# Do the majority of guys out there truly enjoy, embrace being the initiators?



## JaegerLover217 (Feb 23, 2016)

Because i got that response recently on here, the guy said that 98% of guys enjoy, embrace being the initiator. Other arguments elsewhere, have said that it is instinct, innate, natural, for a guy to want to initiate with a woman, to take a initiative, to make the first move and all the other moves. Meanwhile me, and i know many other guys, have always hated, resented that gender role with a huge burning, raging passion.

So what do you think? is being the initiator supposed to be natural, instinctive, innate in guys?


----------



## Persephone The Dread (Aug 28, 2010)

I'd prefer to initiate, but I'm too anxious for that in real life, and on the list of things I already struggle with there's tons I'd have to work on first. Right now, it's not on my mind. I don't see it as more manly, I'd just prefer to be proactive and assertive and get to the point instead of dithering around.

But I don't think guys should have to initiate things if they don't want to, but most guys don't have a choice if they want sex or a relationship.


----------



## Karsten (Apr 3, 2007)

I'm not sure how I feel about this, actually. Sometimes, I wish women were more forward, but on the other hand, if I had to put up with what women put up with regularly, I'd get fed up.


----------



## JaegerLover217 (Feb 23, 2016)

ya, i've also heard some people say that if a guy hates or resents having to initiate, then it probably means he grew up in a family where the Mom was Dominant and the Dad was submissive.


----------



## mezzoforte (May 16, 2010)

Persephone The Dread said:


> I'd prefer to initiate, but I'm too anxious for that in real life, and on the list of things I already struggle with there's tons I'd have to work on first. Right now, it's not on my mind. I don't see it as more manly, I'd just prefer to be proactive and assertive and get to the point instead of dithering around.
> 
> But I don't think guys should have to initiate things if they don't want to, but most guys don't have a choice if they want sex or a relationship.


Same. I tend to be the initiator online, since I'm too scared to approach people in person. The people that interest me usually don't contact me first, while the people that do just want "to get to know me"/sex.


----------



## willtowin (Feb 1, 2017)

Initiating is good for us, so it can be a huge help to fighting social anxiety.

I'm an old-fashioned guy, so I kind of enjoyed the first move, planning the dates, having my gf wear my coat, etc. It's fine to not enjoy initiating too, but in today's society it will lead to long-term loneliness. Especially for men.


----------



## truant (Jul 4, 2014)

Tbh, I'm not sure most guys really think about it. I don't think they're standing there thinking: "Okay, I need to initiate. I'm going to have to go up to her, because she won't come to me. What am I going to say? How am I going to say it?"

I think most guys just walk over and start talking when they see women they find attractive. In that sense, it just seems 'natural' or 'instinctive', in the sense that they don't think about what they're doing. I think SA is 'analysis paralysis'; guys with SA start thinking about the complexities of approaching women, and the possible rejection, and they freeze up. I can understand why that experience can be frustrating and painful, but I don't think non-SA guys have to "get through it" in order to "find the nerve" to talk to women; unless they're already very invested in a specific woman's approval.

I worked with the public for a long time, with a staff made up mostly of university students, and I saw men walk up and talk to women they didn't know all the time. They didn't seem to be thinking much about what they were doing. At least, I didn't see anyone hanging out in a corner, sweating, his eyes glued to some girl. It was more like: see girl -> approach girl -> chat -> see where it goes. If it didn't go anywhere, no big deal, move onto someone else.

Even if you had some big campaign to get more women approaching men, it wouldn't stop the majority of men from approaching women, so I don't think it would improve a shy man's odds very much. Those naturally assertive men are still going to swoop in and intercept those women because they don't have any problem with approaching them.

I think the problem is analogous to the problem women have wrt dress and makeup. Sure, you don't have to dress nicely or wear makeup or do up your hair or shave or any of those other things; but if you don't, you're just going to have a harder time competing with women who don't mind doing all those things. You'd have to convince all those women to stop doing it, too, and they're not going to because they know it gives them an advantage. The less often other women work on maintaining and improving their appearance, the more of a competitive advantage the women who don't mind doing all those things have.

Same with guys encouraging women to do the approaching instead of men; how much difference is it going to make if all those men who don't mind approaching are still approaching those women before those women get around to approaching you? You have to convince all those other men to stop approaching, to give up a competitive advantage, so that you can 'level the playing field'. It's not going to happen. The less often men in general approach women, the more of a competitive advantage approaching becomes for assertive men. You're just going to create an environment in which the most aggressive men have more and more success and the rest of the men get fewer and fewer dates.

Unless you also convince women to turn down men who approach them by shaming them somehow; which would be sort of analogous to the way some feminists try to shame men for having physical preferences; but at this point we're approaching bizarre utopian scenarios that are best reserved for the pages of science fiction novels.


----------



## JH1983 (Nov 14, 2013)

All the relationships I've been in were initiated by my exes. By that I mean they made it very clear they were into me and things progressed from there. Only ever asked out two women in person without them showing interest first and got shot down both times. I've initiated first contact on Tinder a few times, easier that way than in person for sure. I can't see ever expressing interest in someone in person without them making it obvious they were into me first. Much less likely to get rejected that way.


----------



## JaegerLover217 (Feb 23, 2016)

JH1983 said:


> All the relationships I've been in were initiated by my exes. By that I mean they made it very clear they were into me and things progressed from there. Only ever asked out two women in person without them showing interest first and got shot down both times. I've initiated first contact on Tinder a few times, easier that way than in person for sure. I can't see ever expressing interest in someone in person without them making it obvious they were into me first. Much less likely to get rejected that way.


unfortuneately that almost never happens


----------



## Zatch (Apr 28, 2013)

As of recent, I love being the initiator. I don't usually do it with people I hardly know however.

I admire anyone willing to approach or otherwise initiate interaction if they so want. It can be quite the task.


----------



## Persephone The Dread (Aug 28, 2010)

If you find it difficult to approach in person, if you have Facebook you could try adding and talking to them there, that's what I did with my second ex. For a long time (weeks to a month maybe,) neither of us were confident enough to ask each other out and eventually one of my housemates who happened to be fwb by coincidence with someone who lived in his flat block that he was friends with tried to create opportunities to get us together... But when she threw a flat party he refused to come out of his room (he never liked drinking, parties and stuff,) some time (can't remember how much,) later he invited me to get a drink.

That's not conventional or something many on SAS would experience, but I think talking online first might make it easier. I don't reccomend the rest lol probably better to just ask them out somewhere but I was too anxious back then it took me a stupid amount of courage to even start talking to him on FB. I generally build up crushes a lot in my mind - too much in fact.

I think if my life wasn't such a mess now I could ask someone local out online though going from A to B. I've done some embarrassing crap since then, and also observed how guys have approached me online (some good examples some bad lol,) so I think I could manage better hypothetically without behaving like a 12 year old (like with the last guy online who I told I was attracted to and then later that I had a crush on him cringe cringe cringe.)

Obviously it's much easier if you're not as into them initially and allow things to develop more gradually while talking to them but sadly my brain doesn't cooperate well like that most of the time.


----------



## JaegerLover217 (Feb 23, 2016)

Persephone The Dread said:


> If you find it difficult to approach in person, if you have Facebook you could try adding and talking to them there, that's what I did with my second ex. For a long time (weeks to a month maybe,) neither of us were confident enough to ask each other out and eventually one of my housemates who happened to be fwb by coincidence with someone who lived in his flat block that he was friends with tried to create opportunities to get us together... But when she threw a flat party he refused to come out of his room (he never liked drinking, parties and stuff,) some time (can't remember how much,) later he invited me to get a drink.
> 
> That's not conventional or something many on SAS would experience, but I think talking online first might make it easier. I don't reccomend the rest lol probably better to just ask them out somewhere but I was too anxious back then it took me a stupid amount of courage to even start talking to him on FB. I generally build up crushes a lot in my mind - too much in fact.
> 
> ...


even in online dating or dating apps on phones(tinder, coffee meets bagel) guys are still expected to make the first move, as in send out the first message, ask for the number first, etc.


----------



## The Library of Emma (Mar 3, 2016)

In online dating, i'd much rather be the one making the first move. It seems most guys don't actually bother scrutinizing my profile for compatibility. I may receive interest, but most of it is Monopoly Money because it's not a relationship that would work if played out. So really, i'd prefer to message a guy first as opposed to vice-versa.

In person, it needs to be the guy initiating or I probably won't "bother" him.

Funny, because while guys online approach me, guys irl rarely do. :stu


----------



## JaegerLover217 (Feb 23, 2016)

She and Her Darkness said:


> In online dating, i'd much rather be the one making the first move. It seems most guys don't actually bother scrutinizing my profile for compatibility. I may receive interest, but most of it is Monopoly Money because it's not a relationship that would work if played out. So really, i'd prefer to message a guy first as opposed to vice-versa.
> 
> In person, it needs to be the guy initiating or I probably won't "bother" him.
> 
> Funny, because while guys online approach me, guys irl rarely do. :stu


how come you would never initiate in person? are you just stubbornly traditional like most girls?


----------



## The Library of Emma (Mar 3, 2016)

JaegerLover217 said:


> how come you would never initiate in person? are you just stubbornly traditional like most girls?


lol stubbornly traditional? :b No, i just have more confidence online, i'm such an awkward wreck in person. Otherwise i probably would.


----------



## mezzoforte (May 16, 2010)

She and Her Darkness said:


> In online dating, i'd much rather be the one making the first move. It seems most guys don't actually bother scrutinizing my profile for compatibility. I may receive interest, but most of it is Monopoly Money because it's not a relationship that would work if played out. So really, i'd prefer to message a guy first as opposed to vice-versa.
> 
> In person, it needs to be the guy initiating or I probably won't "bother" him.
> 
> Funny, because while guys online approach me, guys irl rarely do. :stu


I'm the same way.


----------



## Persephone The Dread (Aug 28, 2010)

JaegerLover217 said:


> even in online dating or dating apps on phones(tinder, coffee meets bagel) guys are still expected to make the first move, as in send out the first message, ask for the number first, etc.


Do you find that difficult or? You have no desire to initiate contact at all ever is what you're saying? None of those things work well if you have anxiety anyway especially Tinder you have to meet up straight away and perform.


----------



## 0blank0 (Sep 22, 2014)

If i could go up to a guy first I would. I would seriously own that **** hehe 😆 but sadly it's the total opposite. Sometimes I don't even want the guy to come to me because I'm too scared. If a guy I like is coming towards me I repeat in my mind, please don't come over here. So either way it doesn't work out..


----------



## tehuti88 (Jun 19, 2005)

JaegerLover217 said:


> how come you would never initiate in person? are you just stubbornly traditional like most girls?


It's almost like, oh my God, the women here have _anxiety_. :O


----------



## mezzoforte (May 16, 2010)

tehuti88 said:


> It's almost like, oh my God, the women here have _anxiety_. :O














Riker said:


> That's not how it works.


Yeah...


----------



## Evo1114 (Dec 9, 2012)

I don't like it really at all, which is why I have retired from it. I think I'm pretty awful at it anyways, so I just save people the awkwardness.

Obviously I've never been approached myself...add up all these factors and it's no surprise that I've been single for closing in on a decade.


----------



## Neal (Jan 14, 2012)

I dont necessarily like it but I can understand why some dudes would like it. If you're the one doing the waiting, you may find yourself waiting for a looooong time. In fact Id be willing to bet thats why some of the women here have taken it into their own hands, because waiting takes too damn long.


----------



## Pongowaffle (Jul 23, 2015)

I had to be the initiator every time except for once. I always see it this way. Guys are the job seekers. Girls are the jobs or hiring managers.

In the relationship, I am constantly working to keep her interest in me to reduce her chances of being able to find an excuse to be displease with me and dump me. This is at least how I approach and act in relationships I care about. It is a self inferiority way I know. But I just choose to face my own reality.


----------



## Mondo_Fernando (Jun 26, 2014)

My 2 cents worth.  :grin2:

I have had women approach me and I don't do anything to encourage it in real life. Kind of why I worry when I go out, as that attention makes me feel uncomfortable, as seems not genuine. Mostly women just constantly stare at me, flirt with me, even very beautiful, well groomed women.

I think I have only ever asked a woman out once and never worked out. She was more into her ex or someone who looked like her ex.

Usually it just happens if it happens and flows naturally into a relationship from a friendship, which is how it normally happens (you both know it's right). You like her, she likes you, yeah. 

If you approach someone they have no idea who you are, as don't know you well enough and having to make a on the spot decision. It would make anyone uncomfortable. With a friendship they know you better, so can make a good decision on whether you are worth getting to know more or not.

I believe you need to have something you like in common, like a hobby or similar. Or willing to like your partners hobbies, as might interest you in trying them. Most long term couples are like this, as they have something they like in common, could be sports like soccer, fishing, motorsport, etc. Usually why you list those interest's on a dating website.

Also it could even be a concert or similar if have a band in common, doesn't have to be sports, etc.

Usually where you meet a partner is in doing the same hobby, interest, etc at the same time.


----------



## komorikun (Jan 11, 2009)

I don't think non-shy guys mind too much. Might be embarrassing to ask out a whole bunch of women from the same social group though. Then people will talk. ("Jason asked me out." "Oh, he asked me out too. And he asked out Amanda and Christina too.") Online dating is another story.

I initiated with 2 of my exes. They were too cute to pass by. Would only initiate in situations where I won't run into the person again repeatedly. Just awkward if they say no and you risk getting gossiped about if you have mutual friends.


----------



## AllTheSame (Mar 19, 2016)

Most of the women I've been in relationships with have approached me. Both my ex-wives made the first move, totally. I was just blindsided lol, I didn't even see it coming, and had no idea. My first ex-wife spent the day with me at the beach with a group of friends and before the day had ended, before the sun went down, we were in each other's arms. And it was pretty much the same with my second. In other relationships I've had she really initiated things at first. But I've definitely made the first move before, also.

It's kind of hard to tell sometimes though. I mean, sometimes it's kind of a blur as to who really made the first real move, whatever that is. We started talking, getting to know each other a little bit, wanting to get to know each other a little more, she kind of gives me an opening, I take it, I like being around her, she likes being around me, we make excuses to be around each other lol, and then it just takes off.

Tbh, I think that's why I haven't been shot down very much, at all, in my entire life. You know....I can only remember twice that it's happened, once in hs, and once in college. And it's only, only because I think I pay very close attention to women's body language, and eye contact, and you know....if she's giving you a way in, if she's making herself approachable and I'm interested, I take it, and see where it goes. If she's not making herself approachable and I'm interested, I move on. A lot of the time it really is that simple for me lol. If you can read subtle body language and eye contact and if you can discern the difference between small talk and "I'm interested" talk then it becomes a whoooole lot easier imo.

This makes me think of that other thread, about the guy messaging that woman ten times in one day, where it started off asking if she'd like to catch up on old times, and it ended with him actually telling her that because she didn't respond to his message, he hopes she gets raped. That's just psychotic. But. Ffs. Message her one time. That's enough. Then if she shows interest or kind of makes herself approachable....go from there. I don't understand how some guys don't get that. And I never have understood it.


----------



## Twilightforce (Aug 7, 2016)

There's no point. I'm pretty sure I'll always get rejected.


----------



## JaegerLover217 (Feb 23, 2016)

Evo1114 said:


> I don't like it really at all, which is why I have retired from it. I think I'm pretty awful at it anyways, so I just save people the awkwardness.
> 
> Obviously I've never been approached myself...add up all these factors and it's no surprise that I've been single for closing in on a decade.


how many relationships have you been in and how long did they last?


----------



## Tetragammon (Jun 2, 2015)

I hate making the first move because it just sets me up for rejection. So I'm looking forward to being a lifelong bachelor.


----------



## komorikun (Jan 11, 2009)

JaegerLover217 said:


> ya most women are stubbornly traditional and old-fashioned, it's always these excuses "because guys are hunters, or because he's the hunter", "men court women, it goes back to when men courted women", etc.


You didn't even read my post.


----------



## nubly (Nov 2, 2006)

JaegerLover217 said:


> ya most women are stubbornly traditional and old-fashioned, it's always these excuses "because guys are hunters, or because he's the hunter", "men court women, it goes back to when men courted women", etc.


Women do approach men. You can't expect a woman to approach you if they don't know you're there.


----------



## OtterlyAbsurd (Jan 25, 2017)

She and Her Darkness said:


> In online dating, i'd much rather be the one making the first move. It seems most guys don't actually bother scrutinizing my profile for compatibility. I may receive interest, but most of it is Monopoly Money because it's not a relationship that would work if played out. So really, i'd prefer to message a guy first as opposed to vice-versa.
> 
> In person, it needs to be the guy initiating or I probably won't "bother" him.
> 
> Funny, because while guys online approach me, guys irl rarely do. :stu


This is how I feel. I get approached irl once in a while too (I don't go out as much as I should, so there isn't much opportunity). I kind of wish I had the confidence to approach people irl, but I just don't.


----------



## JaegerLover217 (Feb 23, 2016)

komorikun said:


> You didn't even read my post.


i did read your post, yes you did say you have been the initiator of some of your relationships, but still, obviously its very rare for a girl to do that unfortuneately, thats very commendable of you


----------



## scott83 (Aug 10, 2014)

I've never successful as the initiator. Back in my teens it was always the girls that would make the move, probably on account of me being shy and not being able to 'read the signs'. Always felt more comfortable with the ladies making the first move, that way I know they're actually interested and it saves me being rejected. 

My girlfriend of the last 9 years was the one who started it.


----------



## Evo1114 (Dec 9, 2012)

JaegerLover217 said:


> how many relationships have you been in and how long did they last?


Although I have dated several people, I have really only dated 2 people for longer than 3 months. I ALWAYS have gotten a second and third date, but outside of the aforementioned 2 times, I've never gotten further than 3 dates. Almost all was online dating, which is much different than 'initiating' out in the real world. The two that lasted longer than 3 dates were actually both from the 'real world'. The problem is, not only do you have to initiate the first date, but you have to initiate the contact afterwards, the plans for subsequent dates, initiate making out, etc. Although maybe that's just me.


----------



## WillYouStopDave (Jul 14, 2013)

I don't think I've ever embraced anything that didn't have four paws (get your mind out of the gutter you).


----------



## Persephone The Dread (Aug 28, 2010)

WillYouStopDave said:


> I don't think I've ever embraced anything that didn't have four paws *(get your mind out of the gutter you).*


----------



## JaegerLover217 (Feb 23, 2016)

Evo1114 said:


> Although I have dated several people, I have really only dated 2 people for longer than 3 months. I ALWAYS have gotten a second and third date, but outside of the aforementioned 2 times, I've never gotten further than 3 dates. Almost all was online dating, which is much different than 'initiating' out in the real world. The two that lasted longer than 3 dates were actually both from the 'real world'. The problem is, not only do you have to initiate the first date, but you have to initiate the contact afterwards, the plans for subsequent dates, initiate making out, etc. Although maybe that's just me.


ya, the process of starting the relationship falls on the guys shoulders typically


----------



## Shadow5 (Jul 12, 2016)

Personally I was more passive/traditional as a teenager, but as I've grown older I started initiating more. I think no one really likes to be the first to ask the other out, because you know...rejection hurts...whatever you have in your pants. But I do like the feeling of empowerment that comes with it: I am not just the ones who put make up, wait for signs of interest like a barbie doll and get to chose in the limited selection of those who "picked" me : I get to chose from day 1.

However, after the first date I think the best is when both parties take turns to initiate things: it's a great way to show that the interest is mutual and that there is no barbie doll in the equation.


----------



## sad1231234 (Jul 10, 2016)

Obviously not the people who have SA lol.


----------



## TreborHG9 (Dec 22, 2013)

I have social anxiety and I am a guy, but I disagree with the op. Gender roles were not set by society since they have been around from the beginning of humanity. Men should always inniciate the relationship because it is attractive to women and women 90% of the time are too scared to initiate anything themselves. This is why guys take the lead most of the time. I still hate it though how some women will be really harsh if a guy shows interest in them.


----------



## LimePenguin (Aug 3, 2011)

Whilst I used to be scared to initiate, I'd rather do it myself because _it's the right thing to do_. If I left it up to girls to initiate then I'd be left only those who have some ulterior motive or be told what to do from here on.

The thing I hate about initiating though is not actually rejection - I like rejection, I know where I stand and I don't have to follow through - it's not getting a proper answer when you try to ask them out ( ffs I'm not a mind reader or knowledgable on social cues as others might be. )



JaegerLover217 said:


> ya, i've also heard some people say that if a guy hates or resents having to initiate, then it probably means he grew up in a family where the Mom was Dominant and the Dad was submissive.


Funny it was completely the opposite for me. Very dominant control freak father, extremely timid mother - my 2 sisters take after my dad, my brother and myself after mom :stu

My life began when I moved out.


----------



## JaegerLover217 (Feb 23, 2016)

TreborHG9 said:


> I have social anxiety and I am a guy, but I disagree with the op. Gender roles were not set by society since they have been around from the beginning of humanity. Men should always inniciate the relationship because it is attractive to women and women 90% of the time are too scared to initiate anything themselves. This is why guys take the lead most of the time. I still hate it though how some women will be really harsh if a guy shows interest in them.


so sounds like you love and embrace that gender role, i hate how they say that even there are guys out there that are turned off by women who are the initiators


----------



## SwtSurrender (Nov 24, 2014)

My dad taught me to focus on my school not to put moves on boys. He also told me to focus more on homework/stick my face in books and less on looking sexy for boys. He told me that I have more chances with boys if I act that way. So I never wore revealing clothes and was pretty much very reserved and looked down at my feet because of this. Thanks for setting me up for failure dad! Dads these days.... Majority of parenting is like this, might be the cause of everything + society looking down and negatively labeling girls putting moves on guys. I'm so sorry boys but I'll try my best to offer ease in your dating lives. :squeeze


----------



## JaegerLover217 (Feb 23, 2016)

looks like male hippos have it easier:


----------



## antichristsuperstar (Apr 11, 2017)

It's not "supposed" to anything. But do ask yourself, if you didn't have anxiety, would you enjoy the idea of flirting with a girl in that way, being confident, walking up to her, making her weak in the knees? If not, that's fine, but it is important to recognise whether you don't like something because anxiety, or because it's genuinely not for you.

Not a popular thing to say in today's PC culture, but, especially when it comes to romance, most men prefer feeling "masculine" and most women "feminine". Being the quiet, reserved type, I've often ended up on the receiving end, being approached by confident women, and whilst it's always good to get attention and feel like someone is attracted to you, when I've had women who actually like me for being masculine... damn, those moments have really made me feel good.

But whatever preference you have is your business, and there's gonna be women who are compatible with that. Please don't act like other people are somehow brainwashed by society if they follow their own instincts though. Evolution has made each of us the way we are for a reason, including you, and including me. Long as you're not hurting anyone, who cares what you prefer, that's between you and your partner.


----------



## JaegerLover217 (Feb 23, 2016)

"Men either sink or swim, Women pretty much float if that makes sense", "Men either rise to the top or sink to the bottom, while women exist somewhere happily in the middle"
powerful quote i got from elsewhere


----------



## iAmCodeMonkey (May 23, 2010)

I personally absolutely hate it. My reasons are due to anxiety, mostly.


----------



## truant (Jul 4, 2014)

JaegerLover217 said:


> "Men either sink or swim, Women pretty much float if that makes sense", "Men either rise to the top or sink to the bottom, while women exist somewhere happily in the middle"
> powerful quote i got from elsewhere


I think you meant "stupid", not powerful.

Though, I can see some value in the metaphor. Since the eyes of men are so focused on the beauties swimming above them, they're completely oblivious to the existence of women below them.

People like me dwell in the ocean depths, striking fear into the hearts of men everywhere.


----------



## iAmCodeMonkey (May 23, 2010)

truant said:


> I think you meant "stupid", not powerful.
> 
> Though, I can see some value in the metaphor. Since the eyes of men are so focused on the beauties swimming above them, they're completely oblivious to the existence of women below them.
> 
> People like me dwell in the ocean depths, striking fear into the hearts of men everywhere.


Love the octopus gif.


----------



## Act to fall (Apr 15, 2017)

JaegerLover217 said:


> "Men either sink or swim, Women pretty much float if that makes sense", "Men either rise to the top or sink to the bottom, while women exist somewhere happily in the middle"
> powerful quote i got from elsewhere


That's stupid.


----------



## Tunesimah (Dec 31, 2008)

I don't know about most guys, if initiating is culturally ingrained or if it's there as more of a fundamental quality...

I know for me I'm extremely doubtful most of the time, so initiating is hard for me because I'm so unsure of what I actually want. I'm the kind of person to obsess over research and information, over even seemingly mundane things like where to eat... so I rarely initiate... especially without assurances that it'll be successful. 

I don't mind initiating things... but it often is pretty stressful. Because I wait for the right opportunity so much... I don't have enough practice and experience... so whenever it comes up so much pressure is on that interaction that I can't possibly act natural. 

I'm generally annoyed by people that make decisions for others, and at the same time those who are expecting others to make their decisions. I get annoyed when someone asks to go get some lunch, and then expectantly want's a forceful choice of where to go eat.


----------



## Twilightforce (Aug 7, 2016)

I don't enjoy anything.


----------



## Act to fall (Apr 15, 2017)

Twilightforce said:


> I don't enjoy anything.


hahaha awww


----------



## Xenacat (Oct 20, 2015)

I have initiated before and it doesn't work for me. It just works better for me when guys initiate. I think men enjoy a challenge. I just look back at my past relationships.


----------



## Karsten (Apr 3, 2007)

Nah. I just wait til someone comes to me - which is like once a year, lmfao.


----------



## tea111red (Nov 8, 2005)

i think if a man is interested enough in a woman, he will just automatically go after her, even if he's normally shy. just something i've observed.


----------



## Mondo_Fernando (Jun 26, 2014)

For me it's like window shopping. I can look at the pretty things in the shop (women maniquins), but I will always see the happy things (women, men maniquins) together from the outside of the shop while I'm walking by alone in the rain.


----------



## JaegerLover217 (Feb 23, 2016)

well i've been away from this forum for a while, and i haven't posted that much as i used to in the past 4 or 5 months, well it is some slight good news, i feel this year was a breakthrough for me dating-wise, i managed to date someone this year for 4 months, although we never officially become exclusive, she was the closest thing to a girlfriend i ever had, since we got intimate a few times, kissed, made out, went on lots of dates, etc. So in a way, i feel i got my first girlfriend this year but at the same time, i didn't because we never did officially discuss becoming exclusive, but still, before dating her, pretty much all the dates in my life didn't last for more than 1-2 dates. We met through online dating, but i feel i wouldn't have made this breakthough in dating this year if i hadn't lowered my standards, but i feel my intentions for lowering my standards were good, hard to explain or put in words but i would say due to being alone and single this whole time, this year i wanted to experience the mental, emotional aspect of dating, a relationship, more so than the physical aspect, the urge was stronger for the emotional, mental part than it was for the physical part.


----------



## LilMeRich (Jun 2, 2017)

Personally, I don't like being the initiator if I can sense the potential relationship is not going to last. I've been told I have a knack to forsee this quite early on. I hate all the effort for very little reward. 

If the interest/respect is mutual, then yes I will initiate.


----------



## iAmCodeMonkey (May 23, 2010)

LilMeRich said:


> Personally, I don't like being the initiator if I can sense the potential relationship is not going to last. I've been told I have a knack to forsee this quite early on. I hate all the effort for very little reward.
> 
> If the interest/respect is mutual, then yes I will initiate.


Me too. :yes


----------



## CharlieSays (Mar 14, 2011)

I have a thing for reserved/quiet/shy men, so I realised early on that if I wanted to date that type of guy then I would need to either directly ask them out or at least make it very obvious that I liked them. If they want to take the lead in the relationship after that, then I don't mind (I'm happy either way), but I'm willing to take a risk to get a relationship started. Otherwise I would likely have stayed single for the last 30 years!

As other people pointed out, the type of men that DO ask me out online or in RL tend to be the ones that don't bother reading my profile or learning a few things about who I am and therefore set themselves up for rejection (although I always try to be really nice about it). I try to make things easier by stating what I do/don't like, as I'm aware it takes effort to approach a woman and I don't want anyone wasting their energy. But some people will just approach any living breathing woman above legal age!

I don't really worry about rejection if I approach a man. If they say no, they say no. Everyone has different criteria, so it's just a case of trying until you find someone that clicks with your own criteria. I just move on and at worst I've maybe boosted their ego a bit for the day.


----------



## waterfairy (Oct 20, 2016)

GastheJuice said:


> I don't because women are boring as **** and besides their genitals they have nothing to really recommend them. They have nothing to say, they are shallow and unintelligent, uninteresting and completely bereft of personality. They are like overgrown children who are incapable of grasping anything on a fundamental level. That's not to say there aren't plenty of males (not men) who are just like them and with the exception once again of their genitals (which are probably malformed) are exactly like women in their thoughts/actions/general outlook on life. I don't condescend to their level to interact with them;they can raise themselves up to me. I am probably more of a misanthropic schizoid than some d ick with social anxiety; it's not that I am scared or nervous talking to people, it's that I don't care to do so because I don't like people.


Nice troll account.


----------



## Witchblade (Jun 17, 2017)

Yes, the majority of guys prefer their role as a man and certainly the majority of women prefer it when men act like men. Being the leader and taking charge is something you should embrace because it gives you control of a situation. What do you want to do, where do you want to go, what do you want to talk about....do those things and let her follow. Why would you want to concede that authority and just follow her around?


----------



## Excaliber (May 16, 2015)

I don't enjoy it, I'm terrible at initiating and it usually takes forever to get to that point, I would never initiate to someone I just met, Its later when I have got to know something about them. However it is my preference that I am the one doing it based on my judgement and interest, if there is any possibility of it going anywhere. I'm not sure how I would feel about a women initiating to me, I think it comes off strong but at the same time I'd admire her courage too, I guess I think old fashioned that way but I wouldn't reject someone because of that.


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

AllTheSame said:


> Most of the women I've been in relationships with have approached me. Both my ex-wives made the first move, totally. I was just blindsided lol, I didn't even see it coming, and had no idea. My first ex-wife spent the day with me at the beach with a group of friends and before the day had ended, before the sun went down, we were in each other's arms. And it was pretty much the same with my second. In other relationships I've had she really initiated things at first. But I've definitely made the first move before, also.
> 
> It's kind of hard to tell sometimes though. I mean, sometimes it's kind of a blur as to who really made the first real move, whatever that is. We started talking, getting to know each other a little bit, wanting to get to know each other a little more, she kind of gives me an opening, I take it, I like being around her, she likes being around me, we make excuses to be around each other lol, and then it just takes off.
> 
> ...


Good point. Which brings a REAL question: why none of the women ever make themselves approachable to me? Okay, actually I can think of 3 women that did, and I couldn't bring myself to take a bait since I was too fixated on an idea of waiting for them to actually come up to me and ask me out. But still, those were 3 women out of past TWO YEARS. Thats probably why I missed an opportunity since I don't have a lot of practice due to lack of any other opportunities. Which brings up two questions

1. What should I do to get more women show me non-verbal signs of interest. I mean how many women could YOU count? Probably not just 3, probably something like 30. So thats what I want

2. Can I get either of those 3 women back? I mean when I finally got around to email them they both ignored me which makes me think they gave up because I dind't take a bait as fast as I should have.


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

truant said:


> Even if you had some big campaign to get more women approaching men, it wouldn't stop the majority of men from approaching women, so I don't think it would improve a shy man's odds very much. Those naturally assertive men are still going to swoop in and intercept those women because they don't have any problem with approaching them.


So you are saying that the assertive men would approach a woman before she has a chance to approach me. But what about the opposite scenario: what if she approaches me before they have a chance to approach her? True, there is a lot of "them" and one of "her". But there are a lot of other women, so in few of them I can get lucky in this particular way.

Here is a simple math for you. Suppose men approaching women and women approaching men equally often; and, at the same time, I insist on never approaching women. In this case, I have exactly TWICE less chances than other men: other men have two ways of starting a relationship (either they approach a woman or woman approaching them) while I have only one way of starting a relationship (woman approaching me). So if both genders approach equally often I have exactly twice less chances.

And this brings a big question: why is it I have 20 times less chances rather than just twice less chances? I mean I really don't mind having twice less chances: its not like I am some sort of playboy who needs hords of women. I just want some. So if I get twice less chances, I will still get some women, wouldn't I? The real problem is that I get 20 times less chances rather than twice less chances. Why?



truant said:


> Same with guys encouraging women to do the approaching instead of men; how much difference is it going to make if all those men who don't mind approaching are still approaching those women before those women get around to approaching you? You have to convince all those other men to stop approaching, to give up a competitive advantage, so that you can 'level the playing field'. It's not going to happen.* The less often men in general approach women, the more of a competitive advantage approaching becomes for assertive men. *You're just going to create an environment in which the most aggressive men have more and more success and the rest of the men get fewer and fewer dates.


But, by the same logic, women who decide to approach guys would get competitive advantage over the women who don't. If you say women get approached anyway, I can point out that the women who do approaching will have wider choice of guys to choose from: the guys that approached her AND the guys whom she approached; so she is more likely to make better choice. Unless, of course, you say that somehow she "knows" that she would prefer the guys that approach her anyway (as in she likes assertiveness) but that is precisely the problem. Why cna't a guy also prefer a woman who approaches him? I for one would feel flattered if its the woman that approached me than the other way around, so even if I did approach women, if there was a woman that approached me I would of preferred her for that reason alone. I understand women can feel flattered too but if both genders are truly symmetric why can't it go both ways then? Why, instead of women feeling flattered by man approaching and man who approach having more options, don't we also have a situation where man feels flattered by woman approaching and woman who approaches having more options?


----------



## ThatGuy11200 (Sep 3, 2012)

I've only ever asked out three people, so that's a no from me.

Saying that, I was...excited about asking someone out last year. But that crashed and burned before I got the chance to. I feel a lot more hesitant now.


----------



## Qolselanu (Feb 15, 2006)

causalset said:


> *Unless, of course, you say that somehow she "knows" that she would prefer the guys that approach her anyway (as in she likes assertiveness) but that is precisely the problem. Why cna't a guy also prefer a woman who approaches him?* I for one would feel flattered if its the woman that approached me than the other way around, so even if I did approach women, if there was a woman that approached me I would of preferred her for that reason alone. _*I understand women can feel flattered too but if both genders are truly symmetric why can't it go both ways then?*_ Why, instead of women feeling flattered by man approaching and man who approach having more options, don't we also have a situation where man feels flattered by woman approaching and woman who approaches having more options?


That is it. She instinctively knows she will prefer the type of guy that would approach her. A man could prefer the type of woman who is assertive (but assertive in a different context, like where she works). Other than that, no, in a romantic context, the act of a man approaching filters out the men who don't have the bravery to do so.

And no, the two genders (or sexes, whatever) are not symmetric. What a man wants in a woman does not perfectly align with what women want in men.

causalset, you ought to read some books on this - psychology and relationship books. You're not going to figure it out on your own and strangers posting on a forum can only help so much.


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

Qolselanu said:


> And no, the two genders (or sexes, whatever) are not symmetric. What a man wants in a woman does not perfectly align with what women want in men.


Well, they should be. If the society were to let go of traditional gender roles and make both genders symmetric, it would be a lot easier for everyone involved (of either gender).

And the ironic thing is that women are calling ME sexist when I am complaining about not being able to find a girlfriend. So how am I sexist if I want the genders to be symmetric? In fact, women are the ones who are a lot more supportive of patriarchy than I am: when a woman expects a guy to approach her, then she supports patriarchal gender roles. But I thought feminists are supposed to be opposed to patriarchy? Apparently not. On the other hand, I am, in fact, being opposed to patriarchy since I want women to approach men. Yet, despite my opposition to patriarchy, the women are accusing me of promoting patriarchy when, as a matter of fact, they are the ones doing it, not me.



Qolselanu said:


> causalset, you ought to read some books on this - psychology and relationship books. You're not going to figure it out on your own and strangers posting on a forum can only help so much.


What books would you recommend?


----------



## Witchblade (Jun 17, 2017)

causalset said:


> Well, they should be. If the society were to let go of traditional gender roles and make both genders symmetric, it would be a lot easier for everyone involved (of either gender).
> 
> And the ironic thing is that women are calling ME sexist when I am complaining about not being able to find a girlfriend. So how am I sexist if I want the genders to be symmetric? In fact, women are the ones who are a lot more supportive of patriarchy than I am: when a woman expects a guy to approach her, then she supports patriarchal gender roles. But I thought feminists are supposed to be opposed to patriarchy? Apparently not. On the other hand, I am, in fact, being opposed to patriarchy since I want women to approach men. Yet, despite my opposition to patriarchy, the women are accusing me of promoting patriarchy when, as a matter of fact, they are the ones doing it, not me.


When you only want to dismantle the gender roles that hurt yourself, you don't come across as a "feminist progressive", you come across as whining.

But anyway, taking initiative in life and dating isn't something that only men do or that's only good for men. Taking the initiative is the best way to ensure you get what you want, rather than getting whatever other people offer you. You're in control of your own fate, stop trying to give away that power.


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

Witchblade said:


> When you only want to dismantle the gender roles that hurt yourself, you don't come across as a "feminist progressive", you come across as whining.


I want to dismantle ALL gender roles, not just the ones that hurt me. I mean, the way I see it, is that gender roles preclude people from seeing each other as individuals. And thats what I felt long before I wanted to date (I only started to want to date at the age of 22). But of course, it didn't keep me obsessing about it until it started to personally hurt me; but thats just human nature: I am not obsessing about violations of human rights in Islamic world, but if I were to live there I would.



Witchblade said:


> But anyway, taking initiative in life and dating isn't something that only men do or that's only good for men. Taking the initiative is the best way to ensure you get what you want, rather than getting whatever other people offer you. You're in control of your own fate, stop trying to give away that power.


If taking initiative in life is a good thing for both genders, then why don't I see women taking initiative in approaching men? I realize you are talking about other things, such as women taking initiative to apply for jobs. But why can't women apply this principle to dating too?


----------



## a degree of freedom (Sep 28, 2011)

I don't mind it ... there's some pleasure in it, though there has to be some balance to it. I don't mind some gender roles if they are a surface feature and collaboration and equality and strength for both lie underneath.


----------



## Witchblade (Jun 17, 2017)

causalset said:


> If taking initiative in life is a good thing for both genders, then why don't I see women taking initiative in approaching men? I realize you are talking about other things, such as women taking initiative to apply for jobs. But why can't women apply this principle to dating too?


They do. You're obviously not looking hard enough, or you're mislabeling things.


----------



## Qolselanu (Feb 15, 2006)

causalset said:


> What books would you recommend?


No More Mr. Nice Guy by Robert Glover is well-regarded, though I haven't read it. What Women Want When They Test Men by Bruce Bryans is good too - its on the simple and to the point side. Nice and quick read to get you started.


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

Witchblade said:


> They do. You're obviously not looking hard enough, or you're mislabeling things.


If they do, then this brings me back to the other question: what is it about me that stops them from approaching me, even though they approach other guys? I mean, they haven't read this forum, so how do they know I am a whiner or whatever? Is it a body language? Or is it the fact that I am seen always by myself rather than in company of others?


----------



## Witchblade (Jun 17, 2017)

causalset said:


> If they do, then this brings me back to the other question: what is it about me that stops them from approaching me, even though they approach other guys? I mean, they haven't read this forum, so how do they know I am a whiner or whatever? Is it a body language? Or is it the fact that I am seen always by myself rather than in company of others?


You have received the answer to this question too many times, I'm not going to spoon feed you anymore, put some effort in.


----------



## Qolselanu (Feb 15, 2006)

Witchblade said:


> They do. You're obviously not looking hard enough, or you're mislabeling things.


It happens occasionally, but as a man I wouldn't count on it. I have experienced it though in various forms.


----------



## a degree of freedom (Sep 28, 2011)

causalset said:


> But why can't women apply this principle to dating too?


I think "taking the initiative" doesn't need to imply you're completely out on a limb. There is probably often some back an forth to it where a girl may make it relatively clear that she likes you and you may only need to take a small step in asking her out. If you ask, "yeah, but why can't she ask?", I guess I want to say it doesn't really matter, even though certainly she can. Building up to that can be and is probably nicest when it's a fairly equitable process. Approaches though, in real life, can be pretty balanced depending on the context, and very subtle because there may be an obvious excuse for it.

In the end, things just aren't given to anyone on a golden platter, though that might be true of offers of sex for many women and probably a smaller number of men. If you want something more substantial than that, it's not just easy for anyone.


----------



## Witchblade (Jun 17, 2017)

Qolselanu said:


> It happens occasionally, but as a man I wouldn't count on it. I have experienced it though in various forms.


A woman walking up to you out of the blue and asking you out probably isn't going to happen, but that's a stupid thing for a man to do to. Even if you get a yes doing that, it's probably something she just said out of fear and to get away quickly and you won't actually go on a date. So yes, that type of approach is heavily skewed towards men doing it, but that's because there are a lot more men than women who are boundary pushing *******s with no concern for other people's feelings.

When it comes to more natural ways of flowing from conversation into asking for a date, I'd say it's 50/50. Gender will play a role in how it manifests (a man more likely to say "would you go out with me" and a woman more likely to say "here's my number, call me if you want"), but I'd say it's definitely not something men do more than women.


----------



## Qolselanu (Feb 15, 2006)

Witchblade said:


> A woman walking up to you out of the blue and asking you out probably isn't going to happen, but that's a stupid thing for a man to do to. Even if you get a yes doing that, it's probably something she just said out of fear and to get away quickly and you won't actually go on a date. So yes, that type of approach is heavily skewed towards men doing it, but that's because there are a lot more men than women who are boundary pushing *******s with no concern for other people's feelings.
> 
> When it comes to more natural ways of flowing from conversation into asking for a date, I'd say it's 50/50. Gender will play a role in how it manifests (a man more likely to say "would you go out with me" and a woman more likely to say "here's my number, call me if you want"), but I'd say it's definitely not something men do more than women.


I was thinking more of a situation of a man being shown a door, but he has to open it. As in, he gets a flash of interest from a woman and it's up to him whether he accepts/approaches or not - the ball being in the man's court at this point. This did happen to me rather blatantly once at my college cafeteria. Random girl sitting far off started looking and smiling at me. It looked like she wanted to eat me. And she sure looked beautiful and inviting. From that point on, it was on me to approach. I didn't end up approaching her. I'd like to say that I had a lot of other stress on my mind and that I was in no mood for flirting, which was definitely true. But part of me suspects that I failed there.


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

Witchblade said:


> A woman walking up to you out of the blue and asking you out probably isn't going to happen, *but that's a stupid thing for a man to do to.* Even if you get a yes doing that, it's probably something she just said out of fear and to get away quickly and you won't actually go on a date. So yes, that type of approach is heavily skewed towards men doing it, but that's because there are a lot more men than women who are boundary pushing *******s with no concern for other people's feelings.


Well, thats exactly why I don't approach. As you said, simply walking to a woman out of the blue is inappropriate -- just like I always thought. Yet people are telling me "why don't you approach yourself". So what exactly are they asking me to do, other than the inappropriate thing you just described?



Witchblade said:


> When it comes to more natural ways of flowing from conversation into asking for a date, I'd say it's 50/50. Gender will play a role in how it manifests (a man more likely to say "would you go out with me" and a woman more likely to say "here's my number, call me if you want"), but I'd say it's definitely not something men do more than women.


Women giving me a number would be great too, but the problem is that htey don't do it either. And then when I ask "so why doesn't any woman ever give me a number" I am told "well you are a man you should initiate". But wait a second, when it comes to her giving me a number, SHE should initiate, as you described. I mean if a man was supposed to ask a woman for a number, what would be a polite way to not give it? None. So obviously the only way the manners would work is for a woman to offer a number herself. Which is precisely why I am waiting for a woman to offer a number, and it never seems to happen.


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

Qolselanu said:


> I was thinking more of a situation of a man being shown a door, but he has to open it. As in, he gets a flash of interest from a woman and it's up to him whether he accepts/approaches or not - the ball being in the man's court at this point. This did happen to me rather blatantly once at my college cafeteria. Random girl sitting far off started looking and smiling at me. It looked like she wanted to eat me. And she sure looked beautiful and inviting. From that point on, it was on me to approach. I didn't end up approaching her. I'd like to say that I had a lot of other stress on my mind and that I was in no mood for flirting, which was definitely true. But part of me suspects that I failed there.


I had similar situation with a couple of students -- see here http://www.socialanxietysupport.com...unity-with-either-of-those-two-girls-2039721/ But unfortunately my brain didn't work fast enough to respond, cause I am not experienced enough. I just wish I had more such chances so that I could make up for those two that I missed.


----------



## truant (Jul 4, 2014)

causalset said:


> So you are saying that the assertive men would approach a woman before she has a chance to approach me. But what about the opposite scenario: what if she approaches me before they have a chance to approach her? True, there is a lot of "them" and one of "her". But there are a lot of other women, so in few of them I can get lucky in this particular way.
> 
> Here is a simple math for you. Suppose men approaching women and women approaching men equally often; and, at the same time, I insist on never approaching women. In this case, I have exactly TWICE less chances than other men: other men have two ways of starting a relationship (either they approach a woman or woman approaching them) while I have only one way of starting a relationship (woman approaching me). So if both genders approach equally often I have exactly twice less chances.
> 
> ...


Pretty sure we've already had this conversation before, causal. You're getting hung up on the mechanics of courtship when _the mechanics don't matter_. It doesn't matter who approaches; what matters is whether or not you're creating a positive experience. If you lack the psychological resources to approach a woman, what makes you think you have the psychological resources to keep a woman interested even if she does approach? A relationship isn't a one time thing; it's a continuous process. If you can't make another person happy consistently over a long period of time who approaches whom is a moot point. And if you do know how to make another person happy then you don't have to change how dating works because approaching is about figuring out some way to make another person happy in that moment (hence flirting, compliments, offers of assistance, etc.).

Those competitive men swooping in to intercept women who might approach you are a problem because their initiative and confidence automatically makes them more attractive than men who lack initiative and confidence (all other things being equal). They have the initiative and confidence to try to make another person feel good. Even if men and women approach each other at equal rates, what makes you think those women wouldn't go after those men anyway?

This whole idea of randomly approaching strangers is flawed. Most people meet people through their existing social network, not by approaching strangers. Men with initiative and confidence probably move in much larger social circles than men who lack those things; their success has a lot to do with a having a significantly larger dating pool to begin with. You're complaining about "who approaches whom" when you should be trying to figure out how to interact with people in general so that you can build a network that will create a dating pool. Even in a world where men and women approach each other at equal rates (and women do already take an active role in dating, not sure why so many guys think they don't) they're going to be approaching men mostly within their own social networks, not going outside of their networks to find isolated loners that don't know anyone.

You want the whole world to change how they go about dating just so that you have a slightly better chance of being approached. Not only is this incredibly unrealistic, because it works fine for most people, who therefore have no incentive to change, but it's not likely to help. Those women are almost certainly going to go after men who aren't you for the very same reasons that you're already failing with women, and even if they don't they'll likely lose interest if you can't make them happy. You need to figure how to make another person feel good. If you can't figure that out, you're never going to get anywhere.


----------



## harrison (Apr 14, 2012)

Qolselanu said:


> I was thinking more of a situation of a man being shown a door, but he has to open it. As in, he gets a flash of interest from a woman and it's up to him whether he accepts/approaches or not - the ball being in the man's court at this point. This did happen to me rather blatantly once at my college cafeteria. Random girl sitting far off started looking and smiling at me. *It looked like she wanted to eat me*. And she sure looked beautiful and inviting. From that point on, it was on me to approach. I didn't end up approaching her. I'd like to say that I had a lot of other stress on my mind and that I was in no mood for flirting, which was definitely true. *But part of me suspects that I failed there.*




Well, that would be because you have social anxiety mate - so try not to be too hard on yourself. I've been in similar situations and not done anything either - it's scary.

The thing is that I suspect most men find it slightly intimidating - even ones that don't have anxiety. I would say that if a man on this particular site says he actually enjoys it then he's lying.

I probably asked a few women out - but I was asked out more. (thank Christ) I think the only woman I ever chased was my ex-wife. She basically couldn't care less whether I existed or not so I had to sort of change her mind. :b


----------



## EitherThatOrTrees (May 29, 2017)

I, EitherThatOrTrees, do not mind being the initiator so long as the woman gives me the invitation to initiate! Whether it be a smile or a longing glance.

Because I will title myself a dumbo if I just try to talk to some girl who gave me no indication she would like me to talk to her.


----------



## ZonarX (Jul 4, 2017)

Really tired of those ****ing machos approaching every girl knowing that they can get the ***** in any quantity they want. Their live is so much easier and they were just born that way, what a ****ing lottery. So far it was like this - the girls I want to go out with are not interested in me so I don't even try while those who approach me doesn't interest me. Eternal loop.


----------



## Kilgore Trout (Aug 10, 2014)

I wish they could give me a hint that they're 100% into me, then I would be okay to approach.

I have mixed feelings really. I kind of like the guy approaches girl scenario but on the other hand I don't like the idea that the guy _has to _be the one who approaches first. Also I have zero confidence to approach anyone.


----------



## Witchblade (Jun 17, 2017)

geraltofrivia said:


> I wish they could give me a hint that they're 100% into me, then I would be okay to approach.


They'll never give you that because how would they know they're 100% into you before you even approach? The most you're gonna ever get is signs that they're curious about you.


----------



## Kilgore Trout (Aug 10, 2014)

Witchblade said:


> They'll never give you that because how would they know they're 100% into you before you even approach? The most you're gonna ever get is signs that they're curious about you.


I know


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

truant said:


> Pretty sure we've already had this conversation before, causal. You're getting hung up on the mechanics of courtship when _the mechanics don't matter_. It doesn't matter who approaches; what matters is whether or not you're creating a positive experience. If you lack the psychological resources to approach a woman, what makes you think you have the psychological resources to keep a woman interested even if she does approach? A relationship isn't a one time thing; it's a continuous process. If you can't make another person happy consistently over a long period of time who approaches whom is a moot point. And if you do know how to make another person happy then you don't have to change how dating works because approaching is about figuring out some way to make another person happy in that moment (hence flirting, compliments, offers of assistance, etc.).


The reason I talk about mechanics is that I think mechanics is what makes women dislike the time they spend with me -- they simply don't realize its mechanics. I mean, if you re-read the paragraph I quoted above, you will notice that you kind of lumped together two separate issues: making women feel good initially and making them feel good long term. But what makes you think they are related? I had three long term relationships (one was 8 month long and the other two were 2 years long each), and my "initial" issues were no longer and issues once I were in a relationship: of course I knew how to approach those girls once I been dating them for few months.

Now its true that those relationships didn't work out, but the reasons they didn't work out has nothing to do with the reasons why I can't get new relationships. The only one of those three relationships where there *was* clear connection was with my first ex: she was too ashamed to introduce me to her friends cause I didn't talk to them when she did. In case of my second ex the issue was entirely different: what frustrated her was that I was complaining that she was taking up too much time out of my studies and making me spend too much money, and also that when my parents set up plans that interfered with plans I had with her, I basically told each party I want to do their plans but I have to do the other party's plans so that htey don't get mad, which I thought would avoid the conflict but instead it did the opposite and created more and more conflict between my parents and her. With the third ex, the issue was that she was southern baptist and she was raised to think that its horrible if I use cuss words (whether it be God's name in vain or anything else) and also it was horrible if I had any trace of social life: like there was one time when she got jealous because I mentioned some girl coming over that is just a family friend, and there was another time when she got upset I got invited to a party by a landlord and they were drinking (even though I wasn't).

Now, how is any of it related to the issues I have initially? It seems like the first ex is the only one of those three ex-s where there is a clear connection. Still, as obvious as it looks with my first ex, there is a difference because I DID talk to my first ex so the question is why did she assume I won't be able to talk to her friends if I clearly knew how to talk to her? But still I guess to answer my own question is that, even thogh I DID talk to her, she was unhappy, and thats why she was unwilling to put effort into making me talk to her friends. Similarly, in case of initial impression, people are unhappy too, but in those cases its easy for them to take a way out by simply not talking to me (unlike the case with my first ex) and thats why I "think" my problem is conversation skills when, in fact, my actual problem is keeping people happy.

In case of second ex, the issues seem very different; but I guess if you psychoanalyze it you could say that the issue with parents is about assertiveness, and the difficulty initiating conversation is the same thing; and you could also say that part of the reason I am isolated is that I do'nt join clubs because "I have to study" and complaining about my second ex not letting me study is related. But that connection is pretty lose: I mean how many girls ever told me "you don't initiate so you are not going to be assertive enough to stand up to your parents"? None. And thats because those two things don't have to be together.

Finally, you could say that the reason my third ex was southern baptist who was against any kind of social life is that this is the only kind of person I can attract since, as they say, "like attracts like". But once again, thats a bit circular: so lets say we have a girl that is NOT like my third ex, consider dating me; will she BECOME the way my third ex is if she decides to date me? Nope. So problem solved.

ANd, last but not least, MOST PEOPLE have relationships that aren't working out -- thats why most people don't end up marrying their very first significant other. So the real problem is NOT that my relationships didn't work out, but that I had so few of them on the first place. The fact is that I don't have sufficient data to judge myself as either good or bad in long term relationships since I had so few of them (by the way I do want long term relationship -- and hopefully marriage -- regardless: if I am bad at it I am willing to learn; I was just writing from other people's perspective). I mean think about it: if you take my THIRD ex, does her being upset I was invited to a party indicates any of the things others are upset about -- particuarly since I was invited only once in 2 years and others are being invited far more often? Obviously not; if anything, their complaint would be the opposite to the one of my third ex.

And tihs leads to the original question: what makes you think I would be bad at making a girl happy long term, if there isn't sufficient data to say that? Why would inability to approach be any indication of anything long term?



truant said:


> This whole idea of randomly approaching strangers is flawed. Most people meet people through their existing social network, not by approaching strangers. Men with initiative and confidence probably move in much larger social circles than men who lack those things; their success has a lot to do with a having a significantly larger dating pool to begin with. You're complaining about "who approaches whom" when you should be trying to figure out how to interact with people in general so that you can build a network that will create a dating pool. Even in a world where men and women approach each other at equal rates (and women do already take an active role in dating, not sure why so many guys think they don't) they're going to be approaching men mostly within their own social networks, not going outside of their networks to find isolated loners that don't know anyone.


I suspect I had two opportunities to meet girls in my class and I blew both of them (see here http://www.socialanxietysupport.com...unity-with-either-of-those-two-girls-2039721/ ) I don't know who else to meet "through social networks". My only "social cirle" is the math department, so if I spent there the whole year and didn't met anyone, I don't see how that would change.


----------



## nexile90 (May 28, 2017)

If I were at all capable of taking to an attractive girl off my own bat and felt any hope of success, I might enjoy it. Then again, I do dream of the ultimate compliment of a girl initiating with me. If only!


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

truant said:


> Pretty sure we've already had this conversation before, causal. You're getting hung up on the mechanics of courtship when _the mechanics don't matter_. It doesn't matter who approaches; what matters is whether or not you're creating a positive experience. If you lack the psychological resources to approach a woman, what makes you think you have the psychological resources to keep a woman interested even if she does approach? A relationship isn't a one time thing; it's a continuous process. If you can't make another person happy consistently over a long period of time who approaches whom is a moot point. And if you do know how to make another person happy then you don't have to change how dating works because approaching is about figuring out some way to make another person happy in that moment (hence flirting, compliments, offers of assistance, etc.).
> 
> Those competitive men swooping in to intercept women who might approach you are a problem because their initiative and confidence automatically makes them more attractive than men who lack initiative and confidence (all other things being equal). They have the initiative and confidence to try to make another person feel good. Even if men and women approach each other at equal rates, what makes you think those women wouldn't go after those men anyway?
> 
> ...


Okay here is a "short and sweet" reason why I think its about *mechanics*. So am I a total loser? Nope, I am a Ph.D. student. Am I very a bad person? Nope, I don't remember the last time when I was trying to cheat someone out of their money or to cheat on my girlfriend or whatever. Am I boring? Well I like to travel and stuff. *So what is it about me that makes it so universally unpleasant to be around me?* I guess the answer is *MECHANICS* Due to Asperger there are some *mechanical* mishaps that consistently make me come across as one or all of the "bad" categories I just listed, and that is a total miscommunication -- due to Asperger.


----------



## fishy636 (Jul 19, 2017)

Gender roles are crap...I personally find myself more interested when the female initiates.

It's kinda like saying the just because you're a guy that you have a role you must fit into or else.


----------



## truant (Jul 4, 2014)

@causalset

Mechanics just define a procedure. They're neutral terms; courtship expectations are like + and - signs: they tell you how to solve an equation, they don't give you the values of the terms.

In our culture, there is an expectation that "if a man is attracted to a woman, he should approach her and ask her out". That's what a "man" does. There is another expectation that the woman will then either say yes or no. That's all that mechanics cover. That's what you want to change. You want to change the expectation to: "if a man or woman is attracted to a man or woman, he or she should approach and ask him or her out". You think by making this change, you will have a much better chance of getting into a relationship.

First of all, things are already close to being that way. Women are already being told to take the initiative and do the approaching if they're not being approached by the kind of men they prefer. I've seen women approach men; I've had conversations with women about the best way to approach a guy; all of my gfs approached me, not the other way around. It's really not all that uncommon. It's MORE common for a man to approach than a woman, but if a woman is interested in a man, many women will already approach him. The big difference seems to be that men are much more likely to approach a strange woman than a woman is to approach a strange man; presumably, to correct this "imbalance", you want women to start approaching strange men instead of approaching men who are already known to them. I predict that very few women are going to find this idea appealing. But let's say that hypothetically women do start approaching strange men at the same rate that men approach strange women: what happens once two people start talking?

You say you don't see the connection between making a person happy when you first approach them and making them happy later, during the course of the relationship. You base this on the fact that you struggle to find women who are interested at first, but that once you are in a relationship with a woman it goes well for a while. The connection is very straightforward.

Everything is about positive and negative brain stimulation. What's different is the context, and the context is creating different kinds of brain stimulation. First of all, if you approach a strange woman, you're automatically putting her on the defensive, which is a negative brain state you have to overcome. Second, you're probably nervous, which means you're probably behaving awkwardly. Third, you don't know anything about her, which means you have no way of knowing how she's going to respond to anything you say or do, which means you're more or less acting at random. It's very easy, in this context, for a man to create a negative impression. By contrast, once you are in a relationship, you no longer have to overcome the defensiveness created by being a stranger; you will feel relaxed and act more naturally; and you will know more about her, and hence, know what kinds of topics to avoid, what kinds of actions she likes or doesn't like, etc. In this context, it's much easier for you to create positive brain states than it is when you first approach.

Most people seem to interact more or less unconsciously, relying on a mix of social customs, stereotypes, and impulses. But some people are aware of the importance of managing a person's current brain state and work to create as much positive stimulation as they can. These are the "players" who tell women exactly what they want to hear, who lie, brag, joke, name drop, make romantic gestures, throw money around, etc. They work out, dress nice, pay attention to grooming, etc., because they know that the more positive the impression they create, the more likely they are to score. If they have no real interest in the woman, then they're doing basically the opposite of what you're doing: they're making a good first impression, but failing at relationships (because they have no interest in them).

First impressions are important, because people tend to predict how you will behave in the future based on them. If when you meet someone they see someone who is depressed, anxious, apathetic, poor, dirty, etc., they don't suspend judgment until they get to know you; they assume that you will continue to be depressed, anxious, apathetic, poor, dirty, etc., at least for the foreseeable future. The brain state you are presently creating determines the prediction people will make about your future behavior. If you yell at someone, they predict that you will yell at them again later. If you complain, they predict you will continue to complain. Etc. All of these things are negative; they create unpleasant feelings in other people. If you are anxious, you will make the other person feel awkward; if you are depressed, you will make the other person feel sad; if you smell bad, you will make the other person feel disgusted; etc. They will take these feelings of awkwardness, sadness, disgust, etc., and project them into the future. No one knows what will happen; for all they know, you may just be having a bad day; but they will predict based on their present impressions. That's why it's critical that you manage the impression you make on people when you first meet them. (And why, while it's possible to change a person's image of you, it usually takes a long time to erase that first impression.)

It may be true that you are a much better person once you are in a relationship, but no one is interested in making a gamble like that if there are other people around making better first impressions. That's not because people are shallow, but because people don't have time to get to know everyone; they have to have some quick way to make decisions about people in their environment so they don't waste a lot of time following bad leads. If you do have positive traits, and you spend enough time with another person, then their feelings about you may change. I'm an ugly weirdo who dresses like a bum, but I've had gfs; and it's because those women got to know me over a period of months and realized that I had positive traits that weren't immediately obvious.

Now, you list a bunch of things that you consider assets, but what do those assets mean in terms of present moment brain states? What does having a PhD mean to the average person? Well, for people who place a high value on education, it's probably a selling point. On hearing that you are a PhD student, they may predict intelligent conversations and a good job in the future. But that's something that _might_ happen, not something that's happening right now, so the amount of present brain stimulation it's creating is fairly minimal; it's just a nice expectation. It would be _more_ stimulating to actually BE in an intelligent conversation than to predict one, and it would be _more_ stimulating to SEE signs of a good job (like nice clothing, a nice car, etc.) than to just predict those things. Remember: people predict based on present impressions, so if they are having an intelligent conversation with you, they will predict more intelligent conversations in the future; if you just tell them you are a PhD student, they are still waiting for proof that you can engage in intelligent conversations. If you're wearing nice clothes and drive a nice car, they will predict that you will continue to wear nice clothes and drive a nice car; if you just dangle the possibility like a carrot, that's all it is. Something vague and hypothetical; hence, the amount of appeal it holds is minimal.

The next things are "am I a bad person?", and "I won't steal, cheat, etc." First of all: other people have no way of knowing this about you. That's something they can only learn over a long period of time. You telling people that you're not a bad person doesn't mean anything because bad people tell other people they're not bad, too, and most of them really don't think they're bad people! "Not being bad" is the _absence of negative brain stimulation_, not the creation of positive brain stimulation. If you don't lie, don't cheat, don't steal, don't hit people or yell at them, etc., what you're doing is NOTHING AT ALL. You know who else doesn't lie, doesn't cheat, doesn't steal, etc.? A dog or a cat. A pillow. A blank wall. Empty air. _A person can avoid having bad things done to them by a partner simply by staying single._ If the _only_ thing you have going for you is that you're "not a bad person", then you're no better than a teddy bear. Being a good person is extremely important over the long haul, but it doesn't create a positive feeling right now in the moment because it's just not doing something painful to someone else. People only realize how important that is in retrospect, when they look back on the time they've already spent with you and realize that "hey, it's been pretty good" -- because you never cheated on them or hit them or yelled at them, etc.

What you're calling "mechanical mishaps" I'm saying is a result of your inability to understand present moment brain states. Approaching women successfully doesn't depend on knowing some secret code; it depends on your ability to understand what sorts of things will make people feel good (complimenting them, for example), what sorts of things will make them feel bad (insulting them), and what sorts of things won't make any difference to them either way (_not_ doing something unpleasant to them; ie. being a "nice guy"). If you make a good enough first impression and get into a relationship, the health of the relationship over time is going to depend on your ability to keep creating positive brain states (being interesting, funny, romantic, adventurous, etc.) and avoiding negative brain states (by being a good person).


----------



## causalset (Sep 11, 2016)

@truant When I was talking about being a graduate student and not being a bad person, I was basically trying to respond to your point where you said "don't focus on details, look at the big picture" so I was like "alright, here is a big picture; why does it look so bad?" Your point that "being a graduate student doesn't imply anything tangible" is well taken, but that just goes to show that "anything you see at first -- good or bad -- isn't tangible, unless you get to know a person" aka "don't judge by first impressions" But since they clearly DO judge by first impressions, thats what makes me wonder why my first impressions are so bad despite my being graduate student and all. If being a graduate student isn't tangible, then neither is anything else. If other things are important, then so is being a graduate student. You can't have it both ways.

You said the type of "stimulation" (as you put it) they get from me is a predictor of "stimulation" they will have in future. But that predictor isn't very reliable: _as you acnowledged yourself_ the fact that I don't know a person yet would make it easy to have negative initial stimulation while I would create more positive stimulation later on when I know them better. I guess you might say "well even if its not reliable it is still _some_ indicator". But so is being a graduate student -- that is also _some_ indicator. So why is something like my having a bad day more reliable than my whole career?

As far as being a good or bad person, well I am not going around with a big sign "I am a good person I never stolen or lied"; all I am saying is that _they_ are the ones that make assumption (they assume I am bad) so the burden of proof is on them: what is it they see that makes them assume I am so bad? And then I bring up stealing and lying in order to point out the scale on which "bad" is being measured. So, does being awkward in small talk indicates that a person is bad to THAT magnitude? I mean they put up with people that DO do those things, yet they don't put up with my being bad at small talk.

And, by the way, since you mentioned "screaming" as an example. Do you mean "arghhh" like I screamed at the bus driver, or do you mean talking with a loud voice? As far as "arghhh", I only did it with a bus driver (along possibly other very rare occasions). As far as loud voice, yes my voice is naturally loud and its very difficult to control it even for few minutes let along for longer period of time. That would require a lot of training. People do say, however, that that is one of the things that puts them off though so I don't know what to do about it.

As far as your other example, you mentioned complaining. But why is complaining a negative stimulation? You said it makes them feel bad. But lets dissect it a little. The only way complaining would make them feel bad is that they are empathetic towards me so they feel sorry for me. But if they are so empathetic, why wouldn't it make them feel any worse that they leave me in a cold? Or if you say they don't care about me and only care about themselves, then why would complaining make them feel bad if I am complaining about third parties they don't even know about or care? And if, for whatever reason, they still insist that complaining makes them feel bad, then why wouldn't my being a graduate student make them feel good?

By the way, even though I said it is "more usual" for me to complain than to scream, I don't complain that often either for the simple reason that I don't have a chance to. Yes, if someone talks to me for more than 5 minutes it will most likely get to some form of complaining; but most of the time nobody talks to me even that little. So what is it about me that makes them know not to talk to me? Is it my body language? And why is awkward body language would make people feel THAT MUCH of a negative stimulation? It doesn't even affect them in any way.

Here is a general point: if I do something that hurts THEM in some way then I can see why they want to leave. But general situation is that they are leaving due to things that doesn't involve them (if I am awkward at conversations, or if I don't brush my hair, or if I complain, none of it hurts them in any way, unless I am hurting them indirectly through some social network that I am being unaware of). And then the question is: if they can be put off by things that don't directly hurt them, why can't they be turned on by things that don't directly help them either -- such as my being a graduate student?

As far as your point about approaching strange men versus approaching the familiar men, here is a question: so in math department everyone knows who I am (since I been there a year) but they never talked to me this whole year. So am I "stranger" or "familiar"? Should I say they don't approach me because I am a stranger or because they don't like me? You mentioned you created bad first impression but you still got girlfriends because they got to know you over time. But that means that at least they were talking to you. How did you get them to talk to you, since I can't even get that far?


----------

