings it out of you, then you are more likely to develop it. A male child wouldn't be nearly as likely to be triggered as a female, because he wouldn't be constantly reminded that he is a woman.

I think there is some emerging research on the subject of what is passed down on chromosomes, but it's been a while since I checked. It was more than first expected though.


----------



## ImperfectCircle (Jun 1, 2017)

I'm reading these articles now:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3108177/
https://newrepublic.com/article/120144/trauma-genetic-scientists-say-parents-are-passing-ptsd-kids
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/extra/daily_videos/can-trauma-be-passed-to-next-generation-through-dna/


----------



## LonelyLurker (Sep 24, 2016)

ImperfectCircle said:


> Don't worry, it doesn't bother me. I still haven't quite figured out his point yet anyway.


Given that the point I'm making is incredibly simple (whether you agree with me or not), you are either being disingenuous or aren't worth trying to convince (as you won't understand). Either way I don't think I'll waste any more time on you unless you say something worthwhile later.



ImperfectCircle said:


> You're flipping things around again. You were here posting about this before I ever joined in. Your spin zone is crumbling. What will _you_ do? I have a good guess.


Before I leave you to it, I chose not to use certain insults that spring to mind when I see men behaving like you are here, I still won't stoop to your level.

You can think whatever you like about me, based on this discussion your opinion doesn't hold much value anyway.


----------



## ImperfectCircle (Jun 1, 2017)

Sorry, but I'm having trouble following your logic. I think I'm just going to do some research on genetic PTSD link using the articles I mentioned in my last post, and then try to say something later.



Sheska said:


> People who have had the power throughout the history are not representative of the dominant sex. Just ask yourself this question, throughout the history who has been consistently conscripted to fight in wars? How is expected to lay their lives down first in any conflict or disaster? Who has carried the financial burden of providing for families? I'm sure once you keep going you'd be able to think of more such questions.
> 
> My point is, it's not about which sex has it worse, it's about recognising that we all face inequalities and specific challenges. And that trying to solve these issues by applying single-sided approach may exacerbate these inequalities. For instance, in your domestic abuse scenario, if a cop comes and automatically arrests and rough-handles a man on a presumption of guilt, what message does it send to all those men who are victims of a female led domestic abuse? How many of them would even go so far as to seek help or report such abuse? This is not dismissing the fact that women suffer at the hands of men, this is admitting that things aren't always that black and white and we should take a neutral and balanced approach when trying to resolve these situations.
> 
> In your example, arriving at a scene of a crime after the fact, where emotions run riot, would tell you nothing of who perpetrated the crime to begin with, who retaliated, who was defending themselves. You were not a first hand observer of those events so should not jump to conclusions.


----------



## ImperfectCircle (Jun 1, 2017)

This is why I always make it a point to say "most women" or "some women", but no one ever seems to notice that detail.

Should I not care about any women's suffering at all, just because you and women like you don't need or want help? Some of them really do want help because maybe a man has overpowered them physically or emotionally. I know it can go the other way, but I get tired of adding all the disclaimers that make the post twice as long. And it is not nearly as common for a man to suffer from domestic abuse. Surely everyone in their right mind will admit to this.

There is a reason why I try to stand up for the women who can't on their own (other than trying to seduce them like I am often accused of) (if I were going to seduce someone, I wouldn't attach a string like that which would make her feel pressured to pretend to like me that way). When I was younger I made the decision a few times not to help, even though I was in a position to. And now I have to live with wondering what became of them, and the feeling that I could have done something, but I didn't. I would also try to stand up for any guy who was going through true abuse. I just don't get the opportunity very often to prove it.

And I don't mean by fighting them. That is rarely a successful method of helping anyone. I mean telling someone who is actually in a position to help more, and has the experience to do so safely. Or just debating online, I guess.


Sheska said:


> It's ok. I'm not always the best at putting my points across in a comprehensive manner. If there is anything specific you want to ask I'd be happy to elaborate; otherwise, there is no pressure to even continue this line of discussion. I just wanted you to know that some of us women are capable of fighting our own fights
> 
> Slightly off topic... (and I may have written about this already but my **** memory fools me into believing this to be the first time but...)
> 
> ...


----------



## ImperfectCircle (Jun 1, 2017)

So far from my research, I can say that 1 out of 9 women get PTSD, and 1 out of 20 men get PTSD. It is more than twice as common among women. Is there a genetic component that is twice as likely to be handed down from a female to a female, and not to a male? Or is it because society is still not equal? I suppose we will see.


----------



## ImperfectCircle (Jun 1, 2017)

Sheska said:


> I would suggest that you should definitely care about those who are suffering, regardless of whether they are male, female, young, old, or even human. But what makes you think that women are suffering _as a general rule_? What makes you treat all women as victims as a baseline approach?
> 
> Of course you should stand up for those who can't defend themselves? But why would you assume this as a starting position of a female gender?
> 
> ...


The reason is statistics and personal experience. Especially for the areas that I've lived in. The statistics are still showing that women get PTSD twice as often. And you say 60/40 on domestic abuse. I would be willing to bet that more than half of those men in the 40% were abused by other men rather than women. That makes men heavily advantaged over women. And not just that, it means that men are far more violent. Why wouldn't the victims among the women need help? More often than men.

And I have said multiple times that I would stand up for either gender, but that's not exactly where this conversation is at. So why should I have to keep mentioning it other than to keep people from taking cheap shots at me? And cheap shots don't hurt me, they give me a chance to take a better shot back and explain my point even more.  I am kind of trying to read some articles though. 

Maybe you should spend some time helping to get a few of those shelters started for men. I agree that it's not quite fair.

BTW, I think it's very cool that you are a strong woman. That always makes me happy to see someone like you. And I see it more and more often now.


----------



## ImperfectCircle (Jun 1, 2017)

Sheska said:


> @ImperfectCircle
> In this game it helps not to guess or jump to conclusions  We are all tempted to interpret information to fit our personal models even if we don't have all of the details. I try and be cautious about doing so, as otherwise I'm basing things on my uneducated assumptions rather than facts.
> 
> There are lots of statistics where women lead, just like there are those where men dominate the numbers. Compare suicide statistics. Women attempt more suicides but more men than women kill themselves. We are not the same, even as a gender we all differ. It is worth looking at a wider picture.
> ...


Fine. You win. You are a woman after all. I'm not. I don't have much credibility. I also helped keep Hillary from being elected. For strategic reasons, but I don't know many women who care about that part. I take that back. I do know quite a few, but the Hillary supporters hit pretty hard.


----------



## ImperfectCircle (Jun 1, 2017)

Sheska said:


> I feel that I may have upset you. I apologise if this is the case.


No. It's fine. I just realized how I sounded. And the political climate right now. Kind of got a confession out of me lol. Good job.


----------



## Malek (Oct 4, 2012)




----------



## RagnarLothbrok (Dec 16, 2016)

The title of this thread is in nice guy territory.

If a girl likes you and wants to go on a date with you, you can take her to a bar and buy her drink. It's essentially a charity and thus you can never be upset if she doesn't want to sleep with you. If she's attracted to you and isn't very traditional, she might even pay for the next round.

I'm always upfront with women that I'm not looking for commitment or anything serious unless I felt a connection, women respect honesty and not being led on. I've gotten far too many crushes on girls before asking them on a date, unfortunately, it makes you needy and off-putting to women and it almost always leads to disaster. 

People are repulsed by scarcity, which is why if you have an abundance of women and potential dates, you become more attractive to women.


----------



## Malek (Oct 4, 2012)

^
What if you are looking for commitment or something serious though?

Anytime you disclose this to a woman, that's like essentially shooting yourself in the foot and she loses interest due to what you just stated.

If you're anti-social to the point you can't really get multiple dates at the same time, then what chance do you have in this shallow world?

I personally find that playas and people who date multiple people at the same time or practice polygamy as not very genuine nor trust-worthy individuals, that's just my biased opinion.

Even when people claim and act as if they desire something serious or claim to prefer a monogamous lifestyle, they might actually be lying about that and talking to multiple suitors and change their mind about you at the drop of a hat. You're essentially a plan B guy or even C, or whatever. 

I personally think people are not bookmarks, you can't place a relationship on pause with the intention of going back and rekindling that relationship once again, right after you lie to that person mind you.

I think honesty is rare as hell these days and most people are only concerned about number one, yet are never honest about it. The majority of people are placing up a facade because they are concerned too much about how others perceive them, yet they are dishonest without a second thought and little to no remorse. It creates drama, mistrust, and pointless bonds with people you cannot rely on during dark times.

Everyone's entitled to their own opinion, to each their own, I'll live my life, y'all live yours. I respectfully disagree with these methods you all feel I should reapply to my life. I've tried it your way for five long years and felt more and more lonely ironically. Doing things my way this past way has helped me form genuine connections with people who actually care. I hope someday that will extend to a woman I develop feelings for, yet my guard is always up now and I won't make the same mistakes again. If a girl genuinely wants me in her life, then she needs to prove that to me just as much I need to prove to her that I genuinely care for her---trust me, I get it, I understand. I find it confusing why some of you feel the need to string me up for merely suggesting for men to lookout for themselves and be careful when first meeting new people. People who want you to sacrifice your happiness just because of outdated expectations, they do not care about your well being and it would be fallacious to follow blindly.


----------



## WinterDave (Dec 5, 2003)

If Donald Trump can get Ivanka, then you can get a girl too! :group


----------



## Optic Knight (Aug 13, 2017)

Malek said:


> ^
> What if you are looking for commitment or something serious though?
> 
> * Anytime you disclose this to a woman, that's like essentially shooting yourself in the foot and she loses interest due to what you just stated.*
> ...


Yeah, they think wanting a relationship is a low-status trait. High-status men would **** all the women they wanted without giving any commitment. You need to pretend to be the high-status player and pretend that she "changed you" into a guy who can settle down.


----------



## RagnarLothbrok (Dec 16, 2016)

@Malek I don't want to sound mean or anything, but it sounds like you're wanting to cling to somewhat delusional romantic ideals, i.e more traditional (outdated) views of dating. Even if you are interested in a girl as a girlfriend, you shouldn't air those feelings until you've slept with her or until she has broached the subject of exclusivity. I'm sure many will disagree with me on this, but it's what I've come to realise in my experience with women.


----------



## Malek (Oct 4, 2012)

Yeah... sadly I agree now.

Earlier today at work, me and a friend were chatting and he said that he was raised Catholic too but I shouldn't expect too much out of girls or think the way I do. That he and his friend are upfront with girls and tell them they don't want anything serious. For some reason that actually works and they just have like a fwb type of things with these girls.

I stated that I didn't want that, what's the point? I'd prefer more of a monogamous type of thing, why is that so weird now?

He told me that eventually if they both like each other, then they can be dating or be exclusive, but how society is today, no one wants anything serious in the beginning and prefer to play the field or sleep around.


I'm not interested in that type of life, I don't understand how every women tell me that they're not interested in that type of life either yet most of em (not all but most) prefer to spend time with these men that clearly state they want nothing serious and these girls think they can change them, surprise surprise they never can. People say one thing, yet do the opposite all the time.

I'm not wired correctly to play these stupid mind games and I'd rather be alone if this is going to be the case every single time I want to get to know someone. I'm so tired of it all, I'll always be lonely and never fall in love but at least I'll be able to focus on myself, my hobbies, friends, and making money. You're quite right on your assessment of me, hit the nail on the head with that one. I assumed I was being mature when in actuality society labels me as immature and unrealistic lol...--It's so strange to me, being a hopeless romantic is in fact hopeless. Very unwise I guess.


----------



## Optic Knight (Aug 13, 2017)

Malek said:


> Yeah... sadly I agree now.
> 
> Earlier today at work, me and a friend were chatting and he said that he was raised Catholic too but I shouldn't expect too much out of girls or think the way I do. That he and his friend are upfront with girls and tell them they don't want anything serious. For some reason that actually works and they just have like a fwb type of things with these girls.
> 
> ...


One option is to be like all the christian men I know and slay a bunch of ***** while you're young, then ask forgiveness after you're done with it.


----------

