Happy April First

Forget male rape survivors! Ignore the bullying of teen boys! Pay no attention to the marginalization of fathers! Today, NSWATM will discuss the single most important issue facing men of all classes, colors, and creeds: the inability of straight white middle-class men to get laid.

Too long have the slut-feminists and their mangina lapdogs hidden the truth of female sexuality! The feminists know that the true source of their power is their pussies. Without the Holy Grail of a vagina, what man would pay attention to the sack of meat surrounding it? Even the wimpiest white knight, “this is what a feminist looks like” shirt stretched over his jiggling fat, would turn MRA instantly if not promised a short-haired feminist chick on a bender.

The feminist-industrial complex has lied to us about the true nature of female sexuality by saying that women really want emotional connection with nice men who bring them roses. In fact, women are fucking men they met an hour ago in the bathrooms of dive bars; they spread their legs on the uncomfortable futon of an unemployed DJ. Meanwhile, an intelligent man with a good IT job, who would treat her like a queen and be a good provider for her children, is lucky to get a kiss on the cheek or be treated as a waddling plain jane’s emotional tampon.

This is the dark face of female sexuality: hypergamy. Their love juices flow freely for an alpha male, which is to say, for an asshole. If a man treats them like shit, their biomechanical imperative says, he must have dozens of women after him– how else could he treat one of them so awfully? They crave his come, especially during ovulation, so they too can have sexy sons. They tingle for a man with options. Their rationalization hamsters justify that it is just the once– or they’re empowered– or they’re SURE this one will commit!

Beware, nice guys! Even when you marry a “quality woman” who says she’s not a slut, after you drop her home from your romantic stargazing proposal with a ten thousand dollar ring, an alpha male will be fucking her without a condom and jizzing all over her face. So sure that that kid’s yours?

Some say that the only solution is for all men to learn Game– that is, to learn how to imitate the characteristic douchebaggery confidence of a man with options. His prideful stand, his masculine air, his piercing gaze: most men, with six months work, could learn to imitate these traits and, while they may not achieve the rampaging manliness of a true alpha male, could experience a pussy fountain like they had never imagined before, and the concomitant bliss. However, female hypergamy is a fickle mistress: once all men are players, the best at Game will still reap the benefits of multiple loving long-term relationships with beautiful women, while the only sex those inferior would get is a divorce raping up the ass.

Others argue that the solution is a return to patriarchy. Perhaps that is better: at least in that system every man gets a wife guaranteed to not be a slut, to look up to him, to obey him, and to marry while still young and fuckable. The male desire for polygamy can be dealt with by confining the sluttiest sluts (that is, anyone with The Pervocracy in their feed reader)to Houses of Entertainment where they may entertain men the only way that anyone cares about.

However, that dreams too low. After all, the necessity of being a “provider” to dependent women and children is too hard a burden on men.

I propose pussy communism. All women between the ages of fourteen and thirty (when they become unfuckable) will be available to all men, on demand, whenever they like. Once they hit The Wall and have their pussies stretched out by too many cocks, women will be assigned to clean homes, raise children, and make sandwiches for whatever drooling lesser omega wanking it to anime porn will have them.

Some may argue that this plan violates core principles of our democracy. Admittedly, going against capitalism and competition hurts me deep within my soul. However, capitalism only applies to men, ruthless and competitive, not the silly women. Besides, women already give their pussies to the undeserving: what difference does it make for them to fuck a weirdo nerdboy DM than a black thug with a sixteen inch cock?

I believe after some examination everyone will agree this is the only way.

This entry was posted in noseriouslywhatabouttehmenz, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

132 Responses to Happy April First

  1. monkey says:

    Um, Ozy…

    I know this is a humour post, but there’s something a little virgin-shaming about this.

    I know all my problems wouldn’t be solved by “getting laid,” but right now I’m really feeling sad about not having someone to be with.

  2. ralucahippie says:

    My suggestion (to be taken in the context of April 1st only): reciting this tirade to a woman (prefferably hand-gesturing like dictator Ceausescu -look it up on youtube-) will get you laid on the spot. Guys?

  3. ozymandias42 says:

    Monkey: Not having someone to be with is awful, and being lonely is one of the worst pains I’ve experienced. I have absolutely no interest in shaming anyone with this post except people who like coming up with elaborate theories about hypergamy on the Internet, a trait which has very little to do with how often you get laid.

  4. monkey says:

    I guess I see that. I’m just feeling especially vulnerable about this right now, and I’m not so much feeling Nice Guyism as floundering because I have no idea what I’m doing wrong. I have no desire to try to be a PUA, but god, I just feel like a jerk.

  5. MorkaisChosen says:

    Probably not doing anything /wrong/ per se, just not meeting people who like you that way.

  6. monkey says:

    Not sure what the difference is.

  7. ozymandias42 says:

    Sometimes the latter is the result of shitty luck. Which is kind of a more unfair and unfortunate situation, if you think about it.

  8. Matthew Swank says:

    I curled into a ball and cried a lot. This is not so much advice as it is testimony.

  9. Matthew Swank says:

    If you think about a lot of April Fools posts on the internet are elaborate peices of satire that, if taken seriously, tend to open up large emotional wounds, so well done?

  10. dancinbojangles says:

    Going through a breakup myself right now, so I know that feel @monkey. I’ve never understood how people turn that sadness and loneliness into hate so easily though. Sure, women (being a subset of human beings) have some messed-up notions about dating and love, but “man, they’re all just bitches” doesn’t salve my wounds very effectively. Also, I can’t seem to separate calling someone a bitch from this strange inflection and side-to-side bobbing of the head. like “bee-ach.” don’t know what that is.

  11. Lamech says:

    I’m going to have to agree with monkey. This piece was very hurtful.

  12. Danny says:

    @dancinbojangles:
    I’ve never understood how people turn that sadness and loneliness into hate so easily though.
    I do. One way for a person to give into hatred is because simply put they want to avoid the sadness but when there are no other alternatives hate starts to look pretty good. Its a matter of salving ones wounds with the “reassurance” that the problem must be them, never himself.

    Obviously that’s not always the case. Sometimes the problem is with him, sometimes the problem is with them, sometimes the there is no “problem” other than just the misfortune of meeting someone before giving into hate.

    (Personally I see the “man they’re all just bitches” attitude as one of the three ways out of the Spiral of Despair. The other two being giving up on relationships altogether or accepting that something truly is wrong with you.)

    @Ozy: I know you were trying to be funny so I guess I can’t be but so mad about this post (I’ll take solace in the fact that since you said it as a joke you don’t truly believe it) but damn I had a hard time reading all the way through.

  13. Alex says:

    I found this post quite hilarious. The fact that the jabs at the PUA community are only slight exaggerations only made that bit funnier. This is one of the reasons I have new posts fired directly into my email inbox – I love reading that razor-sharp, intelligent sarcasm.

    @Monkey: I can’t say I’m in your position because I don’t know what your life is like, but let’s just say that I can’t read memebase because Forever Alone and Bachelor Frog memes strike a tad too close to home. I had to go back and look to try and find the virgin shaming things, I think I found a few things there. I guess there’s nothing I can do to help, really, but I’m going to try and send love and hugs over the internet and hopefully both of us will make it out. ❤

  14. BK says:

    I don’t believe all women go after douchebags. In fact, I don’t believe many of them do at all. And I don’t like PUAs, but you make it sound like everyone is on the same level, and everyone has the same shot as everyone else at getting laid or finding a significant other. That’s so very far from the truth. I’d give up 6 inches from my height and 60 points from my IQ just to be good-looking. Good-looking men have far more opportunities when it comes to getting laid or finding a significant other. (And PLEASE don’t put any comments on here about how subjective the idea of “good-looking” is. We all know it is, but I’ve never had anyone subjectively find me attractive. But I do have a few male friends who make me question whether how subjective the whole idea of good-looking really is. At a certain point, the subjectivity of attractiveness doesn’t hold much weight. If 5 women out of the 4 billion women in the world find you attractive, then fuck subjectivity.)

    And while I agree that it’s not a significant issue on a macro level, it is on a micro (personal) level. And saying that something that occurs on a personal level isn’t significant is ignorant and insensitive. Just to be clear, I don’t think that’s what you’re doing here, ozy, but you’re getting damn close. Please don’t make it sound like it’s so easy to get a woman to like us just by being nice and respectful to those around us. It takes a hell of a lot more than that. The pain many of us feel because women don’t like us can easily turn a good man bitter, angry, and depressed.

    I’m right there with you, monkey. My birthday is later this month, and I always feel very lonely around this time of the year. I don’t have the skills or the looks to be able to get sex or a significant other. And to make matters even worse, I don’t have any friends within 2 hours of where I currently live.

  15. Matthew Swank says:

    For the record, I didn’t think it was purposefully hurtful. I think it was a well executed pastiche of a certain view of sex and masculinity. The fact that it’s well is why it can elicit strong feelings.

    For example, there is some political satire my wife can’t enjoy watching. It’s “too sad to be funny”. I understand this. I usually don’t have this problem, because dark humor is my default defense against the horrors and absurdities that’s bombard me. Not that this is overtly dark, but the point of view it lampoons certainly is.

  16. Alex says:

    @BK: Can I have those 6 inches? And wow, I had a laugh or cry moment just then. I think maybe this article did cut a bit close to the bone.

  17. monkey says:

    Well, I guess I just felt like the piece didn’t offer an alternative, which was what made me feel sad.

    I should explain that in a few months I will be 40, and I have no one in my life (which, truthfully, is what hurts me more than being a virgin), and I’m scared about my prospects. I am a poorly-endowed, overweight, bald man with a job in the service industry. I can’t even begin to think about “selling” myself, which disgusts me anyway.

  18. BlackHumor says:

    I think I’m gonna side with Alex here: you have a surprisingly good handle on how to parody those guys.

  19. no more mr nice guy says:

    @Monkey:

    Even if most guys in the manosphere cannot get laid, you should not identify with them when they are ridiculed because you don’t blame women for your problems, I discovered the manosphere in shyness/dating forums and most guys in these forums cannot get laid and they do not identify with guys from the manosphere : in fact most people in these forums are against misogyny and they ban these guys. On Puahate, it’s the same thing, guys like Roissy and Roosh are constantly ridiculed – and most guys on Puahate cannot get laid either.

  20. monkey says:

    No More Mr. Nice Guy:

    It doesn’t matter whether I identify with those guys or not. The premise of the article started with (I apologize to Ozy if this wasn’t zir intention) ridiculing the idea that “not getting laid” is something to be upset about. Frankly, it makes me feel like sh*t that I don’t have someone in my life, and I reserve the right to say that.

  21. Eagle34 says:

    Danny: “I do. One way for a person to give into hatred is because simply put they want to avoid the sadness but when there are no other alternatives hate starts to look pretty good.”

    I’d offer an alternate viewpoint, Danny.

    Take it from someone who’s been going through a bit of grief after finding out just how ignorant society can be towards certain issues.

    There are people out there who don’t avoid their sadness. In fact, they’re very honest and up front about the sorrow that plagues them due to experiences of negative trauma from their past lives.

    But when there are no avenues or oppertunities they can find for them to address it properly or worse still they encounter nothing but contempt and scorn should they attempt it, hate does start to look more enticing than realizing that dealing with your sadness fully isn’t going to get you anywhere except smack dab into a dead end since the climate doesn’t allow for the appropriate support nor does it want to provide it.

    So what’s left? Carry on, hold the sadness in, avoid anything that triggers you and just prey that you don’t encounter an issue related to it.

  22. daelyte says:

    I know this is an april first post, but I’m the kind of guy who answers rhetorical questions, so I’ll bite anyway.

    “The feminist-industrial complex has lied to us about the true nature of female sexuality by saying that women really want emotional connection with nice men who bring them roses. In fact, women are fucking men they met an hour ago in the bathrooms of dive bars; they spread their legs on the uncomfortable futon of an unemployed DJ.”

    Or more likely there’s some of both, and often even the same woman at different times in her life.

    “Their love juices flow freely for an alpha male, which is to say, for an asshole.”

    From what I’ve seen, alphaness is defined by agency, which is attractive in either gender but heteronormative dating standards only expect it of males. Acting like an asshole is simple the easiest way there, kind of like the dark side of the force. I guess that would make Darth Roissy a Sith Lord, and his followers would be Sith Apprentices.A

    “Beware, nice guys! Even when you marry a “quality woman” who says she’s not a slut, after you drop her home from your romantic stargazing proposal with a ten thousand dollar ring, an alpha male will be fucking her without a condom and jizzing all over her face. So sure that that kid’s yours?”

    According to some studies, while about 20% of women do cheat on their husbands, only about 10% get pregnant in the process. So there’s about a 90% chance that the kids are indeed yours.

    “Some say that the only solution is for all men to learn Game– that is, to learn how to imitate the characteristic douchebaggery confidence of a man with options.”

    Game can mean a lot of things for different people, or in different situations. For a lanky guy with long hair and a passion for music and poetry, Game could be putting on some pointy ears and strumming his lute at renfairs.

    “His prideful stand, his masculine air, his piercing gaze: most men, with six months work, could learn to imitate these traits and, while they may not achieve the rampaging manliness of a true alpha male, could experience a pussy fountain like they had never imagined before, and the concomitant bliss.”

    More likely statistics suggest that the average male’s success rate is around 2% and the best PUAs get about 10% or so, which is a major improvement but more than a few drops short of a fountain. Given that about 1 in 12-14 relationships last more than a few dates, and the average male has to ask out about 600-700 women to find a long-term partner. Most PUAs-in-training get so caught up in playing the Game that those hundreds of attempts (and rejections) go by without as much emotional damage, instead it’s like grinding for epic gear in any MMO.

    “However, female hypergamy is a fickle mistress: once all men are players, the best at Game will still reap the benefits of multiple loving long-term relationships with beautiful women, while the only sex those inferior would get is a divorce raping up the ass.”

    Seeing as how “the Game” is guys’ answer to “the Rules”, once “players” reach critical mass in the population Cosmo’s dating advice will be exposed as the pile of steaming **** it really is. A global mass orgy will ensue and the patriarchy will simply implode to be replaced by a gender-egalitarian, LGBTQ and race-tolerant sex-positive feminist utopia. Hopefully.

    “The male desire for polygamy can be dealt with by confining the sluttiest sluts (that is, anyone with The Pervocracy in their feed reader)to Houses of Entertainment where they may entertain men the only way that anyone cares about.”

    Welcome to Canada.

    “I propose pussy communism. All women between the ages of fourteen and thirty (when they become unfuckable) will be available to all men, on demand, whenever they like.”

    Counter-proposal. Since men prefer younger women, and women prefer older men, why not genetically engineer humans to be female until their early forties or so, and then turn into dirty old men? The young females would handle domestic tasks (dressed in the most provocative lingerie of course), while the older more powerful males (in tailored suits) would take care of running the patriarchy, and everyone can be comfortable knowing they get their turn at both roles.

  23. BK says:

    @Alex, If you set up the deal with the devil for my soul in exchange for being good-looking, then I’ll find a way to give you 6 inches of my height. You have my word.

    @monkey. I’m seriously RIGHT THERE with you. I’m poorly-endowed, overweight, I still have my hair, but I also have a job that sucks. I’ll be 24 this month, so most jobs that I can get aren’t great, and I honestly believe I’m way too overqualified for any of them, but I need money. The best thing you can do is lose the weight. I’m trying to do the same. Extra weight on a man isn’t appealing to women. There was a post on here a while back about what we find attractive. Everyone posted traits they find attractive and pictures of people they find attractive. Most of the women said they were really into underweight/skinny men and athletic men, and I don’t recall a single post by a woman who was into chubbier guys. And I was looking because I was really hoping for one. (I’m not sure if there were any posts by anyone regardless of gender who are attracted to overweight men, but I didn’t think there were.) And I don’t know any women in real life who like overweight guys. And I’m overweight, so I know what it’s like. I’ve never even been flirted with. I have a strong personality, a quick wit, I’m a good conversationalist, and I have a ton of friends who’d do anything for me, but these things don’t turn on women my age (20-30), and I’ll bet it’s pretty much the same for women your age. And, if you’re like me (and I think I’ve established a few ways in which you are), then you wouldn’t really want to be with a woman who really loves who you are on the inside and would accept you DESPITE your physical appearance. You want someone who’s attracted to the entire package. You need to know she thinks you’re sexy on the outside too. You’ve been put down too much and hurt too badly in the past because of your appearance to be with someone who doesn’t like your looks. That’s if you’re like me.

    And I completely understand what you mean about being alone being worse than not getting laid. And sorry for the harshness/honesty and the rambling. It’s all in love. And this is not a critique of women. I love women. I have the best friendships with women because I can be more open with them than I am with my guy friends. I know that, as a heterosexual man, it’s my responsibility to make myself attractive to those women I’m attracted to if I want to be with them. And part of that attraction is physical attractiveness.

  24. Danny says:

    Eagle:
    So what’s left? Carry on, hold the sadness in, avoid anything that triggers you and just prey that you don’t encounter an issue related to it.
    I should have explained that better.

    When I said:
    “I do. One way for a person to give into hatred is because simply put they want to avoid the sadness but when there are no other alternatives hate starts to look pretty good.”
    I meant that to say that the person in question has been holding the sadness in for some time (that time is going to vary from person to person) already and when faced with further sadness or hatred the hatred starts to look good.

    As in, “Why should I be left feeling miserable? I’ll make other people miserable and see how they like it. And I will get pleasure from their misery. (And that pleasure will help me cope with my own misery that I’ve yet to find any other way to deal with.)

  25. daelyte says:

    @dancinbojangles:
    “I’ve never understood how people turn that sadness and loneliness into hate so easily though.”

    “Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, hate leads to suffering.” – Yoda

    @monkey:
    “I guess I see that. I’m just feeling especially vulnerable about this right now, and I’m not so much feeling Nice Guyism as floundering because I have no idea what I’m doing wrong. I have no desire to try to be a PUA, but god, I just feel like a jerk.”

    “If no mistake have you made, yet losing you are … a different game you should play.” – Yoda

    Pillars of Game: (IIRC, based on a PUA site I saw)
    1. grooming (shower, clothes, hair, gym, …)
    2. confidence (toastmasters, therapy, …)
    3. perception (IOIs, social dynamics, …)
    4. meeting people (friend network, hobbies, …)
    5. interpersonal skills (emotional intelligence, non-verbal communication, …)

    Note that these are all things you can actually improve, as opposed to things you can’t change easily.

    Grooming increases the chances of being approached yourself. Confidence helps when approaching. Perception helps you detect who might have the hots for you, which helps boost confidence not only with that person but also in general. Meeting more people increases your odds of finding someone who you click with. Interpersonal skills can help maintain the relationships you get.

    @BK:
    “I’d give up 6 inches from my height and 60 points from my IQ just to be good-looking. Good-looking men have far more opportunities when it comes to getting laid or finding a significant other.”

    Having opportunities and recognizing them are two very different things. For me not knowing is worse than knowing not. I’d rather demanding pussy than pussy on demand. What I’d give to be able to know what people are thinking, the way everyone else seems to…

  26. monkey says:

    Hrm. I know I need to do a lot of those things – grooming, etc – but right now I don’t see the point.
    I guess the thing about losing weight – I would automatically be suspicious of anyone who was more interested in me after I lost a lot of weight. I have frankly given up on being conventionally phsyically attractive (and frankly, I see a lot of guys who are my size or bigger, who wear nothing but t-shirts, and still manage to have someone who wants to be with them.

    Sorry, I guess I reacted badly because this has been on my mind a lot. But frankly, I think it is an important issue for men. I definitely don’t feel that it’s trivial, because for me it’s not about “getting laid.” The fact that someone is willing to be naked with me is just a part of the whole package.

  27. Suturexself says:

    This post, I think it is a joke.

  28. daelyte says:

    Since everyone is into disclosure mode or something…

    I’m 30, average height and build, out of shape but only a few pounds overweight, I still have all my hair (and a beard), slightly well-endowed, and I’ve been told I’m handsome.

    I’m kind, intelligent, determined, personable, respectful, helpful, funny, and a good listener, knowledgeable in matters vegetable, animal, and mineral, I am the very model of a modern major-general. Not easily offended or shocked, open and honest about almost anything, no social anxiety whatsoever.

    I have difficulty with non-verbal signals, social cues, auditory processing (depending on background noise), motor coordination, flat feet and slight myopia. I’m living at home with no job or prospects.

    My dating requirements can be summed up with: consenting non-abusive female. Everything else is negotiable. Am I too picky?

    My greatest dream and worst nightmare is that someone would be madly in love with me, because I crave it yet I know that I would likely never know it, and that this person would be miserable because of me.

    @BK:
    “I don’t believe all women go after douchebags. In fact, I don’t believe many of them do at all.”

    I think it’s the other way around. Douchebags don’t mind hitting on hundreds of women every week to get laid. Those same douchebags have difficulty maintaining relationships, so as they get older and uglier and everyone around them is pairing off they can get really lonely. For some that just confirms their theory that women are shallow and materialistic, and then they spread their misogyny to anyone who will listen.

    Something many Nice Guys (TM or otherwise) don’t get. Dating is a numbers game, few women will say “yes” without you asking. Plus being openly sexual is attractive to many of the women looking for casual sex, but that’s despite acting like a jerk, not because of it.

    @monkey:
    “Hrm. I know I need to do a lot of those things – grooming, etc – but right now I don’t see the point. I guess the thing about losing weight – I would automatically be suspicious of anyone who was more interested in me after I lost a lot of weight. I have frankly given up on being conventionally phsyically attractive (and frankly, I see a lot of guys who are my size or bigger, who wear nothing but t-shirts, and still manage to have someone who wants to be with them.”

    You don’t have to impress every man and woman you meet, improving anything on that list can help your odds, including meeting more people and being better at recognizing opportunities. If you want a woman who cherishes every ounce of you, you may have to look harder. You said you had no idea what you’re doing wrong, well now you have several ideas of things you could improve, and even if you choose not to you can feel better knowing you have a choice.

    “I think it is an important issue for men. I definitely don’t feel that it’s trivial, because for me it’s not about “getting laid.” The fact that someone is willing to be naked with me is just a part of the whole package.”

    This. With all the victim-blaming and virgin-shaming and rejection in this society, this subject is no laughing matter, and making fun of it is insensitive to all those that have doubts about whether anyone will ever love them.

  29. Xanthë says:

    Hey Ozy! More hypergamy in action: PZ Myers wasn’t alpha enough for Rebecca Watson when he invited her back to his hotel room for coffee at 4am. True story!

  30. ozymandias42 says:

    I’m into overweight guys!

    Clarification of position: I do NOT think that people who don’t have partners aren’t suffering or are worse people, and support getting rid of virgin-shaming. All the virgin-shaming that happened in this post is not actually my belief, just like I do not actually believe that black men are thugboys with ten inch cocks. I do question how well gender movements can help those who can’t get partners (beyond the obvious of fighting the Beauty Myth and the expectation that men make the first move). I also think it is kind of hilarious to believe that people not being able to get partners is the primary issue a men’s gender movement faces, to the exclusion of every other issue; the joke was directed at those people, not at people who think that being lonely is legitimately painful (which is obviously is).

  31. J says:

    There are definitely women who prefer bigger guys, I promise.

  32. Gaius says:

    @Everybody-who-was-offended-by-the-original-post:
    Though I’m honestly pretty certain that Ozy’s post was only an April Fool’s joke (and therefore should, kinda, be taken the OPPOSITE way you did), I nevertheless understand your concerns.

    Speaking as someone who has been mildly successful at the dating game, (basically, if I get my foot in the door, I win — and, miraculous metabolism aside, I’m not that much to look at), I have some advice, if you care to hear it:

    Item 0). Not getting laid, not having someone, and not being one of the lucky ones is NOT YOUR FAULT, nor is it a sign of shame or lack of capacity. Though there are a few things you can control (such as hygiene), these few things within your control are INSIGNIFICANT compared to that which is OUTSIDE your control, like social mores (like when and how you’re allowed to cross the room, etc.) and who you run into on a daily basis (the right person could live a block away from you and you may never know it, nor would be able to without doing an exhaustive, systematic, and thoroughly creepy analysis of everyone on your block).

    I’ve found that when looking for someone, NOTHING goes according to plan. But it sometimes ends up working well, anyway. =)

    Item 1). Happiness is about compatibility: finding someone whose rhythm, habits, sex drive, and personality compliment your own. If you’re strictly monogamous, then the trick is to look for someone who’s okay with that. If you’re bald, the trick is to find someone who doesn’t mind bald men.

    For more on this, see Item 3.

    Item 2). Over time, I’ve learned that, for me, compatibility and personality are as important as looks, if not moreso. To me, things like (in alphabetical order) acne, age, breast size, and etc, are insignificant next to her ability to hold a conversation and say things that fascinate or compel me (granted: I DO avoid extremes of appearance, but we’re not talking extremes here).

    Granted: I’m pretty sure you guys already feel the same way about women. What you may not know is that IT ALSO APPLIES TO YOU.

    In other words: if she can’t see past the surface and see the personal compatibility within (if compatible you are) to the same extent YOU are capable of looking past the surface, she ain’t worth your while.

    It occurs to me that there are some people for whom personality is unimportant. I have no advice for you except to play up your strengths and hope that you find someone who is both attractive to you AND attracted TO you (for whatever combination of reasons).

    Item 3). The process of looking for someone can be divided up into three parts: being in the right place at the right time; finding someone interesting; and making your move.

    Of these, only making your move is wholly within your control (and even then, the results depend on HER, too: whether or not she’s open to relationships, whether or not you’re her type, etc. — these are beyond your control). For starters, I recommend the following:
    * Ask yourself, “Will I regret it tomorrow if I don’t cross the room right now?”
    * When it comes to working up your courage, I find it useful to use the same technique I use when buying condoms: fix a smile on my face, go on autopilot, keep my head high, and just let it happen
    * Another useful technique: imagine you’re a soldier on the beaches of Normandy on D-Day. You’ve just found a nice spot of cover where the bullets and artillery can’t find you. The problem? You’re still on the damn beach, and you’re gonna have to advance at some point. So: take a deep breath, with the understanding that this may be the last breath you ever take. Realize that whatever’s gonna happen is gonna happen. Then go. After all, you’re already dead: what have you got to lose?

    With regard to being in the right place at the right time and locating someone interesting, well…

    Locating someone interesting is pretty simple; all you have to do afterward is cross the room. When you do, be sure to note cues as to whether or not she is interested in return. If she seems to be lighting up, can’t take her eyes off you, etc, then she’s probably interested. If she’s not giving you anything to work with, she’s probably not interested, and it wouldn’t be particularly productive to continue interacting with her.

    As for being in the right place at the right time: there are only a few places where it is socially sanctioned to cross the room, and it’s totally beyond your control who shows up there. But there are ways can stack the odds in your favor.

    Before we continue, a word of caution: it’s disingenuous (and not to mention creepy) to go to places where people are there to pursue a specific interest in the hopes that you will find someone with whom to get laid.

    For example: assume that you’re interested in Warhammer 40K (after all, what cool person isn’t? :P). If you were interested in Warhammer 40K, you might go to a hobby store to look for models to paint and to talk shop with fellow gamers (“Dude, the new Guard codex is ****ing broken”). It would be disingenuous to go to the hobby store PRIMARILY to spelunk the cleavage of womens who happen to be interested in 40K.

    The problem? You’re SINGLE. You WANT TO SPELUNK CLEAVAGE. In particular, you REALLY want to spelunk the cleavage of womens who are interested in 40K!

    The solution here is pretty simple: look for events that BLEND your interests and the almighty goal of spelunking cleavage.

    For example: you note that your local hobby store is hosting a mixer for Warhammer 40K enthusiasts next week. NOW we’re talking! A mixer is a space explicitly devoted to mixing business with pleasure.

    So: to put yourself in the right place at the right time, look around your community for events that blend your interests with opportunities for spelunking cleavage.

    Item 4). In my experience, a loving, balanced relationship takes place ONLY when all participants are as devoted to eachother’s happiness as they are to their own.

    Case in point: I cannot, for the LIFE of me, decide which would be worse: me dying, or my partner dying.

    If I died, my partner would be devastated. Granted, I wouldn’t KNOW about it (since I’d be dead), but the very IDEA that my partner would be devastated is appalling to me.

    But if my PARTNER died, the world would seem cold and gray and empty, like a winter sky scraped clean of color.

    I seriously can’t decide which is worse. Better for us both to go together, if it comes to that.

    My point is that the ideal relationship is such where all participants work tirelessly to facilitate their partner(s).

    Note: I apologize in advance for the irreverence in Item 3; I was going for humor.

  33. dancinbojangles says:

    “I do NOT think that people who don’t have partners aren’t suffering or are worse people, and support getting rid of virgin-shaming.”

    I find it interesting that the focus of such efforts is always acceptance, rather than rectification of a problem. Certainly, some guys don’t want sex, and we should be OK with that as a society. Additionally, we should of course not shame someone who just has bad luck, poor social skills or is otherwise unable to get the romantic and sexual attention he desires. However, acceptance is only half the battle. We need real, concrete, and positive feminist compatible dating advice. To be clear, this advice should be actionable, specific, and not make the reader feel like a creep or an asshole just for having a sex drive. Current efforts are akin to promoting the acceptance of deaf people while scorning cochlear implant research (and often heaping invective onto it). Some people don’t want to be virgins! Let’s make it a choice, eh?

    Honestly, I really feel like this is something that the NSWATM community could actually do. Who’s in?

  34. Hugh says:

    “Let’s make it a choice, eh?”

    We are never going to get to a point where everybody who wants to have sex with a human being is guaranteed to be able to do so. Especially not through providing “dating advice” (from feminists, or anybody else)

    I think it is an extraordinary thing to say it is the job of feminists to help straight men hit on girls. I really don’t see how it furthers any of feminism’s goals. Not that it’s a bad thing, but it’s like expecting feminist advice on helping engineers build jet engines.

  35. Eagle34 says:

    Danny: “I meant that to say that the person in question has been holding the sadness in for some time (that time is going to vary from person to person) already and when faced with further sadness or hatred the hatred starts to look good.”

    You hit it right in the heart with me, Danny.

    I’ve got sadness and hatred. I deal with the sadness, there’s more sadness because of the realization this climate is not supportive one bit of this sadness. Which leads to hatred looking more attractive.

    The only difference is I still believe in love. It just gets drowned out in that moment of sadness.

  36. dancinbojangles says:

    @Hugh: No, but don’t let perfect be the enemy of good. Don’t pretend that people don’t need help with dating, as it is a hard thing that even the smartest people in the world often don’t do very well. If we can level the playing-field even a little bit, I think that would be a good thing, and I think dating advice that does not include a misogynistic component would level the playing field considerably more than a little bit, in addition to helping with a number of other issues.

    Additionally, I disagree with your analogy. It would be more like consulting an accountant when building a jet engine. The two fields are not connected as such, but money matters even on a government project. Look at how close the F-35 came to being cancelled. Dating is axiomatically an issue of gender relations, and while feminism might not always approach it constructively or with any manner of sensitivity, that doesn’t mean it doesn’t have anything to add. And I’m not suggesting consulting Twisty Faster or anything, just cutting the misogyny, removing the alpha-beta etc. element, and giving constructive advice without shaming those who don’t follow it.

  37. Hugh says:

    When you say “Let’s make it a choice” you imply that you do want somebody’s virginity to be a choice – that if they want to lose it, they can. So I’m not the one who made it about the perfect.

    When you talk about “leveling the dating field”, leveling it between who exactly? Men and women? Feminists and non-feminists? Old and young? Poor and rich?

    I dunno, while I’m sympathetic to those who aren’t getting the companionship they want and who found Ozy’s post pointed, I don’t think the feminist movement is the answer. It’s not even really part of the answer.

  38. dancinbojangles says:

    Well, first of all, between both feminists and non-feminists, as well as women and men. Also assholes and those who don’t want to be assholes, rich and poor, etc. All those things! We’re a community which takes into account intersectional issues, why not try and address those? And once again, I’m not saying that we should advocate a total suborning of men to the feminist gestalt. You must agree though that feminism and PUA have some fundamental differences. I’m just saying that those differences could be addressed without making the advice itself less effective. And surely such core tenets of mainstream feminism as respecting women’s boundaries, avoiding manipulation and working against toxic gender roles are compatible with PUA-style techniques for self-betterment and understanding of social dynamics. In fact, major complaints feminists have with current romance dynamics stems simply from obliviousness to non-verbal signals and rejection-coping mechanisms. Both of these issues are addressed in PUA, and are fully compatible with feminism.

    As for the perfection thing, come on, cut me some slack, eh? I’m not trying to bash on you, please extend me the same courtesy.

  39. daelyte says:

    @ozymandias42:
    “I do question how well gender movements can help those who can’t get partners (beyond the obvious of fighting the Beauty Myth and the expectation that men make the first move).”

    There’s also the Success Myth – 80% of women say they wouldn’t date an unemployed man.

    Making the first move is just one part of the dating script. There’s a lot more to it. Men are expected to initiate at EVERY step, and are judged by how well they follow that closely policed ritual.

    Single men spend most of their money on restaurants, movies, gifts, travel, resorts – for two. Men also spend more on impressive-looking cars. After those expenses, even counting women’s dating expenses like makeup, hair care, and clothes, men have less money left than women. One of the reasons women don’t ask men out? They believe that the one who does the asking is expected to pay for the date.

    “I also think it is kind of hilarious to believe that people not being able to get partners is the primary issue a men’s gender movement faces, to the exclusion of every other issue”

    It’s one of the primary forms of gender policing against men. For so many women, a man must be a paragon of patriarchy to even be eligible for dating. He must be confident, employed, must have a car, risk personal security to protect widows and orphans, and all that white knight stuff, otherwise he’s not even seen as a “real man”. Society bangs it into our heads from the moment we’re born until the moment we die – be a “real man” or you’ll never be loved.

    Break that, and men get a lot more freedom to be themselves.

    @Hugh:
    Some think it’s feminism’s job to tell men not to hit on girls, or tell them they’re doing it wrong without offering alternatives. Feminism is already in the dating advice business.

    @dancinbojangles:
    “Honestly, I really feel like this is something that the NSWATM community could actually do. Who’s in?”

    There should be a feminist dating and relationship site, with articles and forums. I considered starting one, but I have no dating experience and I’m no writer. It would need contributors. I’d especially like to see opinions from women who have experience approaching men, LGBTQ who have experienced both approaching and being approached, and men and women who don’t fit society’s ideals. I’d like to see experiments with alternate ways to approach, or with men trying to get women to ask

    “You must agree though that feminism and PUA have some fundamental differences. I’m just saying that those differences could be addressed without making the advice itself less effective. And surely such core tenets of mainstream feminism as respecting women’s boundaries, avoiding manipulation and working against toxic gender roles are compatible with PUA-style techniques for self-betterment and understanding of social dynamics. In fact, major complaints feminists have with current romance dynamics stems simply from obliviousness to non-verbal signals and rejection-coping mechanisms. Both of these issues are addressed in PUA, and are fully compatible with feminism.”

    This, very much this.

    “obliviousness to non-verbal signals”

    Yes, that’s me exactly!

  40. daelyte says:

    Cosmo doesn’t just hurt women. It hurts men too. Even when women try to ignore the Beauty Myth, they still get influenced by the Real Man (TM) Myth, and men have to deal with that when trying to find a partner.

    @Gaius:
    “If she seems to be lighting up, can’t take her eyes off you, etc, then she’s probably interested. If she’s not giving you anything to work with, she’s probably not interested, and it wouldn’t be particularly productive to continue interacting with her.”

    This is a big problem for those of use who have no built-in ability to read those signals, and difficult for many who lack experience with such things as well. More detailed information on those indicators of interest and disinterest would be helpful.

    “As for being in the right place at the right time: there are only a few places where it is socially sanctioned to cross the room, and it’s totally beyond your control who shows up there.”

    Again, those of us not adept at social dynamics could really use more information on which places and/or situations it’s appropriate to approach, and some acceptable ways to do so.

    “Before we continue, a word of caution: it’s disingenuous (and not to mention creepy) to go to places where people are there to pursue a specific interest in the hopes that you will find someone with whom to get laid.”

    Bummer.

    “It would be disingenuous to go to the hobby store PRIMARILY to spelunk the cleavage of womens who happen to be interested in 40K.

    The problem? You’re SINGLE. You WANT TO SPELUNK CLEAVAGE. In particular, you REALLY want to spelunk the cleavage of womens who are interested in 40K!”

    Yes, compatibility is important, and the odds of finding a woman in a bar with shared interests other than alcohol are… less than ideal.

    “For example: you note that your local hobby store is hosting a mixer for Warhammer 40K enthusiasts next week.”

    Does that happen a lot in your area? I wasn’t aware such events were common. A quick search also failed to turn up references to such. Maybe I’m doing it wrong.

  41. gillianlove says:

    “There’s also the Success Myth – 80% of women say they wouldn’t date an unemployed man.”

    Citation needed.

    “Single men spend most of their money on restaurants, movies, gifts, travel, resorts – for two. Men also spend more on impressive-looking cars. After those expenses, even counting women’s dating expenses like makeup, hair care, and clothes, men have less money left than women.”

    Again, citation needed.

    “For so many women, a man must be a paragon of patriarchy to even be eligible for dating.”

    Really? Citation? Any surveys to back this up? And it would be useful to compare that to what the men want in the the women (my hunch would be gender-policers will be compatible with other gender-policers).

    Finally – heteronormativity city. Anyone have an LGBTQ perspective? It might be useful to others reading.

  42. Engineer Krause says:

    “I find it interesting that the focus of such efforts is always acceptance, rather than rectification of a problem. ”
    The absolute and complete unquestionability of this assumption is to me a bit a problem with pretty much any social justice movement with priorities beyond just not dying. Not saying it’s usually wrong, (it’s usually very, very right) but it is a problem. Look at the trouble Greta Christina had with fat-positivity.

    My own little brush with it was in person. I was in the midst of my doom-and-gloom attitude on freaking Valentine’s day, and I had talked to this girl who could only respond to the reason for my unhappiness as “it’s OK to be single.” And of course she talked about _her_ lover, so I could feel envious without being able to hate on her properly, rather than just feeling ignored.

    I’d say that IMO sex-positive feminists know the most about many issues of gender (despite a bias toward disprivileging conventionality) and would be some of the most valuable advisors to the creation of the Non-Crappy Highly Effective Dating System.

    It doesn’t really achieve feminism’s goals, but it probably would over time reduce a fair amount of awful. Plus it’s part of the many-pronged push toward utopia. Not to mention that if people have effective and nonsexist dating advice when they are young and get into GOOD relationships, they are less likely to be misogynist later.

    To me, it seems like we could use some sort of spaces where people can meet potential lovers with that being the stated and understood context. (As opposed to the endless storms of men who hit on women in clubs when said women are probably not interested in hooking up.) And not just online, preferably. I suspect the biggest problem would be these turning into giant sausagefests like Craigslist and the like. IDK really, though. It’s just that for me the biggest problem is getting over this “little” wall that separates platonic and romantic/sexual discussion.

    (One thing I imagined when I was making up a fictional culture was that there would be symbols people would use to attract or discourage flirtation, with specification for orientation and kink. These would have very specific meanings and blatantly disregarding them in either direction would be considered extremely rude. Don’t hit on people with the grey crest, don’t assume the person with the red one is uninterested. Wonder how this would work.)

    @”(early comment joking about having humans be first female and then male, so everybody puts in a turn as sex object and then gets to be patriarch)”:
    I have occasionally puzzled over whether some social system is possible for everybody to receive genuine subservience from genuine humans, who also will receive this. I really don’t know. But an awful lot of stuff has suggested that in a utopia, everybody would be able to receive subservience. What with the way that most humans exist in umpteen different power structures simultaneously, it might be as simple as making sure nobody gets dumped on everywhere at the same time.

    Asking out 600 people on average? _oh god I’m doomed._

  43. daelyte says:

    @gillianlove:
    “Citation needed.”

    Unemployment and dating:
    My mistake, it was 52% of women would date an unemployed man, vs 92% of men. Still gendered.
    http://www.yourtango.com/200919759/dating-unemployed-more-popular-ever

    Single men spending patterns:
    http://money.msn.com/saving-money-tips/post.aspx?post=e02c3bd8-0cc1-450c-b27d-e6a110aea124

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/11/13/AR2010111300228.html

    http://money.msn.com/saving-money-tips/post.aspx?post=00000065-0000-0000-e0dc-170000000000

    “Really? Citation? Any surveys to back this up? And it would be useful to compare that to what the men want in the the women (my hunch would be gender-policers will be compatible with other gender-policers).”

    I’m tired, and I don’t have any citations or surveys handy right now. I can look for some later. In the meantime, just pick up any issue of Cosmo, or look at ads in personals. Also threads on various dating sites and articles.

    I agree that gender-policers would likely be compatible with each other, but what I’m saying is that while it’s not even necessarily intentional in most cases, it’s pervasive in the society we live in.

    “Finally – heteronormativity city. Anyone have an LGBTQ perspective? It might be useful to others reading.”

    Very much so.

  44. gillianlove says:

    Thanks for the links.

    I would question the sample on the first link – the 50% women would date an unemployed man vs. 90% men would date an unemployed woman. They asked people registered on a dating site. In my experience, on a dating site you are much more likely to have evaluated and quantified traits you think you want in a partner. You have to give this info in your advert. So, people might think and say, ‘Yeah, I want to date someone with a job.’ Whereas if you meet someone randomly, you might be willing to ignore that because you really like them.

    Secondly, I wonder how much people worry about what people think of their adverts? Like, if I say I’ll date an unemployed man, people might think I’m aiming low and I’m a loser. A horrible thing to think, and not my view, but i wonder how much that influences people.

    Thirdly, why might women be less willing to date unemployed men? If it’s true, I suspect as you do that it’s all part of kyriarchal gender-policing bullshit. But could we also factor in the pay gap?

    On to spending habits. Your first link states ” While women and shopping has been the fodder of countless jokes, the notion that women spend more money than men is simply not true. Nolan-Ryan says, “I think it’s proven that single men spend more money on food and toys than women do.” She’s right: Single men are the biggest spenders. According to Bundle.com, single men spend 18% more than single women. They also carry slightly more credit card debt..” YOU said “Single men spend most of their money on restaurants, movies, gifts, travel, resorts – for two.” No, not for two. You implied they spend lots of money dating women, which thsi link didn’t back up.

    Second link – ” The main difference is that single men spend more on transportation, while single women spend more on apparel and services. (Men, incidentally, spend about twice as much on alcohol and $600 more on car purchases.)” Again, nothing here about spending money on women or dating.

    Last link – “But even among men and women with similar household incomes, men spent about 19% more than women on food and 16% more on travel. Their insurance bills were higher, they paid more for school-related expenses, even their phones cost them more. Hey, I guess you’ve got to keep the bromance alive. ” It also said men spend more on eating out – but who knows if that’s linked to dating?

    tl;dr – some of your points are valid, but you make a huge assumption about the amount men spend on dating women, which none of your links backed up.

  45. no more mr nice guy says:

    @daelyte :

    More likely statistics suggest that the average male’s success rate is around 2% and the best PUAs get about 10% or so, which is a major improvement but more than a few drops short of a fountain. Given that about 1 in 12-14 relationships last more than a few dates, and the average male has to ask out about 600-700 women to find a long-term partner. Most PUAs-in-training get so caught up in playing the Game that those hundreds of attempts (and rejections) go by without as much emotional damage, instead it’s like grinding for epic gear in any MMO.

    Where do you get your statistics ? Most guys meets their girlfriend through friends or at parties, they don’t need to approach 600 unknown women in clubs.

  46. Dr. anonymous says:

    I have some questions, even if this is satire.
    The thing about women over 30 being unf-uckable. As far as I know this is called right to preference, a right that is held in extremely high regard for women. The same right should be reserved for men.
    And as I have read yet another blazing feminist who thought that using penis size as an insult is somehow a sign of relevancy. Why should I care about women being made to feel bad about their apperance, just because they don’t happen to fall into what I consider attractive?

    And for sadness turning into hate. Try being told time and time and time again that you are the only one to blame for all your failures, that you have to be a horrible person and that you get what you deserve. Then at the same time try hearing things like claims that children and a career should be a right for women, that women should have all right to express their preferences regardless of how this affects men, but somehow skinny models should be banned because they make young women feel bad. The very same young women who drool after the six-packs.

  47. skzip888 says:

    Don’t forget, straight guys who experiment are getting all the cock,

  48. Flyingkal says:

    @Gaius, re the Warhammer 40k setting

    The solution here is pretty simple: look for events that BLEND your interests and the almighty goal of spelunking cleavage.

    For example: you note that your local hobby store is hosting a mixer for Warhammer 40K enthusiasts next week. NOW we’re talking! A mixer is a space explicitly devoted to mixing business with pleasure.

    There’s a reason this piece of advice is more or less useless.
    If you are a person who is already being ignored and/or overlooked in rather neutral social settings, i.e. close to 50-50 gender mix, then how are you supposed to grab the attention of someone being outnumbered in a 10:1 ratio?

  49. monkey says:

    ” I do question how well gender movements can help those who can’t get partners (beyond the obvious of fighting the Beauty Myth and the expectation that men make the first move).”

    Well, there’s also the Success Myth, believe me! As I wrote above, I am nearly 40 with a job in the service industry and a degree that is essentially useless towards getting a better job. And that automatically excludes me from being considered by many people.

    As for changing stuff about myself, well, I understand that, but at the same time I hear a lot about how it’s unfair to women that they *have* to change themselves. In fact, in the song “You Don’t Own Me,” the female narrator says “don’t try to change me in anyway.” Finally, nearly everyone, man and woman, is told “JUST BE YOURSELF.”

    Gaius:
    “@Everybody-who-was-offended-by-the-original-post:
    Though I’m honestly pretty certain that Ozy’s post was only an April Fool’s joke (and therefore should, kinda, be taken the OPPOSITE way you did), I nevertheless understand your concerns.”

    So if it’s satire, it’s implying that not being able to find someone is NOT a major concern, so it still hurts.

  50. anonescu says:

    raluca, I have the feeling that we live in the same country, probably even being members of the same tiny knitting circle. do you happen to have a public blog to link?

  51. monkey says:

    Well, I think feminism is relevant because I want to be with someone who is intelligent and confident, and feminism helps women with that.

    As for common interests – shit, I don’t know. You can’t really meet anyone *at* a movie theater, or reading a book. And I’m not going to join some club for the sole purpose of meeting someone.

  52. Suturexself says:

    monkey: “So if it’s satire, it’s implying that not being able to find someone is NOT a major concern, so it still hurts.”

    I think the joke was that there are much bigger concerns than the ability of straight males to pick up chicks, not about finding a connection and companionship with another person.

  53. Dr. anonymous says:

    Suturexself

    In that very same vein there are much bigger problems than white middle class women not advancing in their careers as fast as they would like.

  54. ozymandias42 says:

    Suturexself: Well, the ACTUAL joke was “look, Ozy is doing a slightly exaggerated impression of misogynistic pick-up artists,” but the joke of the first paragraph is that, yes, there are higher priorities, not that loneliness is somehow hilarious. >.>

    Dr Anonymous: People are perfectly free to say that they are not attracted to women over thirty. They are not free to say that women over thirty are unfuckable, because that is incredibly douchey and also untrue (lots of women over thirty get fucked!). Similarly, people are perfectly free to say that they are not attracted to men under six feet. They are not free to say that men under six feet are unfuckable. And while everyone has the right to be like “look, I know it’s silly, but I wouldn’t be happy in a relationship without Arbitrary Thing X That Doesn’t Have Much To Do With Relationship Happiness” and most people certainly should refrain from dating people they don’t find physically attractive, people who absolutely refuse to date anyone who isn’t Blonde Skinny Large-Breasted Under-Thirty Chick/Six Foot Tall Blue Eyes Lawyer Dude With A PhD and then complain about their inability to get laid are kind of hilarious.

    And I believe the difference in your two examples is that there are many ways to ethically get a business to promote qualified people faster, but there are very few ways to ethically get someone to sleep with someone else.

  55. Dr. Anonymous? says:

    “Dr Anonymous: People are perfectly free to say that they are not attracted to women over thirty. They are not free to say that women over thirty are unfuckable, because that is incredibly douchey and also untrue (lots of women over thirty get fucked!). Similarly, people are perfectly free to say that they are not attracted to men under six feet. They are not free to say that men under six feet are unfuckable.”
    Great, start telling that to the people who complain that they are marginalized when men talk about their preferences.

    “And while everyone has the right to be like “look, I know it’s silly, but I wouldn’t be happy in a relationship without Arbitrary Thing X That Doesn’t Have Much To Do With Relationship Happiness” and most people certainly should refrain from dating people they don’t find physically attractive, people who absolutely refuse to date anyone who isn’t Blonde Skinny Large-Breasted Under-Thirty Chick/Six Foot Tall Blue Eyes Lawyer Dude With A PhD and then complain about their inability to get laid are kind of hilarious. ”
    Once again. Tell this to women who complain that men are intimidated by strong women.

    “And I believe the difference in your two examples is that there are many ways to ethically get a business to promote qualified people faster, but there are very few ways to ethically get someone to sleep with someone else.”
    That was not the point. The point was that feminism isn’t a dating service for lonley straight white men. Neither should it be a career service for middle class white women.

  56. Flyingkal says:

    Monkey Well, I think feminism is relevant because I want to be with someone who is intelligent and confident, and feminism helps women with that.

    And I don’t need feminism to be rejected by women.
    “Without a doubt you’re not really wise.”

  57. Barbara says:

    “I guess the thing about losing weight – I would automatically be suspicious of anyone who was more interested in me after I lost a lot of weight.”

    OK, here’s my quick, simplified, one-sided opinion about the role of weight in “attractiveness.” Attractiveness goes hand-in-hand with confidence. I’ve known gorgeous and sexy overweight people (men and women) and unattractive skinny people, and vice versa. The raw number is not the end answer.

    The main things I consider when I look at someone’s weight are
    1) Are they comfortable in their own skin?
    People who are seriously and heavily unhappy with their size/shape project that in many different ways and it deeply colors others’ perception of them. Ditto with people who are seriously and heavily basing their worth ONLY on how they believe other people see them. If you want to lose weight, do it because it will make YOU a happier person. If you are happier, you will be more likely to find people who are interested in you.

    2) Are they capable of living an active life without weight getting in their way?
    I, personally, want partners who are physically active. I don’t mean they have to run marathons, but at the minimum, I get along best with people who can walk around for several hours on varied terrain, ride a bike on occasion, help a friend move, or carry 40lb bags of cat litter in from the car. If your weight (too much or too little) interferes with your ability to do these things, then I’d consider us incompatible for romance.

    Losing weight CAN improve your life, but it doesn’t always. More people MAY find you attractive when you are in better shape, but not everybody will. It doesn’t mean the people who prefer you after you lost/gained weight are shallow, superficial jerks, but it also doesn’t mean they aren’t. But if changing your shape makes you feel better about yourself, what do you have to lose?

  58. Flyingkal says:

    Trigger warning!

    @Daelyte:

    “If no mistake have you made, yet losing you are … a different game you should play.” – Yoda

    Yeah, you know, I’ve always felt that castration and celibacy was kinda underrated…

  59. pocketjacks says:

    @BK,

    My heart goes out to you, it was difficult to read your story.

    I’m just putting it out there, and it’s totally understandable if you’re dead set against it, but if your weight is making you that miserable… have you considered all options here? It’s okay if you’re against going under the knife, but don’t let the random opinions of others sway you if you’re on the fence. You don’t owe anyone your unhappiness; if others feel that it violates some vague naturalistic/moralistic principle, then they can pay for it with their lives and their emotional health.

    @daelyte,

    Grooming increases the chances of being approached yourself.

    Ha, good luck with that. 😉 Not saying you shouldn’t groom, of course, but nothing short of celebrity status will get any man consistently initiated upon. If you’re feeling unattractive because women never initiate with you, stop beating yourself up. This is how it is for the vast majority of guys, deal with it and move on. (And in fact, it seems poorly correlated with physical attractiveness. Some of my hottest guy friends – yes, I can say that – were hardly ever get the pleasure, according to them, while I’ve known some real plain, short Plain Johns who got asked out as often as they do the asking, though the total number altogether is most likely still quite smaller in their case. It seems more a function of the subculture you inhabit than anything else.)

    In my not-all-encompassing experience, though, the only thing I’d say that helped me get something like that in anything close to a predictable, replicable way is to have been safe because I was already spoken for. The girls knew I would never cheat, and they would never put me in that position, so they could let their guard down in a way they don’t with single guys, and do a lot more low-level stuff, like calling me more often than I call them. (I normally only ever get that from girls with whom I have a long-standing, ironclad platonic friendship or someone who I’m already seeing, or practically seeing.) Then once I was single again, there can be a smoother transition, because once you reach a certain level of comfort with someone it rarely goes away.

    Obviously not something that can or should be adopted as a “strategy” of any kind, for obvious reasons. Just a rambling aside, just something I’ve noticed. I think there’s some interesting gender psychology here.

    Douchebags don’t mind hitting on hundreds of women every week to get laid.

    This is entering sex-negative territory. How many men, really, hit on “hundreds of women every week”? A lot of arguments here are dismissed because people say they only apply to a very small fraction of women or men, and I guarantee you this group of men is smaller than all of them.

    In practice, condemnation of “douchebags” who hit on “hundreds of women a week” becomes really about honestly sexual guys who chat up about a dozen women a month where they’re single. Guys of this mold are the ones who get lumped in, they’re the ones the insecure have targeted in mind when they spread this stuff. The problem is, in the liberal culture I grew up in, honest sexuality is supposed to be lauded, but a lot of people have a problem with guys who are sexual and who aren’t looking for anything long-term, no matter how honest they are about it. (As they are about girls who are the same way, of course, though sometimes these are different sets of people and there are those who clearly have a problem with one gender doing it but not the other, though they’d never admit it out loud. I’ve seen it both ways.) So people have to lie about them and then attack the lie.

    Plus being openly sexual is attractive to many of the women looking for casual sex

    Not just women who are looking for casual sex. Frankly, the gender norms of most cultures make it so that a man is asexual until proven otherwise. That’s of course from a default het male perspective, but het women ingrain a part of it too, so you have to go out of your way to break away from it.

    I also think that what a lot of people think is “openly sexual” is just being “not asexual”, from my perspective.

    @dancinbojangles,

    I find it interesting that the focus of such efforts is always acceptance, rather than rectification of a problem. Certainly, some guys don’t want sex, and we should be OK with that as a society. Additionally, we should of course not shame someone who just has bad luck, poor social skills or is otherwise unable to get the romantic and sexual attention he desires. However, acceptance is only half the battle. We need real, concrete, and positive feminist compatible dating advice. To be clear, this advice should be actionable, specific, and not make the reader feel like a creep or an asshole just for having a sex drive. Current efforts are akin to promoting the acceptance of deaf people while scorning cochlear implant research (and often heaping invective onto it). Some people don’t want to be virgins! Let’s make it a choice, eh?

    Emphasis mine. I think this is the best post so far in this thread.

    @Hugh,

    Of course we can never “guarantee” that “everybody” who’s desperate and lonely can find a partner. But we could try making the number of such people much smaller than it currently is. We can’t “guarantee” the complete eradication of any major problem, but that’s never a reason to not try, and anyone who claims it is is not doing a very good job of hiding the fact that they’re opposed to the endeavor for unspoken reasons. Dancinbojangle says that you’re pitting the perfect against the good, and that’s true, but there’s more – yours is an atrocious misreading of what he said, and it sounds like you’re really reaching to find a reason to object to his perfectly fair proposal.

    It’s revealing that the only feminist-aligned voice to weigh in on what should be an uncontroversial proposal has been one that is, when all’s said and done, in opposition. If there was a non-sexist way to help virginal or otherwise sincerely struggling men “rectify their situation”, as he put it, those of your ideological bent would find some other reason to oppose it. That’s the real reason why, as you said, a lot of feminists (though not all) can have no part in this.

  60. Suturexself says:

    Ozy: “Suturexself: Well, the ACTUAL joke was “look, Ozy is doing a slightly exaggerated impression of misogynistic pick-up artists,” but the joke of the first paragraph is that, yes, there are higher priorities, not that loneliness is somehow hilarious. >.>”

    As an aside, I’m hoping the April Fools mirth indicates that things are going a bit more smoothly for you now 🙂

  61. pocketjacks says:

    And I believe the difference in your two examples is that there are many ways to ethically get a business to promote qualified people faster, but there are very few ways to ethically get someone to sleep with someone else.

    Never making senior partner (being “only” stuck in upper-middle management) is a want, not a need. That public businesses can be regulated by law in a way that the everyday informal behavior of private citizens can’t doesn’t invalidate the comparison (and not just because there are many examples of mainstream feminists also having complaints in an area surrounding the everyday informal behavior of private citizens). They are both First World problems. Furthermore, I’ve seen multiples articles each on Bratz dolls, pole-dancing classes, or if Pixar will ever feature a girl protagonist. If there are so many much bigger concerns than the pain guys like monkey feel that we need to put this disclaimer whenever we talk about this issue, then these issues are so small they’ve collapsed into a singularity that now threatens all existence.

  62. pocketjacks says:

    *Agh, it should say “Making senior partner (rather than being stuck… ) is a want, not a need”.

  63. QuantumInc says:

    Today’s post is surprisingly popular, but considering the topic that quickly arose I is understandable.

    There are a lot of things wrong with modern dating culture. Feminism sometimes does a good job of criticizing it, but doesn’t offer any alternatives. The things MRAs suggest are unfortunately eerily similar to what Ozy originally posted.

    It seems silly to suggest that feminism should dispense dating advice, yet simultaneously necessary. I’m thinking of Samhita Mukhopadhyay’s “Outdated” in particular which points out how most existing dating/romance/sex/pick up advice functions more to enforce old gender roles than to help people. But for all of the “don’t”s there are very few “do”s. I feel like the gender studies professionals who lead feminist discussions are the only ones who I could trust for such advice, but they refuse to even consider it. I feel forced to look at PUA tactics, knowing full well the toxic gender ideas they’re based on if I ever want any suggestions beyond “Be yourself!” “Be confident!” “Respect her as a person!”

    I too believe we need a website based around feminist (or rather gender egalitarian) principles. I’ve got it on my list of things to do before I die. However like many of those who posted before me, I’m lacking in terms of dating experience, and don’t feel confident doing that any day soon. Not to mention the fact that a proper dating website would be like starting a business, and right now I just want my degree and a girlfriend.

  64. daelyte says:

    @Engineer Krause:
    “I suspect the biggest problem would be these turning into giant sausagefests like Craigslist and the like.”
    I’ve heard that real-life meetings of people from dating sites tend to be clambakes, ironically enough.

    “I have occasionally puzzled over whether some social system is possible for everybody to receive genuine subservience from genuine humans, who also will receive this.”

    I hear in the philippines it’s common for an older woman to marry a younger man, who does maintenance and yardwork and can invest his income instead of spending it all on rent. When her time is up, he inherits the house. He then marries a younger woman, who bears his children and does domestic work, and when his time is up, she inherits the house and marries a younger man…

    “Asking out 600 people on average? _oh god I’m doomed.”

    20 per night = 30 days, and that’s for an LTR – and about 12 of them will date you

    @gillianlove:
    “In my experience, on a dating site you are much more likely to have evaluated and quantified traits you think you want in a partner. You have to give this info in your advert. So, people might think and say, ‘Yeah, I want to date someone with a job.’”

    Still gendered. After deep consideration, 48% of women vs 8% of men decided they want to date someone with a job?

    “Like, if I say I’ll date an unemployed man, people might think I’m aiming low and I’m a loser.”

    Still gendered. After deep consideration, 48% of women vs 8% of men decided dating someone unemployed would make them a loser?

    “Thirdly, why might women be less willing to date unemployed men? If it’s true, I suspect as you do that it’s all part of kyriarchal gender-policing bullshit.”

    Yes, and I think Ozy’s Law is brilliant.

    “But could we also factor in the pay gap?”

    http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,2015274,00.html

    “No, not for two. You implied they spend lots of money dating women.”

    I saw men spending more on restaurants, travel and entertainment, combined that with anecdotal evidence that those are traditional dating expenses, and jumped to conclusions. I could be wrong, but I don’t think so.

    Not the article I was looking for, but:
    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB70001424052702304569504576406080946241502.html

    @no more mr nice guy:
    “Where do you get your statistics ? Most guys meets their girlfriend through friends or at parties, they don’t need to approach 600 unknown women in clubs.”

    Where do you get YOUR statistics?

    Here, I just found this:
    http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Relationships/Where_Couples_Met

    Meeting through friends is a limited pool, especially if the guy’s friends don’t know many single women. If a guy isn’t having any luck then he needs to cast a wider net. Private parties aren’t an endless well of single women either, guys still have to approach and their odds aren’t that much better than in clubs.

    “Well, I think feminism is relevant because I want to be with someone who is intelligent and confident, and feminism helps women with that. ”

    Yes, I also have a preference for confident intelligent women who aren’t too fond of gender stereotypes, and feminists tend to qualify.

    pocketjacks:
    “Not saying you shouldn’t groom, of course, but nothing short of celebrity status will get any man consistently initiated upon. If you’re feeling unattractive because women never initiate with you, stop beating yourself up.”

    I didn’t specify by what gender. Go to gay bars with and without grooming, I’m sure you’ll notice a difference. With women, yeah you still have to approach but being more attractive won’t hurt, and for some guys improving appearance may be easier than improving approach skills.

    “How many men, really, hit on “hundreds of women every week”?”

    Many PUA gurus advise exactly this, but I suspect they count even the shortest interactions, because the same preparation and approach anxiety applies regardless. If a single woman in a public venue is already willing to chat with you for a few minutes, the odds of dating her if you don’t screw up are probably very favorable.

    “In practice, condemnation of “douchebags” who hit on “hundreds of women a week” becomes really about honestly sexual guys who chat up about a dozen women a month where they’re single.”

    I didn’t even consider that angle. I was trying to point out that their success has less to do with douchebaggery and more to do with just plain asking a lot of women, and that a lot of inexperienced men aren’t aware of that.

    @QuantumInc:
    I think that makes 5 people who openly support the idea.

    A forum and somewhere to post articles would be enough, like a lot of pickup sites. Moderating the comments and forums wouldn’t require dating experience.

  65. no more mr nice guy says:

    @daelyte :

    According to your link, friends are the primary introducers (35-40%) of couples of all types and parties and bars are good for short-term (less than one month) sexual relationships (17-25%) and not very good for marriages (8-10%).

  66. daelyte says:

    @no more mr nice guy:
    “friends are the primary introducers (35-40%) of couples of all types”

    It says self-introductions are also important (32-47%).

    “parties and bars are … not very good for marriages(8-10%)”

    That’s not what it said. In fact according to the study they’re almost as good as churches (11%) and not far behind family members (15%).

    School and work are common meeting locations (15-20%).

    Personal ads and singles cruises are poor places to meet anyone. Less than 1% of married couples met via a personal ad or on vacation.

  67. Lamech says:

    @daelyte: The probability that people have met there partner through a certain method does not mean much about how effective a certain method is. Namely because people don’t spend equal amounts of time trying certain methods. For example, take churches. How much time does the average person spend at church? About once a week for maybe a bit over an hour, IF they are a regular church goer, and less for an average person. Now how often do people spend time with there friends? A lot of time. Probably several hours, several times a week. So if people spend 7 times as much time with friends then they do with church, yet only get 4 times the relationships… Churches are the more effective method.

  68. daelyte says:

    @Lamech:
    “The probability that people have met there partner through a certain method does not mean much about how effective a certain method is.”

    Completely agree.

    “How much time does the average person spend at church? About once a week for maybe a bit over an hour, IF they are a regular church goer, and less for an average person.”

    I think you underestimate how much time church goers spend at church. Some people spend 10-12 hours a week in there.

    “So if people spend 7 times as much time with friends then they do with church, yet only get 4 times the relationships… Churches are the more effective method.”

    Now I’ll ask you, how much time do you think guys spend in bars chatting up women?

  69. BK says:

    @pocketjacks. I don’t want to make it sound like I’m crying over here. I’m smiling as I write this. Sometimes that doesn’t come across in my writing. And I wrote what I wrote because I was trying to help monkey. I don’t hate the way I look. I hate that the way I look is unattractive to women. I can look at my naked self in the mirror and not care, but I know if a woman saw that same exact image, her ladyparts would dry up for a few years. I’d have to apologize to any of her future sexual partners for the trauma she’s experienced. (See, that’s humor even if it’s self-deprecating.)

    I have a tremendous amount of confidence in who I am as a person. I just don’t have confidence in my ability to attract/interest/pick up women because I’ve never had success. I have no problem meeting and talking to women. I have a problem finding women who want to fuck me or even want to go on a date with me. I’ve never found one. That said, I’m not a virgin. I’ve had sex, but it was a horrible experience, and I’d rather be a virgin today than have that experience in my life because of the way she made me feel about the way I look.

    My point is, you MUST be with someone who thinks you look good and makes you feel sexy and attractive. And the easiest way to do that is to conform to what society says is attractive. Maximize the number of people who find you attractive by looking attractive according to society’s standards. Know who you are. Know what you look like doesn’t define you. But also know that how you look is a large part of how others see you. And that matters. I’m just being a realist. Who do you think gets approached and laid more often? The vacuous yet beautiful male model or the fat yet charismatic man? Male model. Why does that person get more? More people find him attractive than the fat guy.

    And I feel that I can speak on this because I know what it’s like to have charisma and personality but still be alone romantically and sexually. For those of you who do have success and don’t know what it’s like to be overweight or have some other ALMOST-universally unattractive physical feature, please don’t minimize the importance of physical attractiveness. Maybe you just don’t know what it’s like.

  70. Gaius says:

    @Daelyte:

    This is a big problem for those of use who have no built-in ability to read those signals, and difficult for many who lack experience with such things as well. More detailed information on those indicators of interest and disinterest would be helpful.

    Speaking as someone on the spectrum, I feel your pain. I, too, have had to learn signs and signifiers of interest.

    Just for starters:
    1). If the person you’re talking to responds with short, clipped answers, (“How do you feel about X?” “Good.”), then they’re either laconic or not much interested in the conversation.

    2). Eye contact is, GENERALLY, an indicator that they’re interested. If they don’t meet your eyes, or continually look at someone or something else (i.e. if they indicate that their attention is elsewhere), then they’re probably not interested in the conversation. That said: if they show signs of being on the spectrum themselves, they might be perfectly interested in you but incapable of sustaining eye contact.

    3). If they provide lots of enthusiastic “backchannel support” (things like “Oh, so THAT’S what you mean! That’s interesting! Tell me more!”) or ask genuinely interesting or insightful questions, their attention is fully focused on the conversation.

    4). Facial expressions are difficult to describe in text, but suffice to say: if their eyes have a glazed look and their facial muscles are slack, they are probably less interested in the conversation than you are. If, on the other hand, their facial muscles are active and their eyes “sparkle” or seem “warm” and “friendly,” then they’re probably interested in the conversation. I should note, however, that neither of these are wholly reliable, since there ARE people for whom animated or slack facial expressions are the norm.

    Those are the indicators I can think of off the top of my head; if I can think of others, or if you have questions, I’ll do my best to reply.

    “Before we continue, a word of caution: it’s disingenuous (and not to mention creepy) to go to places where people are there to pursue a specific interest in the hopes that you will find someone with whom to get laid.”

    Bummer.

    “It would be disingenuous to go to the hobby store PRIMARILY to spelunk the cleavage of womens who happen to be interested in 40K.

    The problem? You’re SINGLE. You WANT TO SPELUNK CLEAVAGE. In particular, you REALLY want to spelunk the cleavage of womens who are interested in 40K!”

    Yes, compatibility is important, and the odds of finding a woman in a bar with shared interests other than alcohol are… less than ideal.

    I guess I’m trying to make two discrete points here:
    1). If you want to buy 40K parts, go to a hobby store; if something good happens, great! If, on the other hand, you DON’T really want to buy 40K parts, but are really hoping T3h H4wtness happens to be there, it’s disingenuous to go the the hobby store!

    It’s a basic principle that permits more honest transactions, nothing more. As someone on the spectrum, such rules are useful to me.

    2). If you’re primarily interested in no longer being single, it’s best to focus PRIMARILY on social events, which are designed to permit people to mingle and meet other people.

    Your point about the bar is quite accurate: if, like me, you’re not comfortable with the bar scene, and if you want to narrow the scope of people who will likely show up to a given social situation, sometimes it helps to narrow the focus based on a GENERAL or SPECIFIC area of interest.

    Which brings me to my next quote…

    “For example: you note that your local hobby store is hosting a mixer for Warhammer 40K enthusiasts next week.”

    Does that happen a lot in your area? I wasn’t aware such events were common. A quick search also failed to turn up references to such. Maybe I’m doing it wrong.

    Unfortunately, I was just using 40K as a hypothetical example. No, 40K mixers are decidedly uncommon in my area, tragically. =)

    However: in my area there is at least one “singles group” which hosts daily interest-based gatherings with the express purpose of bring single folks together around a theme to mingle. These themes range from hiking to astronomy.

    The idea is to get a bunch of single people together who are all interested in the same thing and see what happens.

    I’m not trying to throw sharp limits on what you can and can’t do. Rather, I’m trying to say that when people show up at a business conference, they’re primarily there to work and exchange business cards, not get a date. Take the same group of people out to a bar afterwards, and you get more opportunities for social interaction.

    I guess a good homework assignment would be to take out a sheet of paper and list ALL the things you’re interested in, even remotely. For me, that would be:
    * Go
    * Exercise (cycling, jogging, martial arts, and yoga)
    * Video games
    * Books and movies (with a bent towards criticism)
    * Social theory
    * Contemporary politics
    * Writing
    * Biology, astrophysics, etc.

    If I were single, I would take a look around my community, and see how many events related to any of these interests I could find in my area.

    Here’s the trick: if I were primarily interested in meeting people, I would NOT go to any such event that was primarily concerned with the interest itself. So I wouldn’t go to a conference about how to make video games, or a Go club, or anything like that, UNLESS I truly wanted to learn the interest.

    Here’s a great example. The other day, a couple of my co-workers invited me to do yoga with them. My co-workers are female, so naturally I agreed. =)

    But when I got there, I found that I was fundamentally interested in learning the craft: learning to perfect each individual pose, to control my body… and if I hadn’t torn a muscle, I would have gone back immediately, to learn more.

    This didn’t stop me from noticing that there were lots of attractive women around in tight clothes. And when I return to yoga after my injury has healed, I will doubtless continue to notice (discreetly). And if something happens, like striking up a conversation after class that turns into something more, what the hell — I’m in a poly relationship, and my partner doesn’t mind.

    But my primary goal when going there will be to learn the craft.

    Granted: it helps that I’m not single. If I WERE single, I probably wouldn’t trust my motives sufficiently; instead, I’d look for more social engagements, related to my interests in a general way so as to narrow down participants.

    @Flyingkal:

    If you are a person who is already being ignored and/or overlooked in rather neutral social settings, i.e. close to 50-50 gender mix, then how are you supposed to grab the attention of someone being outnumbered in a 10:1 ratio?

    That’s a good point.

    My rebuttal is as follows: you are not being ignored because of YOU, you are being ignored because of THEM.

    I truly doubt you’re hideous, either in terms of looks or personality, if only because “hideous” is subjective — I am happily not single, but there are doubtless lots of people who would (and do) find me hideous.

    Rather: by your account, you are merely unlucky so far.

    In my experience, it’s not a matter of out-competing the other guys for the few single females in any given location. For one thing, that notion is problematic on a VARIETY of levels, for a variety of reasons. For another thing, that kind of to-the-victor-go-the-spoils attitude generally doesn’t produce stable relationships, precisely because the people who play such games are, by definition, unstable.

    But, more importantly: if she finds you attractive, you won’t HAVE to out-compete the others! She’ll just gravitate to you. Hopefully, it will be mutual.

    It’s not as though someone would have to be desperate (and therefore interested in such a wide variety of people that she’d jump you if you gave her the opportunity — you wouldn’t want that anyway, trust me — it’s hardly the basis for a healthy relationship) to want you, thereby forcing you to compete with wide variety of people for her desperate heart!

    Rather: it may be that the complex alchemy necessary to produce someone to whom you are attractive is a little on the rare side. Or not. But if so, so be it: you are still at the mercy of fate, and the only thing you can do to fight it is something you prolly need to do anyway: put yourself in the pathway of the gods, meet as many people in social circumstances as possible, and hope something good happens.

    Not to sound trite or philosophical, but god DOES play dice — the only thing you can do is to stack the odds in your favor.

    Me? I avoid flying. This dramatically reduces my odds of dying in a plane crash. =)

  71. Paul says:

    From my reading of the article and all the comments thus far there are a couple of points I would like to note.
    1. Ozy states:

    “Today, NSWATM will discuss the single most important issue facing men of all classes, colors, and creeds: the inability of straight white middle-class men to get laid.”

    Setting aside the sarcastic smashing which is supposed to pass for humor, and the inanity of zir facetious topic, “getting laid is the single most important issue,” zie is doing little more than creating a straw man as a foil for commenters to argue with. If zir point was to actually address the real issue which is selfishness and the lack of selflessness, zie badly missed the mark, as evidenced by the overwhelming number of comments so far. The discussion has avoided any reference to basic ideology (or a person’s psychology) as the cause of the “problem” of not getting laid. The closest someone has come to that is daelyte’s comment at 11:04. An excellent comment in my view.
    2. So, what is everyone talking about instead of exploring the thought daelyte makes here:

    “For me not knowing is worse than knowing not… (snip) What I’d give to be able to know what people are thinking, the way everyone else seems to…”

    They are talking about how they are hurting, how they feel and what they want. Nary a mention about the other person (in this case, a woman); what she is feeling nor what she wants. Who the hell wants to get involved with a totally selfish person who doesn’t give a thought to what the other person feels or wants? Selfishness begets loneliness.

    3. The psychological reality is that the huge majority of people, both men and women, are hurting for essentially the same reasons. Setting aside things like financial security and crooked emotional Gaming, it comes down to a lack of physical and emotional stroking. (See Eric Berne’s books or those of Claude Steiner-he has a website and free books! on Gaming and stroking.) Recognizing that, it stands to reason that if you give people what they hunger for in those areas, relationships are not hard to find. In fact they are automatically available. That might be called selflessness. (The only caveat is you must not sell your soul in doing it. That is crooked and self defeating.)

    4. What I have found in my personal life over these many, many years, is that when I forget about myself and put the other person’s emotional needs ahead of mine, I am almost always rewarded with those things I want. Like being noticed, liked, sought after, admired etc. And yes, that includes sex (when there is attraction, availability etc.) I mean this in a real way, not as a technique to manipulate the other person. (Like wining and dining in order to get laid.) When the other person feels emotionally fulfilled, even briefly, they are often able to set their needs aside and actually see me and respond in a like manner. Its a wonderfully powerful feeling to receive what you did not ask for.
    I realize that this is counterintuitive, but in fact, from my experience it is the reality. That said, I still have much to learn about myself, women, communication, sharing, risking, empathy, compassion and of course, love. But then, on a personal level, I am only 76, in good health and so have, in all probability, quite a few more years ahead to practice. My current love is 69 and a retired psychologist from whom I have learned more than I can note here.

    Paul

    Mod note: Edited for pronouns. Ozy uses nonbinary pronouns, please.

  72. Danny says:

    They are talking about how they are hurting, how they feel and what they want. Nary a mention about the other person (in this case, a woman); what she is feeling nor what she wants. Who the hell wants to get involved with a totally selfish person who doesn’t give a thought to what the other person feels or wants? Selfishness begets loneliness.
    I would dare say that loneliness begets selfishness. When one has never had the chance to be involved with another person, a chance to think of someone else other than themselves, then oneself is all they have.

    However I do agree with a lot of what you have to say and you seem to bring in the proverbial fresh set of eyes.

  73. Geo says:

    I find it sad to read of the pain that so many of you men obviously have! I don’t see easy answers for your issues. I would think, though, that connecting with each other privately – and supporting each other in various ways might be a relatively simple way to be happier in your lives. It’s not that difficult to start Yahoo (or other) email groups or to set up private – Facebook Groups or similar. I think it is particular important for us (non-Gay) men to reach out for other men – for support, understanding, good ideas and caring criticism. While Oxy – does a great job of helping many of you, you also could create on your own. Personally – I spent months – reaching out to getting a closed men’s group started where I live – which has helped me a lot over the past 3-4 years. I am looking to connect with other men – in other ways and for other issues – and it’s not easy (for me) to succeed – but we all can try to make whatever may help us individually. Thanks!

  74. daelyte says:

    @Gaius:
    “Eye contact is, GENERALLY, an indicator that they’re interested.”

    Or they’re plotting your imminent, painful and gory death.

    “That said: if they show signs of being on the spectrum themselves, they might be perfectly interested in you but incapable of sustaining eye contact.”

    Too little eye contact is common for those on the spectrum, but so is too much. I tend toward excessive eye contact myself, since I found out people are more comfortable talking when I’m looking at them than when I’m not.

    Aren’t these mostly indicators of interest in conversation, rather than in spelunking?

    Sustained eye contact from across the room, however, is indicative of obsessive interest – which can be good or bad, depending on their intentions.

    Feet are also meaningful. If their feet are turned away they probably want to leave, but not necessarily because of the conversation. Sometimes they just need to use the restroom.

    “However: in my area there is at least one “singles group” which hosts daily interest-based gatherings with the express purpose of bring single folks together around a theme to mingle. These themes range from hiking to astronomy.”

    That’s useful info, I was aware of singles events but didn’t realize some were theme-based.

    “I guess a good homework assignment would be to take out a sheet of paper and list ALL the things you’re interested in, even remotely.”

    I think it would be faster to photocopy an encyclopedia and blot out things I’m not interested in.

    Off the top of my head there’s Game design and development (and not just video games), scifi and fantasy in any form, any branch of science (including social sciences), history, martial arts, health, cooking, 3d animation, storytelling and filmmaking, … also I have musical talent but difficulty with many instruments due to motor coordination. I used to be good at singing, but I don’t have much lung capacity.

  75. Dr. anonymous says:

    “However I do agree with a lot of what you have to say and you seem to bring in the proverbial fresh set of eyes.”
    Can you elaborate on this please? All I see is another statement that only the single guy is at fault and if he wasn’t so useless in some way or another he would have no trouble finding meaningful relationships. Sorry, heard it all before.

  76. Doug S. says:

    @daelyte:

    If a single woman in a public venue is already willing to chat with you for a few minutes, the odds of dating her if you don’t screw up are probably very favorable.

    There are two problems with this…
    1) It’s usually hard to tell the difference between a “single” woman and one in a relationship before starting to talk to one of them. This can lead to a lot of disappointments, as shown ina certain awful webcomic.
    2) Many women who are willing to talk are in customer service positions. (For example, waitresses.) And it’s very hard to tell if they’re only talking to you because being nice to customers is, literally, their job.

  77. Doug S. says:

    I propose pussy communism. All women between the ages of fourteen and thirty (when they become unfuckable) will be available to all men, on demand, whenever they like. Once they hit The Wall and have their pussies stretched out by too many cocks, women will be assigned to clean homes, raise children, and make sandwiches for whatever drooling lesser omega wanking it to anime porn will have them.

    I’ve actually read this story many times. I think this was the most famous version, but I’ve seen several other variations on the theme on many erotica sites. The amount of misogyny included tends to vary.

    (I was thinking about writing a comment in an open thread trying to critically examine my taste for mind-control themed pornographic stories, such as this one, but the time never felt right…)

  78. Engineer Krause says:

    God that webcomic sucks! and it once veered into rape culture. Still I feel sympathy, with pity for both the deprivation and the delusion. And there is always the subjective experience angle… but still, ugh. I invoke Poe’s Law?

    @Paul on selfishness: I suspect that since people here are at most mildly selfish, they take it all as self-evident that they do care about other people and it did not occur to them to have to explicitly state how they cared for other people. Alternatively, they are proto-Nice Guys who genuinely are nice to people to a selfless degree and are starting to burn out due to not ever asking things of people.

    As to specific difficulties other than no confidence or very low positive reply rate: I for my part suffer from 1. not knowing the scripts for asking somebody to the first date, a particular problem as I just entered college from being in high school. 2. a grand-opera-enhanced tendency to pedestalize and build imaginary images, even when completely aware of what I am doing. 3. this bizzare inability to transition from talking to someone strictly platonically to any form of advances.

    @daelyte: about gender ratio for realworld meetups from dating sites.: That’s really interesting and unexpected, though not surprising. I begin to wonder a lot of things… My perception has always that what I call the Gender Heterosex Disparity (Offer from man to women much more likely to be unwelcome than the reverse) always messed those sorts of things up for all involved. Could perception/socialization of women being more into love and romance be at work here?

    @The Bloggers: Could you address this disparity some time? It’s really strange, ties into Figleaf’s rules, creep shaming, etc a LOT, but I don’t think you have ever specifically talked about it and I want to hear opinions on where it comes from. Is it ONLY because men initiate so much?

  79. daelyte says:

    @Doug S.:
    “1) It’s usually hard to tell the difference between a “single” woman and one in a relationship before starting to talk to one of them. This can lead to a lot of disappointments, as shown in a certain awful webcomic.”

    I used to think that way, but it turns out some women date more than one guy, so just because she has a boyfriend – or several – doesn’t mean you don’t still have a chance.

    Also, she might have like-minded friends who could be a good match. As NMMNG pointed out, being introduced by a friend has a high success rate, because of what PUAs call “social proof”.

    “2) Many women who are willing to talk are in customer service positions. (For example, waitresses.) And it’s very hard to tell if they’re only talking to you because being nice to customers is, literally, their job.”

    There are ways around that. If she still talks to you when she’s off the job, she might be genuinely interested. All the more reason why nonverbal signals of attraction are important, too. If she’s checking your out, that’s probably not business.

    “(I was thinking about writing a comment in an open thread trying to critically examine my taste for mind-control themed pornographic stories, such as this one, but the time never felt right…)”

    You should warn when linking to porn.

    I’m not usually into mind control stories, but horny women make me horny.

    Supposedly the majority of erotica authors and readers are female, and the mind-control genre is no exception.

    Has anyone heard of the Subjugation series? The site is down right now but the wayback machine still has it:
    http://web.archive.org/web/20090429084014/http://sennadar.com/oldsite/other/other.html#sub

    @Engineer Krause:
    “@The Bloggers: Could you address this disparity some time? It’s really strange, ties into Figleaf’s rules, creep shaming, etc a LOT, but I don’t think you have ever specifically talked about it and I want to hear opinions on where it comes from. Is it ONLY because men initiate so much?”

    http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=changing-the-dating-game

    This is another big reason why I want to see a feminist dating site – to help women learn how to approach men.

  80. daelyte says:

    @daelyte:
    “You should warn when linking to porn.”

    Also, I should follow my own advice. The story I linked has some sex scenes in it.

    http://web.archive.org/web/20090429084014/http://sennadar.com/oldsite/other/other.html#sub

    The Subjugation series is a scifi story based around earth being taken over by aliens. Specifically, telepathic blue-skinned space elves from a feudal society where women are the dominant sex. Spaceships, mind control, kinky space elves.

    Is this sort of story common in anime?

    I was there for the spaceships. So hard to find decent (or indecent) space opera these days.

  81. Flyingkal says:

    @Gaius:

    In my experience, it’s not a matter of out-competing the other guys for the few single females in any given location. For one thing, that notion is problematic on a VARIETY of levels, for a variety of reasons. For another thing, that kind of to-the-victor-go-the-spoils attitude generally doesn’t produce stable relationships, precisely because the people who play such games are, by definition, unstable.

    But, more importantly: if she finds you attractive, you won’t HAVE to out-compete the others! She’ll just gravitate to you. Hopefully, it will be mutual.

    I don’t know what definition of “competing” you are using here.

    I’m only noticing that I’m always the one to be left alone at the end of the evening, and that everybody (unless they already have a long-term partner, and are very clear about that) seems to be gravitating away from me.
    And That is what’s problematic to me.

  82. Doug S. says:

    You should warn when linking to porn.

    I thought I did? (“A pornographic story, such as [link]this one[/link]”)

    Supposedly the majority of erotica authors and readers are female, and the mind-control genre is no exception.

    Maybe, but most http://www.mcstories.com writers and forum members seem to be male, at least as far I can tell… and the site’s TV Tropes wiki entry says the same thing, too.

    On another note, although Brave New World is more famous, The World Inside is another well-regarded science fiction dystopia that involves “pussy communism”…

  83. Doug S. says:

    (Note to mods: The comment I have in moderation has an auto-generated link that was supposed to be plain text – it’s the URL of an erotica site.)

  84. Dr. anonymous says:

    I sometimes wonder if there is some kind of double edged sword in this.
    I guess it’s kind of hard to talk to women if you see every woman as just a potential partner it is hard to have a relaxed conversation. If you don’t get a lot of offers, then you tend to view every offer as the last one.

  85. xiu xiu xiu says:

    1. Paul, I think one of the hardest things to do for people with low self-esteem is getting the courage to imagine that their support and care for other people will actually be worth something for these people. If someone feels unwanted, their support and care can feel unwanted, too. This is a sad trap, and I’d recommend therapy for getting out of it. Also, you sound happy, I’m glad. 🙂

    2. mind-control stories can have the benefits, for female readers, to 1. get their fantasy permissions, an easy roundabout way for getting rid of programming and fear. the less internalized slut-shaming one has, the more irrelevant this becomes 2. from what I’ve seen, they tend to have the longest descriptions of how does it feel to want to have sex, because that want is induced from the exterior, so we can read every drop of it as it is spoon-fed. Which is, again, sexy, and it would be just as sexy if it would be a description of an autonomous want… but we read what we can find 3. genuine submissive desires, whose I am not an expert of.

  86. Gaius says:

    I’ve always hated porn/erotica with a mind control theme. If the female changes in some way over the course of it, it’s my preference that she do so because she ultimately wants to be a certain way.

    @Flyingkal:
    I’m sorry to hear that; does it happen often?

    Still, I’m going to stick with my analysis that you’re merely (very?) unlucky; to suggest otherwise would be to suggest that it’s somehow your fault (which it most definitively isn’t).

    That said, one can change variables in an attempt to improve their odds. Do you think there are any variables that you can (REASONABLY) change to improve your odds?

  87. Flyingkal says:

    @Paul:

    They are talking about how they are hurting, how they feel and what they want. Nary a mention about the other person (in this case, a woman); what she is feeling nor what she wants. Who the hell wants to get involved with a totally selfish person who doesn’t give a thought to what the other person feels or wants? Selfishness begets loneliness.

    I’m not talking about what The Other Person (in this case, a woman) wants, precisely because I don’t have a clue about that, which is precisely what this debate is revolving around.
    How am I supposed to know what another person wants, as long as s/he won’t set aside 5 precious seconds to neither talk nor listen to me?
    (And then I’m often told by my friends that I’m a good listener)

    What I want is exactly someone to tell me what she is feeling and what she wants, and hopefully how we can rectify that together…!

  88. rmyoun06 says:

    A lot of commenters seem to assume that having a romantic partner will make them less lonely. I don’t think it necessarily works that way, or at least not for everyone.

  89. Flyingkal says:

    Gaius:
    Yes, it happens often.

    I can think of only one instance where a girl actually crossed the room and came up to me because she liked what she saw, and we had a nice conversation. I was14 years old, which means it was almost 30 years ago.

    I actually prefer to think about it as it’s my fault!
    That way it means it’s something I could change, could I just find out what it is. Instead of changing everyone around me…

    I don’t know. I’ve always considered myself an above average outgoing, social, witty and intelligent person.
    I’ve been a conferencier at dinner partys, and toastmaster at friends’ weddings.
    I try to always be there when a friend need a helping hand.
    I am, and always was, in fairly good shape. Mostly an outdoor person, like Barbara described above. Not bulky with muscles, but no excessive fat either.
    I don’t scarf drinks, money, etc off of friends, or other people.
    I’ve had a few girlfriends, but felt like it was mostly just out of boredom.
    And I don’t think I look craptacular either. At least not compared to people back in school, or some of my friends today who used to be or still are wading knee-deep in the pussy fountain…

  90. Flyingkal says:

    @rmyoun06:
    Care to elaborate?

  91. rmyoun06 says:

    @Flyingkal:

    Sure. I think that, for many people, feelings of isolation and loneliness – and feelings of being unattractive and unwanted – exist independently of a person’s actual circumstances. Having a romantic partner to hug or to tell you that you’re attractive doesn’t always fix anything.

  92. Engineer Krause says:

    @daelyte: very interesting. I want to try the joystick pulling anitracism training.

  93. Flyingkal says:

    @rmyoun06: Sure. I think for someone who haven’t been appreciated in a long time, if ever, it can take a long time to actually feel attractive even if someone start to say that you are.

    But apart from that, I’m pretty sure that most people (not everyone, but a large majority) are more inclined to fall into the trap of feeling lonely when they actually are lonely, than if they are in some sort of community or partnership.

  94. Daelyte,

    “Still gendered. After deep consideration, 48% of women vs 8% of men decided they want to date someone with a job?”

    Less than half of the women on a dating site prefer, in theory, somebody with a job when required to list traits (and I wonder how many of those profiles are fake?). Really, how meaningful is “deep consideration” when required to list traits as people generally have a harder time with what they want than what they don’t want? Gendered or not, there exist 10 times more explanations of how that is meaningless when applied to real life.

    “Still gendered. After deep consideration, 48% of women vs 8% of men decided they want to date someone with a job?”

    Less than half of the women on a dating site prefer, in theory, somebody with a job when required to list traits (and I wonder how many of those profiles are fake). Really, how meaningful is “deep consideration” when required to list traits as people generally have a harder time with what they want than what they don’t want? Gendered or not, there exist 10 times more explanations of how that is meaningless when applied to real life.

    Regarding your link, are 20-something, child-free (can we stop with “childless” please?), single women from cities the only women that date? I’ve been with men without jobs and I’ve been with men that quit their jobs when we were still together. They leave something with high-pay and benefits while I’m waitressing or doing something in an office.

    “I saw men spending more on restaurants, travel and entertainment, combined that with anecdotal evidence that those are traditional dating expenses, and jumped to conclusions. I could be wrong, but I don’t think so.”

    My experience in the service industry has been thorough. In my experience, one is more likely to see a man alone, with his buddies, or with co-workers than with a woman (and they tend to purchase more drinks and food). This includes music venues as well. As for travel, that’s easy – we already know men travel more for jobs and hold jobs that require more travel.

    Flyingkal,
    “I’m not talking about what The Other Person (in this case, a woman) wants, precisely because I don’t have a clue about that, which is precisely what this debate is revolving around.”

    Consider that the other side of the coin is that women are taught to “wait” or else they’re pushy sluts that deserve any treatment they get. This is especially true when alcohol is involved (“bar whores,” “she was asking for it,” “everybody gets a turn,” “she’s broken and desperate,” etc.). And by the logic here, one can argue that women are rejected all the time when men *don’t* approach them. Yet if my girlfriend complains about having the shitty end of the stick for not being approached since she must be passive or be a slut and get laughed at, and that it is because she isn’t a certain age/shape/look despite being in her own “scene” (ie, she isn’t a Top 40 type at an alternative bar) nobody would hesitate to say, hey, maybe she just doesn’t meet his preferences.

    Progressive hetero men and women exist, obviously. But socially awkward and anxious women (like moi) have the double bind of not only trouble with initiating (direct rejection, etc.) and possibly encountering men that throw a fit when they didn’t get the sex they expected (oh, it happens!) but with rejecting the men that do approach them – it’s hard and scary; I’ve wanted to rip my skin off! Plus my friends tell me I’m CLUELESS when a guy is interested and then yell at me when I don’t approach those I am so I’ve had to work on that – not everybody else. This is why it drives me BANANAS when this issue is treated as a one-sided problem (straight guys do everything right but still have problems with shallow, Aspie-hating, hypergamous women that won’t give them a chance) and a one-sided solution (straight women should just knock it off and give them a CHANCE!). The dating scene is hard, period, and gender roles make it hard then on top of that mental health issues make it worse.

    Also, putting a woman into the life of a straight guy with mental health and loneliness issues to fix his problems is not only insulting to women but to men. I know I’ve mentioned this before but it is sad to words like “PUA,” “game,” and “hypergamy” rather than “therapy.”

  95. Danny says:

    Dr. Anonymous:
    Can you elaborate on this please? All I see is another statement that only the single guy is at fault and if he wasn’t so useless in some way or another he would have no trouble finding meaningful relationships. Sorry, heard it all before.

    Mainly that I agree that even when taking one’s on situation and feelings into account it will be a hard going to get a relationship off the ground (much less last long) if the other person’s feelings and situation are not being taken into account.

    And mostly I was just trying to be nice.

  96. daelyte says:

    @Colette Wedding:
    “Gendered or not, there exist 10 times more explanations of how that is meaningless when applied to real life.”

    I have yet to see any explanations of why it’s so gendered. It’s meaningful because most men are exposed to it over and over, the same way women are exposed to society’s often ridiculous gendered expectations.

    “Regarding your link, are 20-something, child-free (can we stop with “childless” please?), single women from cities the only women that date?”

    Yes, older child-burdened MARRIED women aren’t as likely to date.

    “My experience in the service industry has been thorough. In my experience, one is more likely to see a man alone, with his buddies, or with co-workers than with a woman (and they tend to purchase more drinks and food). This includes music venues as well.”

    If you’re going to use your experience in the service industry as a source of authority, we need more details. Was it KFC, or italian restaurants? Music venues – mainstream, or death metal? Did you work at movie theatres – you do know they make most of their money friday and saturday nights yes? Travel also includes resorts – how many men go to resorts alone and/or with buddies?

    “As for travel, that’s easy – we already know men travel more for jobs and hold jobs that require more travel.”

    As for jobs that require travel, cohabiting men travel more than men living alone, whereas there is no such effect among women. Not to mention, jobs that require travel is a work-related expense so disposable income should be adjusted accordingly.

    http://wes.sagepub.com/content/20/3/513.abstract

    “Consider that the other side of the coin is that women are taught to “wait” or else they’re pushy sluts that deserve any treatment they get.”

    To use your words, “gendered or not, there exist 10 times more explanations of how that is meaningless when applied to real life”. Yet it still has an effect doesn’t it?

    “Yet if my girlfriend complains about having the shitty end of the stick for not being approached since she must be passive or be a slut and get laughed at, and that it is because she isn’t a certain age/shape/look…”

    Did she try approaching, or is she assuming? Interestingly, some pickup sites would suggest that she should approach more men, improve her Game skills (which helps compensate for age/shape/look), and take control of her dating life. It’s one of the major things I would see an explicitly gender-egalitarian pickup site focus on, women approaching men. How to ask men out without looking desperate, or how to “pull” men by creating an opening for them, how to identify your individual strengths and play to them, and so on.

    “Progressive hetero men and women exist, obviously.”

    Thank you for acknowledging that.

    “encountering men that throw a fit when they didn’t get the sex they expected”

    http://www.shortnews.com/start.cfm?id=26142

    “rejecting the men that do approach them – it’s hard and scary”

    I’m sure it is, especially if you’re trying to not be a jerk about it. Men are even worse at it since we’re not trained to do it. It’s yet another subject for gender-egalitarian dating advice, how to reject people tactfully without being misconstrued. I’m taking notes.

    “Plus my friends tell me I’m CLUELESS when a guy is interested and then yell at me when I don’t approach those I am so I’ve had to work on that – not everybody else.”

    Game for indicators of interest, Game for approach anxiety, Game community (aka “everybody else”) for encouragement, shared experiences and commiseration.

    “The dating scene is hard, period, and gender roles make it hard then on top of that mental health issues make it worse.”

    Yes.

    “I know I’ve mentioned this before but it is sad to words like “PUA,” “game,” and “hypergamy” rather than “therapy.””

    Alas, mental health is a female dominated field, and therapists have somewhat of a reputation for misandry (of a magnitude similar to family court). For men who are lonely and depressed due to dating issues, the prospect of being told by a female therapist that they they are worthless and don’t deserve to be loved isn’t a welcome one. The closest I can think of is telling a women who’s having a hard time because of traditional gender roles to go to church for advice and comfort.

  97. MaMu1977 says:

    Wow, Poe’s Law in action.
    Bravo.

  98. Gaius says:

    @Colette Wedding:

    But socially awkward and anxious women (like moi) have the double bind of not only trouble with initiating (direct rejection, etc.) and possibly encountering men that throw a fit when they didn’t get the sex they expected (oh, it happens!) but with rejecting the men that do approach them – it’s hard and scary; I’ve wanted to rip my skin off!

    I agree with everything you wrote, but I find I have exactly the opposite problem.

    In my experience, I’ve learned that women can’t be trusted to cross the room (no one ever has), so I have to cross the room myself if I want to have any hope of starting a relationship with anyone. But when I do, more often than not, I find that the act of crossing the room is held against me — as though I had no “right” to do so, as though I’m overreaching. etc. And believe me: I may be direct, but I’m also polite, soft-spoken, articulate, and take pains to approach women in such a way as that they do not feel pressured, trapped, or encroached upon.

    I don’t mind the rejection. I DO mind the fact that I’m basically forced to cross the room, and then blamed for it.

    In a word: our culture sucks.

  99. rmyoun06 says:

    @daelyte:

    (1) Posting a single example of a woman doing something violent after getting turned down for sex doesn’t contradict Collete’s point that turning men down for sex can be a scary experience, nor does it mean that turning women down for sex is generally as scary of an experience for men.

    (2) I have a hard time believing that many men are lonely and depressed due to dating issues. I have a much easier time believing that lots of men have dating issues because they are lonely and depressed. I think your causal arrow runs in the wrong direction (at least in most cases).

    (3) Even assuming for the sake of argument that doing PUA stuff might help some lonely, depressed guys get laid more effectively, the PUA stuff isn’t necessarily going to help with the loneliness and depression. Sex doesn’t actually help all that much.

  100. daelyte says:

    @rmyoun06:
    “Posting a single example of a woman doing something violent after getting turned down for sex”

    Want more? A quick search for “he refused to have sex with her” turned up…
    http://easterniowanewsnow.com/2011/09/27/woman-accused-of-assault-because-boyfriend-would-not-have-sex/
    http://www.complex.com/city-guide/2011/12/sandusky-ohio-woman-assaults-sex-refusing-husband
    http://www.wtfnews.org/law-politics/hello-police-my-partner-wont-have-sex-with-me/
    http://www.asiaone.com/News/Latest+News/Asia/Story/A1Story20110101-255874.html
    http://www.welovesoaps.net/2011/09/alfierilawsuit.html
    http://www.whas11.com/news/local/Woman-allegedly-stabs-man-after-he-refuses-to-have-sex-with-her-114509584.html
    http://www.sanduskyregister.com/perkins-twp/crime/2011/dec/19/police-woman-assaults-husband-refusing-sex

    It wasn’t my intention to contradict Collete’s point, merely that such things to happen to men as well. Nobody should be subjected to that, it’s awful and people shouldn’t do it.

    “I have a hard time believing that many men are lonely and depressed due to dating issues. I have a much easier time believing that lots of men have dating issues because they are lonely and depressed. I think your causal arrow runs in the wrong direction (at least in most cases).”

    I said no such thing. What I said (or meant?) what that therapy wasn’t a simple and easy solution for lonely men as Collete suggested.

    FWIW, I think the causal arrow runs both ways. Loneliness, depression and dating issues are hopelessly intertwined for many men.

    Society tells us that our ability to get the girls is the yardstick of our overall value – confidence, finance, physical appearance, everything. Meanwhile both women’s magazines and feminist sources keep telling us that if we fail at dating, we must be bad people overall.

    When a man’s confidence in such poor condition he tends to be clingy and insecure, which obviously doesn’t help his dating success. It’s a vicious circle.

    “Even assuming for the sake of argument that doing PUA stuff might help some lonely, depressed guys get laid more effectively, the PUA stuff isn’t necessarily going to help with the loneliness and depression. Sex doesn’t actually help all that much.”

    Do you really think most people who use Game do so only for sex? Getting a coffee date, a one night stand, a long-term relationship or finding one’s soulmate require a lot of the same basic approach skills, skills that women keep blaming inexperienced men of not having. The seduction community in fact covers a lot of general social skills that can even help people make new friends and get ahead at work, as well as a community of people with similar problems (usually shy and social awkward) encouraging each other in their respective quests.

  101. Doug S. says:

    Semi-serious question:

    You’ve been curious about a new dating service that has been promising, and apparently delivering, the seemingly impossible: nearly everyone that has passed their screening, which has been most applicants, has ended up married within a year, and all of those marriages appear to be happy ones.

    When you investigate, you discover their secret: they’ve got magic love potions that actually work, and they offer the clients the chance to share one with someone that seem to be compatible. Would you want their service?

  102. Flyingkal says:

    @Colette Wedding

    Consider that the other side of the coin is that women are taught to “wait” or else they’re pushy sluts that deserve any treatment they get.

    I am considering the other side of the coin. That’s why I want to know what I’m doing wrong. Since I’m failing at something that, like, 90% of the population are succeding with, I would really much just like to know what’s wrong with me. And also since the initial responce I get is in general so very different from that most people in my social circles get, I recon’ it must be something that’s very obvious to most people.

    One example. Me and a couple of friends, all in our 40’s, go out to a pub/dancehall, not to try to pick up women just have a talk and a few beers. A woman, maybe 5-10 years our senior, comes up and asks if anyone wants to dance. She asks 2 or 3 guys before one says Sure, why not? go up and dance 10 minutes and then comes back to the table. This is repeated a couple of times during the evening, since all of us are pretty good dancers.
    No, say that we’ve been out like this 10 times, and each time about 10 different women have asked on random 2-3-4 guys for a dance. AND NOT A SINGLE ONE OF THEM HAVE EVER HAPPENED TO ASK ME. You’d say that sounds like pure coincidence?
    To me, it says that there’s quite a lot of women who don’t mind crossing the room if they want something regardless of what they’ve been taught, and it also says I’m the Ogre.

    And I’m not saying that loneliness is a menthal health problem. I just think it’s easier for most people to feel wanted and loved if they have someone to tell them so on a somewhat regular basis, than if they do not have such a person.

  103. Flyingkal says:

    I apologize for my last post.
    I didn’t mean to become so descriptive and hog the discussion.
    It’s just that I want to know what’s wrong with me, but it so often gets a dismissed with the misinterpretation that I want the whole world to change to accomodate me…

  104. rmyoun06 says:

    @daelyte:

    “Do you really think most people who use Game do so only for sex? Getting a coffee date, a one night stand, a long-term relationship or finding one’s soulmate require a lot of the same basic approach skills, skills that women keep blaming inexperienced men of not having. The seduction community in fact covers a lot of general social skills that can even help people make new friends and get ahead at work, as well as a community of people with similar problems (usually shy and social awkward) encouraging each other in their respective quests.”

    What I said for sex goes for long term relationships as well. If you feel lonely and undesirable while not in a relationship, you will most likely feel lonely and undesirable in a relationship, too. Having a partner can distract you from your own misery for a while, but can’t cure it, and until you find a way to cure it, all the “game” in the world won’t make you feel good about yourself. Therapy may not be a panacea, but PUA stuff – even if successful – most certainly isn’t either. That’s my only point.

  105. Daelyte,

    “I have yet to see any explanations of why it’s so gendered.”

    You answer your own question immediately following this which is basically a summation of what I already said. What it doesn’t do is determine what an individual woman is going decide about an individual man. You’re ignoring something that could actually get you somewhere in favor of something that can give you an excuse to do nothing and throw stones.

    “It’s meaningful because most men are exposed to it over and over, the same way women are exposed to society’s often ridiculous gendered expectations.”

    But in both cases, that doesn’t determine what an individual woman is going to want in an individual man. Yet you draw all these conclusions about the dysfunction of the women within this possibly narrow group you find desirable whom you don’t even know.

    “Yes, older child-burdened MARRIED women aren’t as likely to date.”

    Single 20-something non-city, child-free women? 30+something single city women with kids? Single 20-something mothers outside the city?

    “If you’re going to use your experience in the service industry as a source of authority, we need more details.”

    Well you didn’t provide more details, but fine. No, not KFC. I’m talking bars, bars/clubs, family restaurants, bar/restaurants. I’ve always worked weekends and at least three days during the week. The type of music could be anything from acoustic to free-style rap.

    “As for jobs that require travel, cohabiting men travel more than men living alone, whereas there is no such effect among women.”

    Ahhh, now you’re talking about men already in a relationship. Did you ever think that since he has a partner and has settled down, funds can be put toward travel? Did it ever occur to you that the once-single women that enjoy travel snag men who one day desire to travel because she wants to share the experience with somebody? It wouldn’t surprise me that isn’t the case with cohabitating women since female-dominated jobs tend to be underpaid and undervalued and generally women still tend to house/children.

    ‘To use your words, “gendered or not, there exist 10 times more explanations of how that is meaningless when applied to real life”’

    For one thing, you used theoretical preferences from dating sites that may have included fake profiles to explain away your problems with dating in the real world. For another, I address that in the same paragraph which you smugly respond to after breaking down what I say so that everything is out of context. Finally, I’m actually trying to show you that it isn’t personal and suggest you consider that *if* it is the case that you’re being expected to initiate, remember she is feeling gendered-pressure too. Are you discussing with me in good faith, are you trying to avoid (which is understandable and I’m not insulting you; I do that myself), or do you actually want to know?

    “Did she try approaching, or is she assuming?”

    See, you’re just responding with the first thing that pops into your head without reading what I say in context. This was addressed to another person that responded, “well I don’t know what they want because she won’t give me five seconds” to somebody’s amazing suggestion that one consider the wants of the woman too. Within the approach/wait model (which is obviously used there), she’s not only dealing with gender expectations too but she should consider that maybe the men that would consider picking up a woman in that place just don’t happen to want her. As the approaching men should consider that maybe the woman denying his advances just doesn’t want him.

    What the hell does that link about a woman biting her husband for refusing sex have to do with the issues women may face when being the initiators?

    “I’m sure it is, especially if you’re trying to not be a jerk about it. Men are even worse at it since we’re not trained to do it.”

    Yet that women are generally conditioned to be nurturing and warned in different ways throughout life to not be a bitch and find themselves punished for it when they are is constantly ignored here when the subject of turning down advances comes up. It is always simply about how horrible the woman is and how undeniably bad the man and he alone has it. Think about the position she is put in when you decide to engage in pick-ups and then maybe you’ll understand that she has feelings, wants, and needs too and it wouldn’t burn so badly.

    “Game for indicators of interest, Game for approach anxiety, Game community (aka “everybody else”) for encouragement, shared experiences and commiseration.”

    It doesn’t address the underlying issues. But the point is that it never occurred to me to focus so much blame outward, at least not when I remembered my emotional reaction to something isn’t necessarily a reflection of reality.

    “Alas, mental health is a female dominated field, and therapists have somewhat of a reputation for misandry (of a magnitude similar to family court). For men who are lonely and depressed due to dating issues, the prospect of being told by a female therapist that they are worthless and don’t deserve to be loved isn’t a welcome one.”

    Well you already have your mind made up, don’t you? Just like with everything else. Obviously that has done wonders for you.

    “The closest I can think of is telling a women who’s having a hard time because of traditional gender roles to go to church for advice and comfort.”

    For some women, that does work, and there can be very understanding and even feminist Christian men and women (even clergy). This is coming from a non-believer. Looks like you live in a cookie-cutter world.

  106. Also, since therapists are evil misandrists, there are several books you can read that teach different strategies for dealing with depression and anxiety, and even changing one’s way of thinking. I’ve learned a lot in discovering the core beliefs I aquired during my dysfunctional childhood and abusive upbringing. Many are written by men, although I’m certain that they’re misandrists too and it’s a plot to teach men that they’re terrible (even though I’m a cis/bi woman and read the exact same material). It is worth a try.Or just give me a link about a female book that bit a man who tried to read it.

  107. dancinbojangles says:

    A quick thought: Much of the objection to PUA and such seems to center on a strange notion of reality. Like, if someone says something spontaneously and due to their own personal temperament, it’s OK. If someone says or does the exact same thing to try and influence a situation, it’s manipulative, regardless of whether or not he is trying to conceal his true temperament or attitude. A couple months ago, I saw a video where the speaker described a tradition his grandmother had: She would hug him tightly once on meeting, then later ask if he could still feel her hug. If not, she would hug him again. I thought it was cute, so I started doing it with my young nieces. They loved it, I loved it, and now they specifically ask for another hug midway through my visits. Yet I started this tradition with the goal of becoming closer to them, and it was successful (in addition to being really damn adorable). How is this different from PUA techniques, absent misogyny? If a person uses social dynamics to influence an outcome, but does not lie or offer violence, why is that wrong?

  108. rmyoun06 says:

    @dancinbojangles:

    I can’t speak for anyone else, but my objection to PUA stuff is twofold:

    (1) It seems to be another predatory self-help scam, just like faddish diets, astrology-based health advice, and that endless parade of business advice books about how Sun Tzu can get you rich.

    (2) Judging from PUA blogs, many of the specific things it tells people to do are cruel.

    I don’t have any general objection to people “us[ing] social dynamics to influence an outcome” – that’s what we all do when we ask for a favor with a smile. I object only to the specific ways in which PUA is marketed to lonely or self-loathing men, and the specific ways in which it tells men to behave.

  109. dancinbojangles says:

    @rmyoun06: I totally agree that the current PUA paradigm falls into exactly the traps you describe. The problem I find with many criticisms is that they imply that the concept itself is axiomatically flawed or misogynistic, and I disagree. Certainly, your reasonable criticisms are not included in those.

  110. daelyte says:

    @Colette Wedding:
    I was going to write a long rebuttal but the further I got the more clear it became that you have me all wrong, and that perhaps my intentions aren’t clear enough. So I’ll deal with that before proceeding any further, that way it won’t get lost (as much) in the discussion.

    “For another, I address that in the same paragraph which you smugly respond to after breaking down what I say so that everything is out of context.”

    While I may sometimes cut quotes short in my replies, it’s only to reduce my otherwise novel-sized posts. I do read everything at least twice before replying, because sometimes what’s said later even gives me better insight into earlier statements.

    I was trying to make a point that the Success Myth affects men whether it’s real or not, especially those who don’t have enough experience to know better. Just like society telling women not to be open about their desires lest they be seen as pushy sluts, affects them regardless of what men really think.

    “Finally, I’m actually trying to show you that it isn’t personal and suggest you consider that *if* it is the case that you’re being expected to initiate, remember she is feeling gendered-pressure too.”

    Yes, and this is part of the dating issues I think feminist dating advice should cover, where other sources of dating advice largely fail to do so. Men and women don’t know what’s in each other’s heads, even less when we think we do, and a lot of dating problems on both sides are due to this. Rather than expect men to guess what women are thinking, and vice-versa, it would be nice to have some real information.

    For example, when approached by a women, men say that they are more critical of her personality, but aren’t as concerned with her looks. That might be good news for wonderful women who are somewhat outside of society’s beauty standards, or who would rather dress more casually. Also, men worry that if a woman is desperate enough to approach, maybe there’s a reason for it, but I think there’s ways for a woman to get around that and it’s something that deserves more research.

    “Are you discussing with me in good faith, are you trying to avoid (which is understandable and I’m not insulting you; I do that myself), or do you actually want to know?”

    Yes, I am discussing in good faith and I do actually want to know, even if it doesn’t always seem that way.

    @rmyoun06:
    “Therapy may not be a panacea, but PUA stuff – even if successful – most certainly isn’t either. That’s my only point.”

    That I agree with. Incidentally, there’s some overlap, and the two aren’t mutually exclusive. Many PUAs work on their “inner game”, which from what I can tell basically means reading self-help books and doing a lot of introspection, and for some that includes therapy. Not surprisingly, working out their personal issues improves their dating success as well, which in turn motivates them to continue dealing with their issues. Positive feedback loop.

    @dancinbojangles:
    “How is this different from PUA techniques, absent misogyny? If a person uses social dynamics to influence an outcome, but does not lie or offer violence, why is that wrong?”

    Exactly!

    @rmyoun06:
    “It seems to be another predatory self-help scam, just like faddish diets, astrology-based health advice, and that endless parade of business advice books about how Sun Tzu can get you rich.”

    It’s not just one thing. It’s all of the above and more. Some people jumped in who were already dating coaches and matchmakers before the PUA label gained popularity. A lot of ideas in the seduction community are neither scammy nor inherently sexist, but it can be difficult for individuals to separate the good from the bad.

    “Judging from PUA blogs, many of the specific things it tells people to do are cruel.”

    Some of those are controversial even within that community. Notably Roissy, who seems oddly proud of being known as a sexist right-wing douche. Mystery mostly has a reputation for being weird, which I guess goes well the fuzzy hat. The list goes on.

    The forums are more diverse than the blogs, with a lot more guys that don’t feel the need to speak from a podium. The ones I like best are frequented by a few women as well, who provide much-needed insight into the female’s point of view instead of the sometimes ridiculous theories inexperienced men come up with. More of that is needed, I think.

    “I don’t have any general objection to people “using social dynamics to influence an outcome” – that’s what we all do when we ask for a favor with a smile. I object only to the specific ways in which PUA is marketed to lonely or self-loathing men, and the specific ways in which it tells men to behave.”

    Which is why some here are calling attention to the need for a source of gender-egalitarian solutions to the same problem. Old sexist dating advice based on traditional gender roles isn’t working as well as it used to, and both men and women are struggling to adapt.

    Men don’t know what they could offer women other than financial stability. Yet women didn’t all suddenly turn into lesbians the moment they could afford to live independently did they? Men need to know how to be more attractive to women, and not just based on porn or Cosmo.

    Women now have more freedom to approach men but (as Colette pointed out) are facing similar problems such as approach anxiety, fear of rejection, and a few of their own based on lingering gender expectations (eg virgin/whore dichotomy) and safety concerns (being alone with a man can be dangerous).

    There’s an opportunity here for feminism to help reshape gender dynamics in a major and positive way.

  111. no more mr nice guy says:

    @rmyoun06 :

    It seems to be another predatory self-help scam, just like faddish diets, astrology-based health advice, and that endless parade of business advice books about how Sun Tzu can get you rich.

    I agree. But what’s worst is that many guys who are scammed by PUAs and are a failure with women just want other guys to fail like them. A few years ago, there was a blog were a guy was saying he was trying to pick up women in hardware stores and other public places and he was failing miserably. The blog was full of PUAs and they were encouraging him to continue – one of them told him that women want to be picked up in public places by PUAs.

  112. Daelyte,

    Understandable, but it creates a bigger problem once I’m forced to go back and explain something else in addition to replying to your response that doesn’t even, in context, make much sense. Further whether you wanted to condense your posts or not, it doesn’t prevent you from reading what I said in context to begin with. Even when you, now, have explained why you replied with what you did, it doesn’t make sense in context.

    Flyingkal,

    I didn’t find your post harsh one bit! As for the content, first I want to say I understand and can empathize. I’ve had self-worth issues and problems understanding my own wants and feelings since childhood. I don’t always pick up on or perform social cues/conventions well whereas I pick up on emotional cues and “see” into people on a phenomenal scale yet always “doubt” myself to my own detriment (it’s a mess). My immediate response to instances where I wanted to connect with a group of people that never seemed to invite me to regular outings or tv show viewings was that it must mean I’m terrible. But then one day I realized, wait, I HATE that show! And I can’t sit there drinking Margarita’s and making small-talk for hours, especially not with a group of women who’ve been friends with highschool! They know that because I never sit there and make small-talk with them, lol.

    When I stepped back, I realized in most cases there were so many explanations of how it was *not* all about me. They knew I didn’t like that tv show, they knew we didn’t have much in common on that level, and I just met them a few years ago – of course this makes sense!

    You say these women are five to 10 years your senior – do you think perhaps they’re just looking for fun and can pick up on how much being picked to dance may mean to you? Is it clear in any way that you don’t have much in common with the men that are being picked? Have you even considered that a couple actually have taken a shine to you and are too nervous? Is it possible you’re simply exaggerating here? Have you tried going to another place (something more your scene, perhaps)? I’ve found that once I “stepped out” of my shell a little bit and was able to feel joy again, I’ve interacted more with members of that group and actually found that in some ways I connect with one or two more than they connect with each other. I’m not trying to preach, I’m just finding that the only way I can try to help with what is clearly hurting you is sharing these experiences.

  113. daelyte says:

    @Colette Wedding:
    I’ll try to be nicer this time, with maybe a touch of levity.

    “What it doesn’t do is determine what an individual woman is going decide about an individual man.”

    It doesn’t, but it narrows the dating pool for some men, and shows to what extent men and women’s impression of normal dating dynamics is still gendered. My point was that I think it’s one more subject gender movements should have something to say about.

    Another article regarding the costs of dating for men:
    http://gothamist.com/2011/06/12/new_yorkers_dont_spend_enough_on_fi.php

    “Ahhh, now you’re talking about men already in a relationship. Did you ever think that since he has a partner and has settled down, funds can be put toward travel?”

    I’m sorry, I was confusing travel with transportation. A single man without a car is widely perceived to be a “loser”, whereas a single woman isn’t under as much pressure to spend on expensive personal transportation. Car-related expenses take a big chunk out of single men’s budget.

    “See, you’re just responding with the first thing that pops into your head without reading what I say in context.”

    I did read the context. I’m wondering how many women don’t approach because of how they think men would react, and what do men actually think of women approaching.

    Other than a few informal polls, I’ve found this survey from australia:
    http://blogs.news.com.au/womenonmen/index.php/news/comments/do_men_want_to_be_asked_out_by_women

    This might also be of interest concerning clear communication of intent:
    http://www.enotalone.com/relationships/19474.html

    “What the hell does that link about a woman biting her husband for refusing sex have to do with the issues women may face when being the initiators?”

    You said women risk “possibly encountering men that throw a fit when they didn’t get the sex they expected”, and I was pointing out that such things can happen to men too. I suspect that’s just the tip of the iceberg, since society says men aren’t supposed to turn down sex, and aren’t supposed to feel threatened by women, so how many men aren’t reporting it?

    “Yet that women are generally conditioned to be nurturing and warned in different ways throughout life to not be a bitch and find themselves punished for it when they are is constantly ignored here when the subject of turning down advances comes up. It is always simply about how horrible the woman is and how undeniably bad the man and he alone has it.”

    I didn’t get that impression at all. Yes, turning men down is hard, harder than it should be, and some men don’t get that. However, men have issues of their own when turning down women’s advances, which aren’t frequently addressed because it’s so rare.

    “Think about the position she is put in when you decide to engage in pick-ups and then maybe you’ll understand that she has feelings, wants, and needs too and it wouldn’t burn so badly.”

    I think the main reason it burns is not due to lack of empathy. Rejection burns because approaching is hard, and getting nowhere after many approaches is really frustrating. Can you imagine working up the courage to approach dozens of men, only to get rejected EVERY time?

    “Well you already have your mind made up, don’t you? Just like with everything else. Obviously that has done wonders for you.”

    I’ll assume you’re just understandably frustrated by this point. I was listing some of the reasons I’ve seen for why men who had bad experiences with women are sometimes reluctant about therapy even when they do need it (sometimes very badly).

    “there are several books you can read that teach different strategies for dealing with depression and anxiety, and even changing one’s way of thinking. I’ve learned a lot in discovering the core beliefs I acquired during my dysfunctional childhood and abusive upbringing.”

    That is a much better solution. Books are more affordable (especially at the library), easy to put one down if it’s not helping, and can provide a wide variety of insights. I imagine they’re a low stress option for people with social anxiety especially.

    I don’t personally suffer from depression or anxiety (at all), but would you mind recommending a few specific titles for those who do?

    “You say these women are five to 10 years your senior – do you think perhaps they’re just looking for fun and can pick up on how much being picked to dance may mean to you?”

    Wow, I would not have thought of that. That would make a lot of sense. This is exactly why a co-ed “pickup” site is badly needed.

    Flyingkal:
    “A woman, maybe 5-10 years our senior, comes up and asks if anyone wants to dance. She asks 2 or 3 guys before one says Sure, why not? go up and dance 10 minutes and then comes back to the table. This is repeated a couple of times during the evening, since all of us are pretty good dancers.”

    Maybe your body language was wrong. Did you make eye contact and smile at her? Approachable body language is very important, and looking unapproachable could explain your being continuously overlooked. (This advice is based on FPUA “girl game”, for women trying to improve their odds of being approached.)

    You say she asked 2 or 3 guys before one accepted, could you have volunteered before being asked? You already knew she wanted to dance, so the odds of rejection were much lower than some random woman drinking and chatting with her friends.

  114. jpsord says:

    If I may pose a couple questions:

    1. Has anyone ever actually met a man who held the belief that women who take on the initiator role are sluts? If you have, could you please (to the best of your ability) offer up the date of your meeting this man, and his age as of that date.

    2. In which set of circumstances – found in modern society – is it possible for a hypothetical person who does hold this belief to shame women they see as slutty?

    I ask the first question because I honestly have never met a man who expressed anything less than great joy at the idea of women taking on the role of initiator more often. I also don’t know any man who sees this role that’s been foisted upon them as something other than a burden. These experiences greatly conflict with the equivalency being drawn here between men being pushed into the initiator role and women being pushed out of it. Whenever I talk about this with women, they never frame their general passivity in the dating paradigm as being caused by a fear of anyone seeing them negatively in any fashion, instead framing it as either “men are supposed to do the asking out, because men are supposed to do the asking out” (i.e. if I press for further reasoning, they have none and just accept it as a self-evident truth), or “asking someone out opens my self-esteem up to being hurt, and why should I do that when men do the asking out?” I’m paraphrasing in both cases, obviously, but these are the general sentiments I come across. I’ve literally never met a woman who expressed fear of being considered a slut for asking a guy out.

    I ask the second question because, even if there is some non-insignificant portion of the population that believes women who initiate are sluts, I don’t see how those people could spin that belief into any kind of real-world consequence for initiating women. Unless one is some sort of celebrity, we all walk around veiled by a shroud of relative anonymity. If a woman asks a guy out, who then believes her to be a slut for having done as much, what exactly is going to happen beyond maybe a dirty look to go along with the rejection? The social world we exist in these days (for most people in developed countries, at least) is much too large for the existence of the kind of shaming this fear seems to be predicated on. I’m pretty sure I could go to the nearest mall in a bonnet, t-shirt that only covers half my chest, and a diaper with no pants, and run around shouting, “I’m [full name], and right now I’m pooping in this diaper!” without experiencing any consequences that extended beyond the duration of the embarrassing act itself.

    But maybe I’m missing something. Always a possibility.

  115. Gaius says:

    @Doug S.

    You’ve been curious about a new dating service that has been promising, and apparently delivering, the seemingly impossible: nearly everyone that has passed their screening, which has been most applicants, has ended up married within a year, and all of those marriages appear to be happy ones.

    When you investigate, you discover their secret: they’ve got magic love potions that actually work, and they offer the clients the chance to share one with someone that seem to be compatible. Would you want their service?

    Absofuckinglutely not.

    I’m not interested in zombies. I’m interested in partners with agency, who choose me of their own free will.

    Please note that my answer is emphatic, not harsh. I’m extraordinarily glad you posted it!

  116. Gaius says:

    @all:
    My gut reaction to PUAs: they seem childish and reactionary.

  117. daelyte says:

    @Doug S.:
    “You’ve been curious about a new dating service that has been promising, and apparently delivering, the seemingly impossible: nearly everyone that has passed their screening, which has been most applicants, has ended up married within a year, and all of those marriages appear to be happy ones.

    When you investigate, you discover their secret: they’ve got magic love potions that actually work, and they offer the clients the chance to share one with someone that seem to be compatible. Would you want their service?”

    Sounds suspiciously rape-y. Is this compatible person going into this willingly? If so, the love potion is probably overkill in my case. I’m easy to please.

    @Gaius:
    They’re a diverse bunch. Some of them wear makeup and high heels, that doesn’t sound very conservative to me.

  118. Gaius says:

    @Daelyte:
    Like I said, it’s my gut reaction. I have no facts or evidence to back it up, nor is it necessarily even valid as a hypothesis.

    That said, I didn’t say they were conservative; I said they seemed childish and reactionary. =)

  119. daelyte says:

    @Gaius:
    Look up reactionary.

    1. Characterized by reaction, especially opposition to progress or liberalism; extremely conservative.

    2. An opponent of progress or liberalism; an extreme conservative.

    3. Opposed to change; urging a return to a previous state. Very conservative.

    4. Opposed to change, progress, or reform; extremely conservative.

    If it’s not what you meant, you may want to rephrase that.

  120. rmyoun06 says:

    @jpsord:

    I’d say that the majority of the people I grew up with – male and female both – thought women who pursued sex were sluts and were bad people. If you want, I can try to remember the dates that I met all of these different people, but it’s gonna be mostly estimates from the 1990s!

    The real world consequences of a woman getting identified as a slut in the community I’m talking about consist mostly of losing respect and social status. People can be meaner to sluts, and the pool of men willing to actually date women who have been identified as sluts is much, much smaller.

    Honestly, I’m kind of shocked that you’ve never met a man who thinks women initiating sex with a man is a slut. I think it’s probably the majority of men that I know.

  121. Gaius says:

    @jpsord:

    I’m kind of shocked that you’ve never met a man who thinks women initiating sex with a man is a slut.

    I’ve met such men, but I can’t say I’ve ever done more than that. I try to avoid them as much as possible and exclude them from my social life.

    @Daelyte:
    Most PUAs I’ve met have been reactionary in the sense that they view their behavior as a kind of fuck-you to what they perceive as feminism.

    Granted: what they perceive as feminism may NOT, in fact, be feminist. For instance, owing to Ozy’s law, I’m of the opinion that the only valid form of feminism is egalitarianism, as sexism of any kind cuts both ways.

    That said: a lot of PUAs I’ve met seem to hold a “feminists are uptight, ball-busting [insert gendered insult of your choice]” and view their behavior as a way of “sticking it to the [woman].”

    Hence, they are reactionary.

  122. Daelyte,

    “It doesn’t, but it narrows the dating pool for some men, and shows to what extent men and women’s impression of normal dating dynamics is still gendered.”

    Except your example came from dating site statistics.

    “I’m sorry, I was confusing travel with transportation. A single man without a car is widely perceived to be a “loser”, whereas a single woman isn’t under as much pressure to spend on expensive personal transportation. Car-related expenses take a big chunk out of single men’s budget.”

    In other words this entire time “travel” should have been “transportation”? Thus cohabitating men spend more on *transportation* than single men whereas that isn’t true for single versus cohabitating women, correct? I’ve lost the original link at this point but I’m going off of what you said.

    “I did read the context. I’m wondering how many women don’t approach because of how they think men would react, and what do men actually think of women approaching.”

    No, you’re not, because in context of the discussion it must be taken for granted that the het woman is adhering to traditional gender roles in order to make the situations as similar as possible and thus be fair to flyingkal. Whether she “assumed” or not is moot yet you demanded a completely different discussion than the one about considering the wants/needs of the other person.

    “You said women risk “possibly encountering men that throw a fit when they didn’t get the sex they expected”, and I was pointing out that such things can happen to men too. I suspect that’s just the tip of the iceberg, since society says men aren’t supposed to turn down sex, and aren’t supposed to feel threatened by women, so how many men aren’t reporting it?”

    Once again, what the hell does this have to do with the issues women may face when being the initiators?

    “I didn’t get that impression at all. Yes, turning men down is hard, harder than it should be, and some men don’t get that. However, men have issues of their own when turning down women’s advances, which aren’t frequently addressed because it’s so rare.”

    You do not get the impression that posters *on this site* almost exclusively neglect to consider that women on the receiving end of pick-ups experience negativity?
    “Can you imagine working up the courage to approach dozens of men, only to get rejected EVERY time?”

    Not always in the way you’re probably thinking it happens; rejection can come in many forms, not just the narrative laid out here for het men. I can also imagine becoming so jaded by negative experiences with men after approaching that I blame myself for his behavior and no longer initiate and then think the men I want aren’t approaching me because something is wrong with me. I can also imagine the anxiety and guilt from rejecting dozens of men approaching me (plus embarrassment if they react in a hostile manner) when I’d rather be left alone. This is particularly hard for me since I’m very much a “care-taker,” but I digress. However I am skeptical that for let’s say every 10 men that approach one dozen women, more than a quarter of them must “work up the courage” one dozen times.

    As for books, ‘Peaceful Mind: Using Mindfulness and Cognitive Behavioral Psychology to Overcome Depression’ (John R. McQuaid, Paula E. Carmona) is one. I’m logged in from work and can’t remember the specific name of another but it deals with anxiety and depression mixed.

  123. no more mr nice guy says:

    @Gaius :

    That said: a lot of PUAs I’ve met seem to hold a “feminists are uptight, ball-busting [insert gendered insult of your choice]” and view their behavior as a way of “sticking it to the [woman].”

    Lots of these guys blame on feminism all the problems they have with women and they become PUAs to get their revenge on women. And becoming PUAs doesn’t solve their problems with women or their problems of depression and loneliness, so they just become angrier.

  124. daelyte says:

    @Colette Wedding:

    Concerning the Success Object thing:
    http://articles.businessinsider.com/2011-09-28/news/30211835_1_match-com-patti-stanger-pamela-j-smock
    http://blog.match.com/2012/02/02/introducing-the-singles-in-america-study-by-match-com/
    http://blog.match.com/2012/02/10/money-cant-buy-love-singles-on-the-economy-by-dr-helen-fisher/

    http://www.city-data.com/forum/relationships/1419943-how-do-unemployed-men-get-women-3.html

    This seems to be where I got that 80%… but the original article is in spanish:
    http://www.pagef30.com/2011/01/survey-68-of-men-would-date-unemployed.html

    “In other words this entire time “travel” should have been “transportation”? Thus cohabitating men spend more on *transportation* than single men whereas that isn’t true for single versus cohabitating women, correct? I’ve lost the original link at this point but I’m going off of what you said.”

    Not quite, cohabitating men do spend more on travel not transportation. In fact, single men spend more on their cars than married men.

    http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1607265,00.html
    http://www.cbs.nl/en-GB/menu/themas/inkomen-bestedingen/publicaties/artikelen/archief/2009/2009-2993-wm.htm

    Came across this interesting link as well:
    http://www.driving.ca/cars+send+signals+women/4987523/story.html.

    “No, you’re not, because in context of the discussion it must be taken for granted that the het woman is adhering to traditional gender roles in order to make the situations as similar as possible and thus be fair to flyingkal. Whether she “assumed” or not is moot yet you demanded a completely different discussion than the one about considering the wants/needs of the other person.”

    I don’t understand this. I’m not sure we’re even talking about the same thing. I was talking about your friend who thinks “she must be passive or be a slut and get laughed at”, and wondering how many men vs women think this way, because I surely don’t.

    “Once again, what the hell does this have to do with the issues women may face when being the initiators?”

    You brought up an issue that affects women, and it reminded me that some men may also encounter similar problems. In short: “no seriously, what about teh menz”. Men may be bigger and stronger, but they’re under more societal pressure to accept (even accused of being gay, with homophobic beatings to follow), and can ironically be accused of rape for NOT having sex.

    “You do not get the impression that posters *on this site* almost exclusively neglect to consider that women on the receiving end of pick-ups experience negativity?”

    No, if anything I get the impression that many here still consider turning down approaches to be a greater burden than approaching. So long as they’re not the ones who have to approach, of course, in which case it’s an unsurmountable problem until society changes to accommodate them. I didn’t really expect otherwise given the large number of feminists involved, who are generally more aware of women’s problems.

    “However I am skeptical that for let’s say every 10 men that approach one dozen women, more than a quarter of them must “work up the courage” one dozen times.”

    I’m not sure I understand this question. Are you asking how many men experience “approach anxiety”, and whether they have it every time? I haven’t found any studies, but the answer seems to be every man to some degree, and for most it’s every time. In particular about 95% of men who go to PUA seminars list approach anxiety as the primary reason.

    A few random articles about the subject:
    http://ezinearticles.com/?What-Do-Women-Think-About-Approach-Anxiety?&id=1399502

    Is Your Fear Of Rejection Holding You Back?


    http://mr-m1.hubpages.com/hub/How-to-Eradicate-Approach-Anxiety-When-You-Meet-New-Women
    http://adjourned.wordpress.com/2011/02/02/the-truth-about-approach-anxiety/
    http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=why-interacting-with-woman-leave-man-cognitively-impaired&WT.mc_id=SA_syn_HuffPo

  125. Gaius says:

    @Colette, Daelyte:

    Um, I know it’s not my place to comment, and I have no authority to intervene in any sense, but it almost seems like (SEEMS LIKE) you’re playing Oppression Olympics.

    Could it be possible that, statistics aside, both men AND women are shafted by the dating game as it exists in our culture, and that the trying to assess how BADLY either group is shafted is kind’ve ignoring the fundamental problem of men AND women being shafted by double-standards and inegalitarian starting conditions?

    I only mention this because I find myself agreeing with BOTH parties, and not on the basis of statistics.

    Rather: as a thinking, observing person, I have seen women victimized by the circumstances described by Colette.

    Likewise, I have seen MEN victimized by the circumstances described by Daelyte.

    And, once again, I, PERSONALLY, have found myself in the double bind of being forced to cross the room, but being simultaneously damned for my interest.

    I think the mere fact that otherwise-decent human beings (and both Colette and Daelyte certainly appear to be decent human beings) feel pressured and hurt by social demands is sufficient evidence that the dating game hurts ALL participants, male or female, in different ways.

    Just my two cents. Feel free to continue the tennis match. =)

  126. daelyte says:

    @Gaius:
    I was trying to write a long, clever reply to your post but could only come up with one word.

    Yes.

  127. dancinbojangles says:

    @gaius, I think you deserve a slow clap for that.

    clap

    clap

    clap

  128. “Not quite, cohabitating men do spend more on travel not transportation. In fact, single men spend more on their cars than married men.”

    So then my original point still stands, and it makes sense that single men spend more on transportation than married men.

    “I don’t understand this. I’m not sure we’re even talking about the same thing. I was talking about your friend who thinks “she must be passive or be a slut and get laughed at”, and wondering how many men vs women think this way, because I surely don’t”

    You don’t understand it because you refused to read it in context. In this case my friend is hypothetical. I was using the hypothetical to illustrate a point about considering the needs of the woman with all else the same. That is what I meant about reading one sentence and responding to the first thing that pops into your head.

    “You brought up an issue that affects women, and it reminded me that some men may also encounter similar problems. In short: “no seriously, what about teh menz”.”

    So here we go with that context thing again. Do you even know why I said what I did originally?

    “No, if anything I get the impression that many here still consider turning down approaches to be a greater burden than approaching.”

    Please point me to instances where posters complain about having to turn down women that approach them and then we can compare that to those complaining about women not approaching them and thus have bad men have it.
    “I’m not sure I understand this question. Are you asking how many men experience “approach anxiety”, and whether they have it every time?”

    I didn’t ask a question, I made a statement expressing my skepticism. I doubt a significant amount have any more than the average amount of anxiety by the time they’re approaching the last of the dozen women.

    “In particular about 95% of men who go to PUA seminars list approach anxiety as the primary reason.”

    Of course they would though. I’m certain some 95% of those visiting wedding venue websites are already in the planning stages of marriage as well.

    Gaius,

    “Could it be possible that, statistics aside, both men AND women are shafted by the dating game as it exists in our culture, and that the trying to assess how BADLY either group is shafted is kind’ve ignoring the fundamental problem of men AND women being shafted by double-standards and inegalitarian starting conditions?”

    That is precisely and demonstrably my point. Unfortunately each time I note the importance of remembering that the other person (in this case the het woman) doesn’t have it any better, and that doing so can probably help with the man’s anxiety too, Daelyte ignores it and attempts to “one-up” with something unrelated. Given that s/he continually and rudely ignores this but chooses to remain engaged, I think s/he particularly could use the insight.

  129. dancinbojangles says:

    @Colette Wedding: Get yourself some self-awareness, you’re doing the exact same thing. That was Gaius’ point. “not[ing] the importance of remembering the other person” could just as easily be applied to daelyte’s posts. Either way though, time to disengage, don’t you think?

  130. dancinbojangles,

    If posters that regularly complain about their own social anxiety and the rejection they/other het men face being the initiators expressed an understanding that its possible the person on the receiving end do as well, I’d agree with you. If I hadn’t made suggestions to flyingkal that have helped me in similar situations, I’d agree with you. If I hadn’t suggested some books that go deeper than PUA “solutions” (who AFAIC exploit men with mental health issues), then I’d agree with you. I’ve gone beyond acknowledging the pain and negativity het men face without trying to “one-up” or “win” with Daelyte. Acknowledging the issues of the other person doesn’t negate one’s own and in fact may help once one sees that it ISN’T about one’s self-worth. You can feel free to disengage if you so choose.

  131. Wow! First time I’ve seen this site. I’ve been doing a lot of thinking lately about how feminism often presents as an authoritarian female domination movement that uses social pressure to force behavioral compliance, rather than the equality movement that it often bills itself as, and how I choose to accept or interact with self-identifying feminists who attempt to use that social pressure on me, possibly without being consciously aware of what they’re doing (in fact, I recently lost a friend this way, not that we were actually very close).

    Anyway.

    From my personal experience with depression and dating woes, outwardly-directed hate and anger are much more pleasant and energizing emotional states than inwardly-directed hate and despair. I would far rather choose to believe that the reason I can’t find a date or get laid is because women are shallow and materialistic, stupid, or even (against all reason) deliberately malicious than that it’s because I’m a boring loser who doesn’t deserve love, sex, or companionship… and when you’re sufficiently frustrated and tortured, reasonable explanations like “dating is a numbers game” and “you just haven’t met the right person yet” simply aren’t satisfying – never mind patronizing ones like “you’re too desperate” or “just be more confident, bro!”

    It’s also been my experience that men are given extremely contradictory, even paradoxical, messages about how to meet women. We’re told that (some) women actually want sex, we’re told that compliments often work well, we’re told that women want men to be more aggressive, confident, and sexual, and that they wish men would be honest about their intentions. And then we’re told that women don’t want to be complimented on their looks because it objectifies them or creeps them out, that they’re so sick of being hit on that they have to go out to places where men can’t find them, or not go out at all, that the the vast majority of post-school environments are inappropriate places to approach women, we’re told things like “all sex is rape” (though usually not in so few words, or so directly), and we’re told that anyone who propositions a strange woman (in the interests of skipping all the tedious small talk, perhaps) is a disgusting pig. In the event that we do actually get a date, the woman wants to be ravished, but only so long as explicit verbal consent is continually sought and given, because otherwise you’re a creepy groper (at best) or even a rapist. And many of the negative messages, the “don’t do this” stuff, seem to come from feminism.

    I think that this isn’t a problem for a guy with good social skills (reading body language and facial cues, determining appropriate behavior, making small talk and being generally approachable/warm and charming). I don’t have good social skills, though; for me, dating or even approaching women was always hopelessly confusing (and terrifying, since I also have some kind of social anxiety-like problem). But at the same time, I have a (perhaps irrational) loathing for putting on any kind of act or using any kind of social/emotional manipulation to bias people toward me, so I could never take PUA stuff seriously (besides which a lot of it is obviously hogwash).

    At this point, dating advice would be rather worthless to me, as I could in no event practice it anyway (I somehow stumbled into an LTR, we’re monogamous, and I really don’t want to break up just to see if I can successfully date/proposition other women) – but I would still really like to see some kind of dating resource that takes socially-disadvantaged guys (and girls) into consideration and offers more useful advice than the usual body language primers (which are often wrong anyway, or maybe I just don’t read people correctly) or patronizing platitudes like “be more confident!” Like, how do you approach a strange woman and tell her “hi, I think you’re hot/wonderful, and I would like to fuck/date you” without spending a long time forming a platonic relationship, using stupid tricks to emotionally manipulate her, or coming off as creepy/scary/offensive?

Leave a comment