# Girls, would you date an unemployed guy?



## LostinReverie (Mar 18, 2007)

I would, but I'm poor, so it wouldn't involve a lot of going out... which would be perfect considering I don't go out anywhere anyhow... I'm a little hesitant to admit this, but I have some social anxiety.


----------



## barnabas (Apr 24, 2007)

I think there's a similar thread like this down yonder, but to answer the question: casual dating - yes, serious relationship - nay.



> I'm a little hesitant to admit this, but I have some social anxiety.


:lol

Really? We would never have guessed. :b


----------



## Razorblade Kiss (Oct 29, 2006)

He has to be able to take me out to dinner, a movie, something! So probably not...unless he's one of those unemployed dudes who happen to have money somehow. 

I'm not even one who likes to go out a lot, but in the beginning of dating, going out is important IMO.


----------



## srschirm (Jun 25, 2006)

*Re: re: Girls, would you date an unemployed guy?*



Strange Religion said:


> He has to be able to take me out to dinner, a movie, something! So probably not...unless he's one of those unemployed dudes who happen to have money somehow.
> 
> I'm not even one who likes to go out a lot, but in the beginning of dating, going out is important IMO.


What about you taking him out to dinner, a movie, something?


----------



## embers (Dec 19, 2006)

In agreement with Germanhermit, and i'm not sure i'd respect a guy without a job for there to be any long term connection. But if he were hot and had a good personality we could work out a little somethin somethin *wink *wink *nudge :boogie


----------



## srschirm (Jun 25, 2006)

*Re: re: Girls, would you date an unemployed guy?*



embers said:


> In agreement with Germanhermit, and i'm not sure i'd respect a guy without a job for there to be any long term connection. But if he were hot and had a good personality we could work out a little somethin somethin *wink *wink *nudge :boogie


Maybe guys shouldn't respect women without jobs then.


----------



## nesteroff (Nov 14, 2003)

I dated one for four years, though he did work about a year during that time. I was ok with it since he was making music all day long. He was productive. He didn't just sit around watching tv. 

I don't really care about money. Fancy dinners, movies, buying me crap, blah blah blah, who cares. I'm such a homebody, and I literally only enjoy music and going on walks, so as long as he can walk, and at least is a fan of music and doesn't mind me playing it, we're good. I don't feel I have to live with my mate, either, so it doesn't matter if he can't pay his bills. As long as I don't have to pay his bills, I don't care. Live at home with mom? Well, so do I, so I would be a hypocrite to judge a guy for that.

I guess the only thing Id feel I was missing out on was traveling. I love doing that, and god that's expensive. I would feel cheated if I had to pay for the entire trip.


----------



## embers (Dec 19, 2006)

> embers wrote:
> In agreement with Germanhermit, and i'm not sure i'd respect a guy without a job for there to be any long term connection. But if he were hot and had a good personality we could work out a little somethin somethin *wink *wink *nudge
> 
> Maybe guys shouldn't respect women without jobs then.


Maybe...but the point is its probably better for both parties to be pulling their weight financially for anything to work longterm.


----------



## Razorblade Kiss (Oct 29, 2006)

*Re: re: Girls, would you date an unemployed guy?*



srschirm said:


> Strange Religion said:
> 
> 
> > He has to be able to take me out to dinner, a movie, something! So probably not...unless he's one of those unemployed dudes who happen to have money somehow.
> ...


The way I see it, a guy needs to make those moves in the beginning. 
Not saying I would never do those things for him...but as embers said, both people need to bring something to the plate.


----------



## TX boy (Apr 26, 2006)

*Re: re: Girls, would you date an unemployed guy?*



Strange Religion said:


> srschirm said:
> 
> 
> > [quote="Strange Religion":7c2b9]He has to be able to take me out to dinner, a movie, something! So probably not...unless he's one of those unemployed dudes who happen to have money somehow.
> ...


The way I see it, a guy needs to make those moves in the beginning. 
Not saying I would never do those things for him...but as embers said, both people need to bring something to the plate.[/quote:7c2b9]

Why can't a woman make the move in the beginning? If "both people need to bring something to the plate" then why do you only expect the guy to "make those moves in the beginning"? Yes, the guy can do it, but can't the girl also equally do it? I think that is an odd statement coming from a liberal thinker such as yourself.


----------



## Whimsy (Mar 16, 2006)

No, I actually turned a guy down because of this (amoung other things...). I would love to go out to restaurants and cafe's and those sorts of things. Even if I don't get out very much when I do I would like it to be a nice place. I don't mind if he still lives at home. But he has to have atleast a part time job.


----------



## ebolarama (Nov 13, 2006)

If he doesn't have a job, he'd better be in school or have some sort of responsibilities that prevent him from working.


----------



## Razorblade Kiss (Oct 29, 2006)

*Re: re: Girls, would you date an unemployed guy?*



TX boy said:


> [quote="Strange Religion":e3b74]
> 
> 
> srschirm said:
> ...


The way I see it, a guy needs to make those moves in the beginning. 
Not saying I would never do those things for him...but as embers said, both people need to bring something to the plate.[/quote:e3b74]

Why can't a woman make the move in the beginning? If "both people need to bring something to the plate" then why do you only expect the guy to "make those moves in the beginning"? Yes, the guy can do it, but can't the girl also equally do it? I think that is an odd statement coming from a liberal thinker such as yourself.[/quote:e3b74]

That's just my view on first going out with someone. The guy should be the one taking me out first and it would be some kind of assurance that he's genuinely interested.


----------



## Softy785 (Apr 16, 2006)

I'm not materialistic; I don't need my man to have money, buy me things, and take me out on expensive dates in order to be happy in a relationship. However, if the guy hasn't had a job and has no plans on looking for a job in the immediate future, then that says something about him, and I don't think I could get seriously involved with a guy like that. I'm very ambitious and goal-driven, and I couldn't be with someone who was ok with being unemployed and living off their parents and/or benefits.


----------



## PGVan (May 22, 2004)

*Re: re: Girls, would you date an unemployed guy?*



Strange Religion said:


> That's just my view on first going out with someone. The guy should be the one taking me out first and it would be some kind of assurance that he's genuinely interested.


What about the guy needing that assurance about the girl?

Why is it always up to the guy? Why can't the girl show the first interest?

I have to agree with whoever questioned why you would have this opinion, but at the same time say that, "both need to bring something to the plate". It's a two-way street, and not in the "you go, I go" sense.


----------



## Razorblade Kiss (Oct 29, 2006)

Oy vey...this is how I feel, me personally. If you don't agree, ok, but for ME, I would like the guy to take ME out first. That's just how I feel and when I said "You both need to bring something to the plate" I meant that in order for a relationship to work, you both have to contribute something. If a guy is unemployed, I'm assuming he has no money; therefore, he wouldn't be able to take me out at all and I'm not going to be the only one doing it. That's all I meant....and excuse me for feeling like a guy should try to actually win me over in the beginning by taking me out first.

I could easily say "No, he doesn't need money at all. We can just sit on his couch all day and watch tv." Puh-lease. 
I don't have anything against spending time like that, but that's not gonna cut it all the time.

Sorry, I don't mean to sound like a ******. I just didn't know what I said was a big deal.


----------



## PGVan (May 22, 2004)

*Re: re: Girls, would you date an unemployed guy?*



Strange Religion said:


> Oy vey...this is how I feel, me personally. If you don't agree, ok, but for ME, I would like the guy to take ME out first.
> 
> and excuse me for feeling like a guy should try to actually win me over in the beginning by taking me out.


No offence (really, I'm not trying to be an ***), but your personal views are mighty stereotypical. Why do you think some guys here are taking a bit of offence to your views? It is opinions like yours that prevent guys like me from ever having a hope. I'm never going to try to "win" a girl. If I'm attracted to a girl, I am not competing with anybody to "win" her, especially not with her herself.

What about if you like a guy? Should you not have to try to "win" him and take him out? You make yourself sound like every guy within a 100-mile radius of you is lining up to "win" you.


----------



## Nae (Nov 10, 2003)

_If a guy is unemployed, I'm assuming he has no money; therefore, he wouldn't be able to take me out at all and I'm not going to be the only one doing it. That's all I meant....and excuse me for feeling like a guy should try to actually win me over in the beginning by taking me out first. 
_

By _why_ is this view prevalent is the deeper question. Have you ever questioned yourself and your beliefs on why a man should be the one to win you over instead of vice-versa?

I'm not trying to change your mind, BTW. I am just trying to stimulate some introspective thought on why we hold these beliefs. According to Steven Pinker, just about every culture besides a few (in which the females gather the food) assigned roles to each sex in a similar way that we see in America. This, I would assume, suggest that there is an innate psychological different between men and women. This materialist view might show a deeper, psychological connection: Women desire men who will be able to provide for a family/child. This does not suggest because it is natural that is it correct, btw. We defy nature and our genetic impulses frequently, considering we have the ability to reason, unlike many species.

I'll end on a humorous note from the devils dictionary, written back in the earlyt 1900s, which shows this as an age old question

*MALE, n.*
_ A member of the unconsidered, or negligible sex. The male of the human race is commonly known (to the female) as Mere Man. The genus has two varieties: good providers and bad providers._


----------



## Razorblade Kiss (Oct 29, 2006)

You wanna know why a man should try to "win" me over and by that I mean win my affection? Because I'm worth it dammit. That simple.
I hold myself to a certain esteem, I'm not full of myself at all, but I know what I deserve and I know what I want. Thankyou.


----------



## WineKitty (Nov 26, 2004)

*Re: re: Girls, would you date an unemployed guy?*



Strange Religion said:


> You wanna know why a man should try to "win" me over and by that I mean win my affection? Because I'm worth it dammit. That simple.
> I hold myself to a certain esteem, I'm not full of myself at all, but I know what I deserve and I know what I want. Thankyou.


Spoken like a strong woman!!!!!!!!! :clap


----------



## dez (Jun 25, 2005)

Only if there were a good reason such as other responsibilities, school, anxiety, etc. Also he would need to be willing to improve on whatever the situation is that prevents him from working. I won't date someone who chooses not to be employed out of sheer laziness.


----------



## Your Lover Scrub Ducky (Jul 26, 2004)

Strange Religion said:


> You wanna know why a man should try to "win" me over and by that I mean win my affection? Because I'm worth it dammit. That simple.
> I hold myself to a certain esteem, I'm not full of myself at all, but I know what I deserve and I know what I want. Thankyou.


wowza. That attitude/outlook is a huge turn off for me. Can't stand it when a girl thinks she's something spectacular and all the guys need to "Win" her over and take her there and here and pay for this and that in order to win her affection. I wouldn't waste my time with someone like that.

Not that I wouldn't pay for her, actually I'd prefer to pay for most things in a relationship. But not if she expects it or acts as though I _have_ to in order to gain her affection. **** that.

THIS is the kind of girl I would invest time into:



Softy785 said:


> I'm not materialistic; I don't need my man to have money, buy me things, and take me out on expensive dates in order to be happy in a relationship. However, if the guy hasn't had a job and has no plans on looking for a job in the immediate future, then that says something about him, and I don't think I could get seriously involved with a guy like that. I'm very ambitious and goal-driven, and I couldn't be with someone who was ok with being unemployed and living off their parents and/or benefits.


I nub you Softy


----------



## WineKitty (Nov 26, 2004)

Scrub Ducky said:


> [quote="Strange Religion":0f6ae]You wanna know why a man should try to "win" me over and by that I mean win my affection? Because I'm worth it dammit. That simple.
> I hold myself to a certain esteem, I'm not full of myself at all, but I know what I deserve and I know what I want. Thankyou.


wowza. That attitude/outlook is a huge turn off for me. Can't stand it when a girl thinks she's something spectacular and all the guys need to "Win" her over and take her there and here and pay for this and that in order to win her affection. I wouldn't waste my time with someone like that.

Not that I wouldn't pay for her, actually I'd prefer to pay for most things in a relationship. But not if she expects it or acts as though I _have_ to in order to gain her affection. **** that.

THIS is the kind of girl I would invest time into:



Softy785 said:


> I'm not materialistic; I don't need my man to have money, buy me things, and take me out on expensive dates in order to be happy in a relationship. However, if the guy hasn't had a job and has no plans on looking for a job in the immediate future, then that says something about him, and I don't think I could get seriously involved with a guy like that. I'm very ambitious and goal-driven, and I couldn't be with someone who was ok with being unemployed and living off their parents and/or benefits.


I nub you Softy [/quote:0f6ae]
With all due respect to the Duckster :kiss, I do not think that Ashley meant to sound like she is materialistic. Rather, I read it as someone who feels she deserves to be treated like a lady.


----------



## PGVan (May 22, 2004)

Scrub Ducky said:


> [quote="Strange Religion":4ca47]You wanna know why a man should try to "win" me over and by that I mean win my affection? Because I'm worth it dammit. That simple.
> I hold myself to a certain esteem, I'm not full of myself at all, but I know what I deserve and I know what I want. Thankyou.


wowza. That attitude/outlook is a huge turn off for me. Can't stand it when a girl thinks she's something spectacular and all the guys need to "Win" her over and take her there and here and pay for this and that in order to win her affection. I wouldn't waste my time with someone like that.

Not that I wouldn't pay for her, actually I'd prefer to pay for most things in a relationship. But not if she expects it or acts as though I _have_ to in order to gain her affection. **** that. [/quote:4ca47]

Took the words right out of my mouth. I wouldn't feel very respected with a girl with that attitude. In fact, I'd feel gouged if I fell for it.


----------



## Razorblade Kiss (Oct 29, 2006)

Oh no, what I said is a huge turnoff to Ducky, how shall I sleep at night?! I just don't know. HAHA I never said I was something "spectacular". 
I have certain expectations. I'm not ashamed of that and there's nothing wrong with that.
I'm not materialistic either, but I'm also not going to say a guy doesn't need money.


----------



## Razorblade Kiss (Oct 29, 2006)

Penny said:


> Scrub Ducky said:
> 
> 
> > [quote="Strange Religion":59665]You wanna know why a man should try to "win" me over and by that I mean win my affection? Because I'm worth it dammit. That simple.
> ...


With all due respect to the Duckster :kiss, I do not think that Ashley meant to sound like she is materialistic. Rather, I read it as someone who feels she deserves to be treated like a lady.[/quote:59665]

FINALLY! Someone who understands. I appreciate you, really. 
This is getting ridiculous.


----------



## PGVan (May 22, 2004)

Penny said:


> With all due respect to the Duckster :kiss, I do not think that Ashley meant to sound like she is materialistic. Rather, I read it as someone who feels she deserves to be treated like a lady.


Saying "I'm worth it" and saying that she deserves to have guys compete with her to "win her over" is being a "lady"?

She may say that she is not full of herself, but every word she has used to express her views on this suggests otherwise.


----------



## Razorblade Kiss (Oct 29, 2006)

I am worth it. What's wrong with that? Don't take your insecurities out on me. I didn't say I have guys lined up competing to win me over. You're blowing things out of proportion and it's ****ing annoying.


----------



## Your Lover Scrub Ducky (Jul 26, 2004)

*Re: re: Girls, would you date an unemployed guy?*



Strange Religion said:


> Oh no, what I said is a huge turnoff to Ducky, *how shall I sleep at night?!* I just don't know.


Well, since my bed is unavailable to you, I'd suggest to walk out into the street and give all the other guys in the world the "once in a lifetime" opportunity to buy you a nice hotel room for the night.

And maybe if they're lucky they can buy you dinner too!


----------



## PGVan (May 22, 2004)

*Re: re: Girls, would you date an unemployed guy?*



Strange Religion said:


> Oh no, what I said is a huge turnoff to Ducky, how shall I sleep at night?! I just don't know. HAHA I never said I was something "spectacular".
> I have certain expectations. I'm not ashamed of that and there's nothing wrong with that.
> I'm not materialistic either, but I'm also not going to say a guy doesn't need money.


This is no longer about money. This is about us guys trying to figure out why you have the views you do about how guy should have to "win you over". Why is it a competition and who are the guys competing with?

Sure you never actually said you were something spectacular, but if you look at it from our point of view, you should be able to see where we see you as selfish.

As I've said, your views are mighty stereotypical. You seem dead against doing the same for a guy you would like.


----------



## Razorblade Kiss (Oct 29, 2006)

> Well, since my bed is unavailable to you, I'd suggest to walk out into the street and give all the other guys in the world the "once in a lifetime" opportunity to buy you a nice hotel room for the night.
> 
> And maybe if they're lucky they can buy you dinner too!


Hilarious. Obviously you and PG Van or whoever else misunderstood what I was trying to say.


----------



## vicente (Nov 10, 2003)

I can't believe this has turned into a discussion on gender roles. These discussions tend to go nowhere...fast.


For women who want to be treated like a lady, I say screw that, I want to treat you like a PERSON.


----------



## PGVan (May 22, 2004)

Strange Religion said:


> Hilarious. Obviously you and PG Van or whoever else misunderstood what I was trying to say.


How else do you expect us to understand it?

Your expectation is that whatever guy finds you attractive needs to "win you over". How is that not putting yourself above him? While I admire your self-esteem, you don't give the impression that you would bend over for a guy you like to try to initiate a relationship, as you expect a guy who likes you to do.

If both the man and woman need to "bring things to the table" in a relationship, what is the difference between being in a relationship and starting a relationship? Why do you not have to contribute until the relationship is underway?

It's not all about you. Whether you realize it or not, you are giving off a major "vibe" of selfishness.


----------



## barnabas (Apr 24, 2007)

Internet fight! Hurray! opcorn 



Seriously, y'all need to chill...


----------



## vicente (Nov 10, 2003)

I hate it when women insist on being "treated like a lady" and then pretend that they view relationships as an equal partnership.

To them, being treated like a lady means enjoying the perks of being a (pre-feminist) girl: having doors opened for them, being paid for on dates, being asked out by men who sacrifice their safety and convenience for them.

Yet what do men get in return? I guess they are so vain that the mere companionship and loyalty of an attractive woman is enough reward for them?

This is the view of a woman who wants to enjoy the rights of a post-feminist world (i.e. not being physically beat by their partner when they disagree, and being able to say NO to sex), yet live in the pre-feminist world without responsibilities of an equal partnership where both men and women support each other in the same way emotionally and financially.


----------



## barnabas (Apr 24, 2007)

Yeah. There's a newer episode of The Simpsons in which an exasperated Homer finally screams out, "What do women _want_?" :haha

It's really funnier in context.


----------



## Razorblade Kiss (Oct 29, 2006)

*Re: re: Girls, would you date an unemployed guy?*



pinkeye said:


> Internet fight! Hurray! opcorn
> 
> Seriously, y'all need to chill...


Hahaha, it's crazy. I don't need to explain myself any further and I'm definitely not trying to impress anyone here so **** it. They can think what they want to think about me.


----------



## Your Lover Scrub Ducky (Jul 26, 2004)

*Re: re: Girls, would you date an unemployed guy?*

Who was fighting?

Tee hee, whenever you call overly confident women out on something they immediately get defensive then act like they dont care and that they're above it all. I think its cause they're so used to having all the power(especially with sex), they can't handle it when they realize dont have that power and theyre not in charge anymore. At least from my personal experiences with these types. 

Guys, don't bend over for women. Every girl deserves to be treated like a lady, but dont be her toy, you also deserve to be treated like a man. When I have a g/f, I treat her like a princess, take good care of her, but I do it on my own terms, not hers. Like, If I take her out to eat it's cause I want to take her out to eat, not cause I'm trying to "win" her or some BS. Ja know'm sayin?



vincebs said:


> For women who want to be treated like a lady, I say screw that, I want to treat you like a PERSON.


Vince, this sentence made me crack up. I dunno if it's just cause its late and I'm giddy or what. It doesn't really make sense to me right now. :lol


----------



## BeNice (Jan 2, 2004)

I'm partially employed, lack work because of anxiety, but still have some money. Of course, I am not willing to spend it on anybody, really. I guess I deserve to be alone. Oh yeah - I don't drive, either. I've totally got it going on!


----------



## embers (Dec 19, 2006)

Can I just post my two cents? :hide 

I had a feeling when I threw out the phrase "don't think I could respect a guy without a job" there would be some defense. I'm surprised at the reaction to Strange Religion's posts though, it shows you where we are when it comes to roles in society. Its like we've become one gender...no more old fashioned courting, just hit it and maybe we'll talk again? What a nightmare!

But face it, there are gender roles that are deeply embedded in society no matter how "progressive" we have become, and also double standards. Guys, would you respect a gal who slept with you on the first date? Probably not. She's supposed to hold out to prove to you she's not easy and that you're special. Yet you can sleep with someone on the first date and can still be a stud. 

The same goes for providing. Men are the providers, the top earners, and are supposed to court to make a woman feel secure to stay home and provide for the family. Why are you blaming Strange for being old fashioned? Don't you want an old fashioned girl? What happened to the thrill of the chase?? I think you misunderstood her for being materialistic when she just wants that romance. Guys, not all women are gold diggers! :stu


----------



## justlistening (Dec 4, 2006)

*Re: re: Girls, would you date an unemployed guy?*



Penny said:


> Strange Religion said:
> 
> 
> > You wanna know why a man should try to "win" me over and by that I mean win my affection? Because I'm worth it dammit. That simple.
> ...


I would say a strong woman doesn't even want the feeling of a man trying to win her, cause I think that would only make her feel cheap.

Seriously, drop the win me over attitude. You'll attract guys who just want sex and are willing to make you feel like a princess for only a week or so, and probably also some 'nice guys' but the kind with not much personality or dignity.
I think every guy will offer to pay on the first date, but not every guy is willing to win a girl over. Nothing wrong with playing hard to get to a certain level, just don't make it feel like _what you're offering at the moment it isn't enough to win me over._

But I think we're focussing a little to much on Strange Religion her ''a guy should win me over'' quote, while she probably only meant that a guy should make the first move.


----------



## LoverBoy (May 9, 2007)

If you don't have a job get one. Not for a girl but for yourself. Imagine someone who is unemployeed. What do they look like? How is their life going? Do they have goals? Are they passionate about something? Do they have respect for themself? What value are they creating in society?

If you like those anwsers then stay unemployeed. If you don't then find a way to create value in society. A job is the way most people take. Others create different forms of value whether it's writing a book, owning a business, creating a cd, being a professional photographer and selling photos. You don't always have to be an employee, but if you aren't making money that is a good route to take.


----------



## LostinReverie (Mar 18, 2007)

Holy **** I should have checked this sooner. 

I find it quite interesting that on the original topic I mirrored mine from, there were many "traditional" views being expressed which weren't turned into a huge deal. Although I was quite tempted to post my opinions on things such as :

"I don't mind working while she plays 'housewife'."

"It's cool with me. I prefer my woman in the kitchen, anyway"

"Yes, its called a wife"

I didn't hear you boys questioning their opinions, so why are you all jumping on an intelligent and confident woman who would like to see a little appreciation from a man?

I agree with Ashley. If you're not up for the pursuit, then back off and quit whining.


----------



## montgomery (May 9, 2007)

> I would say a strong woman doesn't even want the feeling of a man trying to win her, cause I think that would only make her feel cheap


I think it takes a strong woman to stand up for what she believes in and that she's worth being treated with a certain amount of dignity and respect by a man. Its okay for her to do that. Just like its okay for a man to stand up for what he believes in, like not having a job, or paying for dinner or getting a measly flower, and still expecting sex somewhere in the equation.


----------



## WineKitty (Nov 26, 2004)

montgomery said:


> > I would say a strong woman doesn't even want the feeling of a man trying to win her, cause I think that would only make her feel cheap
> 
> 
> I think it takes a strong woman to stand up for what she believes in and that she's worth being treated with a certain amount of dignity and respect by a man. Its okay for her to do that. Just like its okay for a man to stand up for what he believes in, like not having a job, or paying for dinner or getting a measly flower, and still expecting sex somewhere in the equation.


This is about the equivalent of what I was about to post.

I also want to say that the remark about "chivalry", posted by a female, being degrading is ridiculous. That may be how you feel but not everyone feels as you do. I dont see it as "chivalry" if my husband opens a door for me or brings me a rose. He is just being nice. Its not like I am some helpless maiden. Lets not go over the top here. :roll

It seems to me Ashley's/strange religion's remarks have been taken too far and has veered off what she was actually trying to say. Just because a woman holds certain standards to herself doesnt make her obnoxious the way some of these posts are trying to imply. Men should also hold certain standards to themselves as well. I stand by my support of Ashley. :yes


----------



## ott (Aug 2, 2005)

*Re: re: Girls, would you date an unemployed guy?*



Strange Religion said:


> Hahaha, it's crazy. I don't need to explain myself any further and I'm definitely not trying to impress anyone here so @#%$ it. They can think what they want to think about me.


I think you're forgetting where you're posting and who the crowd is. You just accidentally struck a very, very sore nerve. At least that's what it is in my case, because I reacted to your posts too, but I know why I did.

I reacted because I'm very shy and dating is a severe struggle for me, like many other guys on this board. I have self-esteem issues, and I can't really see why any girl would want me. So when I read stuff like I have to "win" a girl's affection or similar it just confirms my worst fears, because I don't think I have what it takes to do that, which again makes me feel weak and worthless.

I don't mind showing that I'm interested and putting in whatever effort is required to make her feel worth it, but I need to feel appreciated and like I'm worth a little effort too. I'm not a confident guy and definitely not the player type, I'm a shy man who's struggled with social anxiety my whole life. Playing hard to get with me is just going to make me give up.

So I reacted not because of you, but because I have a problem that I need to solve but don't know how. Could be the reason behind some of the replies you received too (even though a couple were a bit rude).


----------



## justlistening (Dec 4, 2006)

*Re: re: Girls, would you date an unemployed guy?*



libbyberk83 said:


> I was quite tempted to post my opinions on things such as :
> 
> "It's cool with me. I prefer my woman in the kitchen, anyway"
> 
> ...


They both even mentioned they were just joking ...



libbyberk83 said:


> I agree with Ashley. If you're not up for the pursuit, then back off and quit whining.


OK, but don't you start whining instead when 90% of the guys who were fancying you (so pursuing you in a way) will stop 'the pursuit' after reading that line.

I'm telling you, that attitude is such a turn-off!


----------



## LostinReverie (Mar 18, 2007)

First off, I have never been "fancied" so thank you for rubbing that in my face. That was sweet, really.

Second, if there's no "pursuit" then it has been my observation that 90% of males aren't interested. Unless, of course, she's hot.

Third, although yes it was apparent they were joking, their traditional views still hold.


----------



## FreeSoul (Jan 1, 2006)

So is this coming down to the "waiting game" concept of one sex waiting for other person to make the initial move.
My opinion is that it's just all round bad idea for those with SA. The odds are already stacked against us due to SA and the antiquated "waiting game" approach does nothing to help that. 
You guys are guilty of that as well. You play that game due to SA and feel that the women have to pick up the slack in making the first move. I understand where that is coming from. I'm guilty of thinking that way too. I want girls to make the first move because my SA makes it so damn for me to so.
For you girls, you need to ask yourselves whether you really play that game due to personal beliefs or because of SA. I think it's okay to have some self-worth about yourselves, however don't let pride get in the way of practicality. I don't want to hear about "I only get asked out by jerks/why don't nice guys ever ask me out?" stuff later on.
Point being, the "waiting game" is just a waste of everyone's time and of course it leads to frustrations and finger pointing.


----------



## NeedleInTheHay (May 20, 2007)

FreeSoul said:


> So is this coming down to the "waiting game" concept of one sex waiting for other person to make the initial move.
> My opinion is that it's just all round bad idea for those with SA. The odds are already stacked against us due to SA and the antiquated "waiting game" approach does nothing to help that.
> You guys are guilty of that as well. You play that game due to SA and feel that the women have to pick up the slack in making the first move. I understand where that is coming from. I'm guilty of thinking that way too. I want girls to make the first move because my SA makes it so damn for me to so.
> For you girls, you need to ask yourselves whether you really play that game due to personal beliefs or because of SA. I think it's okay to have some self-worth about yourselves, however don't let pride get in the way of practicality. I don't want to hear about "I only get asked out by jerks/why don't nice guys ever ask me out?" stuff later on.
> Point being, the "waiting game" is just a waste of everyone's time and of course it leads to frustrations and finger pointing.


You took the words right out my mouth


----------



## Eraserhead (Sep 23, 2006)

FreeSoul said:


> So is this coming down to the "waiting game" concept of one sex waiting for other person to make the initial move.
> My opinion is that it's just all round bad idea for those with SA. The odds are already stacked against us due to SA and the antiquated "waiting game" approach does nothing to help that.
> You guys are guilty of that as well. You play that game due to SA and feel that the women have to pick up the slack in making the first move. I understand where that is coming from. I'm guilty of thinking that way too. I want girls to make the first move because my SA makes it so damn for me to so.
> For you girls, you need to ask yourselves whether you really play that game due to personal beliefs or because of SA. I think it's okay to have some self-worth about yourselves, however don't let pride get in the way of practicality. I don't want to hear about "I only get asked out by jerks/why don't nice guys ever ask me out?" stuff later on.
> Point being, the "waiting game" is just a waste of everyone's time and of course it leads to frustrations and finger pointing.


I pretty much agree. You just can't sit around expecting someone else to make the "moves".

As a guy though, I take a bit of an old-fashioned view on dating and such. I'd rather take a girl out than have a girl take me out. I'd rather ask a girl out than have her ask me out. In my [limited] experience, it seems like this view is reciprocated by most girls. Maybe it's just a cultural thing, but I believe in Nae's suggestion that there's an innate psychological difference between men and women and how each wants to interact with the other.

I don't exactly buy the "win me over" concept, at least in the materialistic sense. However, I do like treating girls nicely and doing nice things for them. If they like it too, then that's perfect! I just don't see it as a _transaction_.


----------



## vicente (Nov 10, 2003)

*Re: re: Girls, would you date an unemployed guy?*



Penny said:


> I also want to say that the remark about "chivalry", posted by a female, being degrading is ridiculous. That may be how you feel but not everyone feels as you do. I dont see it as "chivalry" if my husband opens a door for me or brings me a rose. He is just being nice. Its not like I am some helpless maiden. Lets not go over the top here. :roll


There's a difference between holding a door to be nice and holding a door open because you're female. I often hold the door open for my friends to be nice and I would certainly like for them to hold the door back for me too.

The problem is when many women these days get the "princess" mentality. Women should not be treated like ladies / princesses. Just think for a second: what do princesses do? They sit in the king's castle and look pretty and live in luxury until a prince (who has actual responsibilities like fighting for the kingdom) comes along and they get married off. The whole princess mentality that many girls grow up with is that they're entitled to lavish treatment by a man -- with little to nothing to give in return. In the past, women did have to do things in return: if the man wanted sex, she had to do it, no questions asked. if she disagreed, she got physically beat. the man had the final say in all matters. I am definitely happy that these pre-feminist expectations no longer exist, but women should definitely not expect pre-feminist expectations about what men should do for them.

Scrub Ducky was wondering about my comment about treating women as PERSONS and not ladies. Sorry, I guess this is a Canadian particularity. There was a famous court case about whether women should be considered "persons" in the eyes of the law. Previously, it was interpreted that "Women are persons in matters of pains and penalties, but are not persons in matters of rights and privileges." So therefore they could not run for political office. But thanks to the Supreme Court, it was decided they were indeed PERSONS and could run for office.


----------



## Drella (Dec 4, 2004)

*Re: re: Girls, would you date an unemployed guy?*

I get what Strange Religion was saying, I think, and it isn't fair that she is being jumped all over. I'm really not getting the "selfish . . . . materialistic" vibe from her at all. I've seen people here jumped on for less, so it's like a rite of passage in the "relationships" forum. If you're picked on at least once, you've arrived. God knows I have.

I would never, ever, want to pay for absolutely everything when we go out. I would feel like his mother. That's not sexy at all. Unless his mother really is hot, and then.. you know... wait, that's weird. Forget I said that. Anyway, I think that since this is the 21st century, both people should foot the bill every now and then. If I were dating a man, I would happily take him to dinner, movies, buy him something I know he would want, etc., but I would also expect him to treat me occasionally, as well. That seems fair. It would feel insulting to me if he felt the need to pay for everything. I would feel like less of an equal partner, and more like a tax write-off dependency, and also like I was exploiting him. I would easily feel like I was being taken advantage of if he always expected me to pay. 
I would have no problems dating an unemployed guy, as long as he didn't assume that I would take him out and treat him to expensive outings _all the time_. If there are intervening circumstances keeping him from working, then that's fine. It would make me feel appreciated if he did make an effort (it doesn't have to be by taking me on a date; just by cleaning, cooking me something, or fixing an appliance that I probably broke.) In a lot of circumstances, I would probably just feel like he's using me for free meals along with hot, smoldering and extremely fulfilling sex... alright, the free food part would be right, anyway.


----------



## LostinReverie (Mar 18, 2007)

Sometimes it's pretty damn tempting to become a lesbian.

Romance is lost on guys.


----------



## WineKitty (Nov 26, 2004)

*Re: re: Girls, would you date an unemployed guy?*



ianthe said:


> Penny said:
> 
> 
> > I also want to say that the remark about "chivalry", posted by a female, being degrading is ridiculous. That may be how you feel but not everyone feels as you do. I dont see it as "chivalry" if my husband opens a door for me or brings me a rose. He is just being nice. Its not like I am some helpless maiden. Lets not go over the top here. :roll
> ...


You are entitled to think whatever you want. I personally dont see it as what you perceive to be "prejudice" so before you saddle up on your high horse of morals, think about what you are really upset about here. Sounds like your issue with this, your "raw nerve" stems from more than someone holding a door for you... I was referring to my HUSBAND thank you very much and if someone who doesnt know me on the net thinks my husband is treating me with prejudice, well whatever.

This is my last post on this thread as I just fail to see what everyone is getting into a rather intense lather about. Slam doors in girls faces for all I care. Dont buy flowers, that is for suckers :roll .... a good relationship involves caring and sweetness FROM BOTH SIDES. Have fun with your flaming.....I am moving on to other threads. :kiss


----------



## ott (Aug 2, 2005)

*Re: re: Girls, would you date an unemployed guy?*



Penny said:


> a good relationship involves caring and sweetness FROM BOTH SIDES.


I think that is what everyone is trying to say, except from two completely opposite points of view.


----------



## Nae (Nov 10, 2003)

> "It's cool with me. I prefer my woman in the kitchen, anyway"


This was my comment in another thread, and it was purely a joke trying to point out the difference between men and women, that cut across many cultures of the world


ianthe said:


> Indeed this hits a raw nerve and I'm not even really sure why.


Perhaps (here comes a biological argument again ) this is because males and females are indeed inherently different. Mitochondrial tests have shown that females have much greater variability among their descendants than compared to males Y chromosomes[Mito comes from the mother only, Y comes from the father only] which means some guys had lots of kids and others had little or none and this points to a harsh reality, given that for the past 100 years or so we have been conditioned to think in terms of true equality among the sexes, along all lines, being achievable: That females had greater control over whom fathered their children.

It reminds me of a joke I recently read


> Every day a 4th grade boy walks home from school past a 4th grade girl's house.
> One day he he stops to taunt the little girl. He holds up the football and says
> "See this football? Football is a boys game and girls can't have one!"
> 
> ...


Interestingly while looking up a fact for this post I found a thesis on female sexual promiscuity. In both humans and other primates it is observed that males keep close guard on female sexual behavior. I wonder why that is. I further wonder if, as we have moved to greater female freedoms, this is the underlying psychological reason why women are still called ****s, considered easy, etc when they choose to have sex with multiple partners.

Wow, I have a talent for going off topic. And the .pdf I was reading about female sexuality contained porno images. How cool is that?


----------



## barnabas (Apr 24, 2007)

*Re: re: Girls, would you date an unemployed guy?*



ott said:


> I think that is what everyone is trying to say, except from two completely opposite points of view.


Yeah. Thanks for clearing that up for EVERYONE. :hide


----------



## Inturmal (Jan 15, 2006)

Can't we all just agree that we all deserve the best?

opcorn


----------



## mismac (Oct 27, 2005)

Inturmal said:


> Can't we all just agree that we all deserve the best?
> 
> opcorn


Yea, but if you're a guy and you expect the girl to chase you and ask you out and pay for the date...good luck with that! GOOD LUCK with that! :lol


----------



## justlistening (Dec 4, 2006)

*Re: re: Girls, would you date an unemployed guy?*



libbyberk83 said:


> First off, I have never been "fancied" so thank you for rubbing that in my face. That was sweet, really.


I'm not sure what the word fancy _exactly_ means, but you definitely caught my attention when I saw your picture  and no doubt the attention of many others on this board ... But like you asked us to back off without whining if we're not up for the pursuit, don't start whining yourself if that attitude stops 90% of the guys on this board to develop any further kind of romantically interest in you.


----------



## Perfectly~Flawed (Jun 13, 2005)

*Re: re: Girls, would you date an unemployed guy?*



Drella said:


> I get what Strange Religion was saying, I think, and it isn't fair that she is being jumped all over. I'm really not getting the "selfish . . . . materialistic" vibe from her at all.


 :agree



libbyberk83 said:


> Romance is lost on guys.


Not all of us.


----------



## barnabas (Apr 24, 2007)

stellar said:


> Yea, but if you're a guy and you expect the girl to chase you and ask you out and pay for the date...good luck with that! GOOD LUCK with that! :lol


Yea, this always bugs me. If the feelings are more or less mutual, the responsibility could be, y'know, shared.

As a girl, I really don't want any guy spending a little too much money on me. For one thing, that would make feel very indebted to him - which I don't want to happen until we've gone from the dating phase to the courting phase. For another, I think this kind of tradition is unfair to boys. Most people in their twenties are not financially stable yet, and everyone I know - girls and boys alike - still has a HUGE amount of credit card debt and loan they still need to take care of.

And I'm pretty sure if I were a guy and if I were dating a girl who never offered to chip in for anything, I would change my mind about her. Even if I never actually let her pay due to a bizarre male pride thing (which is not quite evident during this entire discussion), it's the thought that counts. :yes


----------



## TX boy (Apr 26, 2006)

*Re: re: Girls, would you date an unemployed guy?*



PGVan said:


> Strange Religion said:
> 
> 
> > Oy vey...this is how I feel, me personally. If you don't agree, ok, but for ME, I would like the guy to take ME out first.
> ...


PGVan, great reply!!

I LITERALLY laughed out loud when I read your last line, referring to Strange Religion, of: "You make yourself sound like every guy within a 100-mile radius of you is lining up to "win" you." The reason I laughed out loud was not because I disagee, but for the opposite reason. I laughed out loud because what you said was so true! That's exactly what she was sounding like!

I was wondering the same thing... Why does Strange Religion (Ashley) demand a guy try to win her over? It's a two-way street, right? EQUAL expectations should also be on her (and other women) in that they should equally try to win men over also. Do women such as Ashley realize the ridiculousness of their statements? They come across as if women are these high and mighty beings, and us men are "lucky" to even be in their presence. Give me a break! :spit

PGVan, your posts and Scrub Ducky's posts are the best and most accurate on this thread. You guys have won this debate: game, set and match! Keep up the good work guys!

I'm going to end this post with an excellent quote from ott:



ott said:


> I don't mind showing that I'm interested and putting in whatever effort is required to make her feel worth it, but I need to feel appreciated and like I'm worth a little effort too.


Strange Religion/Ashley, that quote from ott is - in a nutshell - PRECISELY the bottom line of the point that all us guys are trying to get across. It's not about us guys lining up to win YOU over, but instead, have the attitude of (to quote a saying made famous on this thread) "both people need to bring something to the plate". If you like a guy then you are JUST as capable of winning him over as he is of winning you over. We also want to feel appreciated, and we want to feel as if we are ALSO worth the effort, just as you do!

My common sense even amazes mysellf sometimes. :b


----------



## WineKitty (Nov 26, 2004)

Why is everyone bashing Ashley so much -- Knock it off!!!!!!!! This isnt a forum to bash people but rather to discuss ideas. ATTACK THE IDEA NOT THE POSTER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Ever hear of that????


----------



## Drella (Dec 4, 2004)

*Re: re: Girls, would you date an unemployed guy?*



Penny said:


> Why is everyone bashing Ashley so much -- Knock it off!!!!!!!! This isnt a forum to bash people but rather to discuss ideas. ATTACK THE IDEA NOT THE POSTER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Ever hear of that????


I agree. It's rather appalling, actually. The fact that this is a support forum seems to have escaped some people.


----------

