Who cares?

[Stuck_in_a_RUT!]

I'm 21 years old and have never held hands with a girl, hugged a girl, kissed a girl, or slept with a girl. I'm a good looking guy, athletic and all that and it's not that I couldn't have done all of the above I just didn't want to. I'm interested in women and everything, but I HATE them. In my entire life I have never met an interesting women, or at least what I find interesting.

Plus, I always think that I'm going to get screwed over in the end so I don't even bother. My parents got divorced when I was about 11, and every single women that I have met since then is either a raging slut, completely conceited, a social status whore (won't date you because your not socially acceptable enough- happened to a friend of mine), or wants to change you in some drastic way like your some kind of F*$king after school project or something.

I over analyze anything and everything. If a women does something to a friend of mine I dissect it and file it away as just another reminder of what to expect. Even in my own experience women are two faced. I'll get a girls number and hear how interested they are in me from their friends and when I call they don't answer and I come to find out later that they already have a boyfriend. Or I'll take them on a date and all they do is talk about themselves: I'll ask them what their doing this weekend, they respond, there's an awkward pause, and then I reply that I'm also not doing anything this weekend. It's like I'm talking to myself or something. Even at my shit job woman will flirt with me and then five seconds later go and make out with their boyfriends right in front of me. It's gotten so bad that any women that even approaches me with a smile I snub like nobody's business.

Anyway, I've grown tired of being played with,and prefer now to just put women in their place. I no longer have feelings for them at all, and am completely numb to their presence. I am alone and that's how I want it.

[AznHisoka]

Go get yourself a foreign girl. I hear they're less maintenance.

[goingthroughQLC]

I hate them too

but you can't live without them unfortunately :(

[larry52]

I don't think I share your level of hate, but I agree that bothering to interact with women in a non-platonic situation is a waste of time. I've just accepted that's it's not even worth the hassle for all the reasons you mention and more.

Alone is the way to go.

[newdate]

Wow, you guys are cynical!

[kmv2005]

Wow, you guys are cynical!

I was thinking scary. I'm sorry you've had such bad experiences, but that's not a reason to hate all women. Maybe you should see a therapist to deal with your anger issues before you become violent.

[Bocheezu]

I was thinking scary. I'm sorry you've had such bad experiences, but that's not a reason to hate all women. Maybe you should see a therapist to deal with your anger issues before you become violent.

It's not scary. There's millions of guys that think the same way and you probaby see them every day. People on this board see the word "hate" and just automatically think something's wrong, therapy is needed, you have anger issues, check your testosterone at the door, please don't kill me, whatever. He's just a regular dude that has a tough time with the ladies and doesn't care enough to do anything extraordinary about it.

I felt pretty much the same at that age, mostly because

1. Women jerked me around,
2. Made absolutely zero sense with what they deemed "attractive," and
3. Had nothing in common with me and had no common interests

It made me really depressed in college. At that time, I analyzed the situation, and realized that the root cause of every feeling of self-doubt and depression was directly linked to women. So I eliminated women from the equation. Didn't care, didn't show interest, didn't make an effort, and didn't try to analyze whether they're interested in me. I knew whatever effort I made would be a waste because they would just fawn over the cute guys that didn't give two shits about them, and whatever interest they showed in me was just a bullshit facade used in an attempt to try and manipulate me. Problem solved, I wasn't depressed anymore.

[Tayl405]

yeah, but considering as about half the population is female, that's a pretty broad generalization. :rolleyes:

[winneythepooh7]

yeah, but considering as about half the population is female, that's a pretty broad generalization. :rolleyes:

What's wrong with broad generalizations though, especially on this board:rolleyes:. ;).

[Bocheezu]

yeah, but considering as about half the population is female, that's a pretty broad generalization. :rolleyes:

To be fair, the women I know that are late 20s/early 30s are a lot more mature and make a lot more sense than they did then; they just happen to all be married. The college years were a weird time and it sort of surprised me how few women cared about serious relationships. I just never thought that way at all and serious relationships were all I wanted. If I knew then that relationship qualities like hard work/determination and future financial security had no value, and hook-up qualities like apperance and fun factor were all that mattered, I would have cared a lot less than I initially did. It just didn't make any sense at the time.

[pawnstar3]

To be fair, the women I know that are late 20s/early 30s are a lot more mature and make a lot more sense than they did then; they just happen to all be married. The college years were a weird time and it sort of surprised me how few women cared about serious relationships. I just never thought that way at all and serious relationships were all I wanted. If I knew then that relationship qualities like hard work/determination and future financial security had no value, and hook-up qualities like apperance and fun factor were all that mattered, I would have cared a lot less than I initially did. It just didn't make any sense at the time.

To be honest, i was also shocked at how women in HS, college, and now in their 20s and 30s even are still into casual hookups and not serious relationships- i think it's the whole sex and the city type of lifestyle that they think is cool- either way, it's so hard to find a girl worthy of dating - granted there are guys that are like this too but the amount of women like this is scary nowadays

[gemma-dahl]

If a man ever said the kind of stuff going on in this thread to my face or acted like he had a chip on his shoulder I'd have no interest in dating him, either. I've been jerked around by men. I was sexually harassed by a boss. I was in an abusive relationship. That doesn't mean I'm going to dismiss half of the human race.

If guys are upset because women don't want relationships anymore, either, all I can say is, equal opportunity, baby. Realize that marriage was originally an economic arrangement because women didn't work or weren't allowed to work. Now that they do, more realize marriage is a choice and are having fun, just like men have been for decades. Think of the verbiage used until recently: single men are "bachelors," but single women are "spinsters," and are defective because no man wants them. It's all equal opportunity now.

In fact, a great many people of both genders act like total assholes. We just have different derogatory words for each. Try an experiment sometime...check out how the guys you know act. Are they kind? Considerate? Macho? Gruff? Putting on an act to get laid?

This is from a woman who takes marriage seriously, is partnered with a nice guy (into engineering and programming BTW), and who loathes Sex and the City. Yeah, we're out there, for real.

[Bsig84]

If a man ever said the kind of stuff going on in this thread to my face or acted like he had a chip on his shoulder I'd have no interest in dating him, either. I've been jerked around by men. I was sexually harassed by a boss. I was in an abusive relationship. That doesn't mean I'm going to dismiss half of the human race.

If guys are upset because women don't want relationships anymore, either, all I can say is, equal opportunity, baby. Realize that marriage was originally an economic arrangement because women didn't work or weren't allowed to work. Now that they do, more realize marriage is a choice and are having fun, just like men have been for decades. Think of the verbiage used until recently: single men are "bachelors," but single women are "spinsters," and are defective because no man wants them. It's all equal opportunity now.

In fact, a great many people of both genders act like total assholes. We just have different derogatory words for each. Try an experiment sometime...check out how the guys you know act. Are they kind? Considerate? Macho? Gruff? Putting on an act to get laid?

This is from a woman who takes marriage seriously, is partnered with a nice guy (into engineering and programming BTW), and who loathes Sex and the City. Yeah, we're out there, for real.

Amen sister! I have had a ton of horrible experiences with men too. I have been sexually harrassed and treated like garbage by guys I really cared about. I had guys use me just to try to get laid. However, I don't walk around hating all men, just those that treat me poorly. I'm pretty sure if I let those bad experiences influence my view of all men, I never would have met my fiance who is a genuinely nice guy. Of if I had met him, I wouldn't have been trusting and open to getting to know him.

[Tayl405]

If a man ever said the kind of stuff going on in this thread to my face or acted like he had a chip on his shoulder I'd have no interest in dating him, either. I've been jerked around by men. I was sexually harassed by a boss. I was in an abusive relationship. That doesn't mean I'm going to dismiss half of the human race.

If guys are upset because women don't want relationships anymore, either, all I can say is, equal opportunity, baby. Realize that marriage was originally an economic arrangement because women didn't work or weren't allowed to work. Now that they do, more realize marriage is a choice and are having fun, just like men have been for decades. Think of the verbiage used until recently: single men are "bachelors," but single women are "spinsters," and are defective because no man wants them. It's all equal opportunity now.

In fact, a great many people of both genders act like total assholes. We just have different derogatory words for each. Try an experiment sometime...check out how the guys you know act. Are they kind? Considerate? Macho? Gruff? Putting on an act to get laid?

This is from a woman who takes marriage seriously, is partnered with a nice guy (into engineering and programming BTW), and who loathes Sex and the City. Yeah, we're out there, for real.

Well said!!!

[KCboy]

Realize that marriage was originally an economic arrangement because women didn't work or weren't allowed to work. Now that they do,

women may work now, but many of them (a majority IMO) still expect men to provide them with “financial security” (i.e. pay for everything). that hasn’t changed, and I doubt it will - women may beat the drum for total equality, but you can’t pry the perks from their tiny little fingers with a crowbar.

[Tac-Tics]

OP, your attitude sucks. Everyone is allowed cynical moments, but if that is your average outlook, it's not surprising you haven't had so much success.

Women are just people. They aren't two-faced. They don't have it "in" for you. Some might act conceited. Some might break your heart or make you feel insecure about your social standing. But never get the idea that you are somehow morally above them. You certainly are not.

You seem to have found that you don't like the rules of the game you're playing. But those are the only rules there are.

Dating is all about social dynamics. Most of life is going to be just like it, so it only makes sense to accept the bullshit that comes along with it.

Admit your strategy isn't working.
Learn about strategies that do.
Work at it until you stop failing at it.

[DaneCA]

If a man ever said the kind of stuff going on in this thread to my face or acted like he had a chip on his shoulder I'd have no interest in dating him, either. I've been jerked around by men. I was sexually harassed by a boss. I was in an abusive relationship. That doesn't mean I'm going to dismiss half of the human race.

If guys are upset because women don't want relationships anymore, either, all I can say is, equal opportunity, baby. Realize that marriage was originally an economic arrangement because women didn't work or weren't allowed to work. Now that they do, more realize marriage is a choice and are having fun, just like men have been for decades. Think of the verbiage used until recently: single men are "bachelors," but single women are "spinsters," and are defective because no man wants them. It's all equal opportunity now.

In fact, a great many people of both genders act like total assholes. We just have different derogatory words for each. Try an experiment sometime...check out how the guys you know act. Are they kind? Considerate? Macho? Gruff? Putting on an act to get laid?

This is from a woman who takes marriage seriously, is partnered with a nice guy (into engineering and programming BTW), and who loathes Sex and the City. Yeah, we're out there, for real.

I totally agree. Honestly, I'm not surprised you guys have had a difficult time with women. You probably give off the same woman-hating vibe you've written about here, and what girl in her right mind would put up with that? It's easy to act cynical, but it's also easy to blame others where you yourself have fallen short.

[gemma-dahl]

I'm pretty sure if I let those bad experiences influence my view of all men, I never would have met my fiance who is a genuinely nice guy. Of if I had met him, I wouldn't have been trusting and open to getting to know him.

Dating is all about social dynamics. Most of life is going to be just like it, so it only makes sense to accept the bullshit that comes along with it.

It's easy to act cynical, but it's also easy to blame others where you yourself have fallen short.

This is great advice for anyone, male or female.

women may work now, but many of them (a majority IMO) still expect men to provide them with “financial security” (i.e. pay for everything). that hasn’t changed, and I doubt it will - women may beat the drum for total equality, but you can’t pry the perks from their tiny little fingers with a crowbar.

For anyone to whom this applies, try changing who you date. I outearn my partner and I like to pay for things. In other relationships, couples split expenses down the middle. I could equally say "Men get offended whether they pay on a date, or if we offer," based on people who are like that - but that's ridiculous because it puts all men, who deal with dates in all different kinds of ways, into one category.

Personally, I like to go Dutch. Have since college. And I'm sure that offends some people, depending on who you're talking to.

[roulettefanatic]

In other relationships, couples split expenses down the middle. I could equally say "Men get offended whether they pay on a date, or if we offer," based on people who are like that - but that's ridiculous because it puts all men, who deal with dates in all different kinds of ways, into one category.

Personally, I like to go Dutch. Have since college. And I'm sure that offends some people, depending on who you're talking to.

i just had a discussion with my brother about this last night and he made a comment about how his friend is happy on some level not to be in a relationship because it "costs money" and i immediately took offense.....i know exactly what he meant by that.....

i agree that each relationship plays out differently depending on personal preference and who brings in more money however it appears that my brother has settled into a traditional relationship.....from what i've seen from his girlfriend, she prefers it that way, regardless of education or jobs (she works too)......

it could be a cultural thing (we're european) since my cousin did the same thing in his relationship and he is still proud to be the one in the relationship who handles the finances.....he even bragged to my brother and i that he spent hundreds of dollars extra to put his wife in a special room when their child was born.....i personally can't stand the attitude he has about "taking care" of his wife like that but it's not my place to criticize....no offense intended to anyone.....

the point i'm trying to make is that i personally would not be able to be a relationship like that but his wife couldn't be happier.....thus, to group all women into one category is ridiculous.....

in the end people do what works for them.....

[AznHisoka]

I was thinking scary. I'm sorry you've had such bad experiences, but that's not a reason to hate all women. Maybe you should see a therapist to deal with your anger issues before you become violent.

Why is that seeing a therapist is such a common suggestion in these boards? it's not a great idea, considering you're relying on 1 person to make you feel better.

Anyway, OP, women problems are common. We're only human beings, none of us are perfect. We're not dealing with machines here. Just learn to improve your character, and approach relationships with honesty, and directness. Heck, don't even date, just tell them you want a relationship with them, see what happens.

[winneythepooh7]

[QUOTE=AznHisoka;565699]Why is that seeing a therapist is such a common suggestion in these boards? it's not a great idea, considering you're relying on 1 person to make you feel better.

QUOTE]

Speaking only for myself, and being a long-time poster on here having witnessed numerous types of posters, I feel that it's often suggested when people write about, or portray themselves as having serious issues that this site alone can't address. It's often disturbing to see someone like that and know that you can't really do anything to help them. Especially when they are often writing over and over about the same kinds of problems. Not saying this is the OP's case, but it's often a common theme on here.

Therapy is not about "relying on one person to make you feel better". It's about being linked up to resources that can help you feel better, and learning over time how to cope with issues, whether on your own, or leaning on others, all while looking into yourself to see what you can or cannot change. Therapy can also help you to recognize patterns of behaviors, and to change them. Some people also may benefit from seeing a doctor or psychiatrist who can prescribe meds. There's nothing wrong with that, even though there's such a stigma attached to it in our society.

[wordsmith]

For anyone to whom this applies, try changing who you date.

Seriously. If you feel that you're being taken advantage of, and are resentful of the women you date, change your chosen circle. Don't date women who sponge off you. We wouldn't date men who sponge off us.

[KCboy]

For anyone to whom this applies, try changing who you date.

My opinion isn't based on who I have dated (I am comfortable not calling a woman back if they show a "buy me stuff" attitude). Its more based on conversations I have overheard or been a part of.

For instance, two women talking about dating, where one claims that the man should pay for anything and everything throughout the relationship, and a self-proclaimed "liberal independent" woman disagreeing only to the point that he should pay for dates for the first year or so.

This is just one of many. I've been shocked while talking to longtime (previously believed level-headed, rational) friends, to learn that their so-called "independent" attitude also comes with the expectation that the man pay for more, and have actually gone so far as to expect their boyfriends to pay for bills and such.


I agree that some men feel a need to pay for everything and get offended when a woman pays. IMO those guys have self-esteem issues, and only do that to demean women and hold power over them. Typically they see women less as a partner and more as an object that can be bought.

[Agadefe]

My opinion isn't based on who I have dated (I am comfortable not calling a woman back if they show a "buy me stuff" attitude). Its more based on conversations I have overheard or been a part of.


This is so very true. And changing who you date is pretty hard, because there is rarely a certain 'type' of woman that is not like this. Like KCboy, I also hate dating woman who expect me to buy them stuff, or would get offended if I didn't pay for something (outside of the guy paying for the first date if he asked the girl out, I don't think anything else should be expected). But despite this, the amount of normal, rational, laid back women who ARE like this is just astounding. I have good female friends who have stable jobs, yet look down on guys if they don't buy them expensive jewelery for their holidays/birthdays. Again, these are all really normal, non-gold digging girls. And yes, I know this is all anecdotal evidence, but I think that many girls simply expect this of men. It's not that they are looking to marry a rich guy, they were just raised believing that is how things are. This is not all girls by any stretch of the imagination, but it is enough that when you get a few in a row, all with different personalities, it might skew your view a little bit.

To the OP: it sounds like you've had a lot of negative experiences, but assuming the next experience is going to be negative is basically a self-fulfilling prophecy. It is always easier to say "all women suck, I am tired of their games" than to go through the possible heartaches and headaches that are required to find a girl that is not like this. I recommend being friends with girls. That is, go into the whole 'talking to a girl' thing without the expectation that this could go anywhere. Pick girls that you are not attracted to physically. Once you have some female friends, and you get to know them and see that they are good people, maybe your views on women will be different and it will be easier to find ones that you are interested in dating. All women usually also have friends that you may get interested in. This is how I met the majority of women I have been with and I think having friends of the opposite sex is essential in growing socially, but many guys have trouble talking to a girl without automatically thinking about dating.

[KCboy]

I've mentioned this before, but one day I was walking to my car from the gym behind a woman with 2 small kids (girls). The family was very average looking, not glitzy or pretentious or anything. One of the youngest girls said she wanted McDonalds for dinner.

The mom says "well, you can grow up and marry a man who can take you out to eat every night".

I wanted to puke. When I was growing up my parents told me I could get a job to pay for the stuff I want, I was shocked that parents were teaching their daughters this crap.

I know its just one case, but its one of many.

[pawnstar3]

I've mentioned this before, but one day I was walking to my car from the gym behind a woman with 2 small kids (girls). The family was very average looking, not glitzy or pretentious or anything. One of the youngest girls said she wanted McDonalds for dinner.

The mom says "well, you can grow up and marry a man who can take you out to eat every night".

.

And what's also shocking is that a mother wouldn't spend a few dollars to get her kids a meal - just bad parenting all around

But to talk about the whole idea of paying in a relationship - i've always paid for girls when i go out and most of them expected me too - i was a little foolish maybe and sometimes they prob took advantage of my generosity - i've come to learn that a lot of guys make girls split but i feel like in the early phases of dating i prefer paying for a girl- if we enter into a relationship and she has a job, she should pick up the tab sometimes

[Tayl405]

KCBoy - I wonder if your experiences have anything to do with where you live. I don't agree that most women want a man who will pay for things for them, but I do see more if it down my parents' house in SC. I think you'll find more self-sufficient, independent, career-minded women in big cities, esp. up north.

I would never want someone to "take care of me". If my boyfriend has more money than me, I don't mind if he picks up the tab more often, but we each pitch in equally in our own ways. I would feel guilty letting him pay for everything I do. I work, I make money (at least a little bit!), therefore I can pay.

[winneythepooh7]

And what's also shocking is that a mother wouldn't spend a few dollars to get her kids a meal - just bad parenting all around



This is slightly off-topic, but as a parent, the fact that you refuse to buy your child fast food or take them out to dinner is not the sign of a bad parent. At all.

[Tayl405]

This is slightly off-topic, but as a parent, the fact that you refuse to buy your child fast food or take them out to dinner is not the sign of a bad parent. At all.

Haha. Refusing to buy them fast-food is the sign of a good parent, IMO.

[pawnstar3]

This is slightly off-topic, but as a parent, the fact that you refuse to buy your child fast food or take them out to dinner is not the sign of a bad parent. At all.

based on her response, she sounds like a neglectful parent - it's not like she said , "no honey, we'll be eating dinner at home tonight" etc- to reply in the way she did was implying that she wouldn't be getting dinner because it cost money, so if she wanted somene to buy her dinner she would have to get married- terrible parenting

[winneythepooh7]

based on her response, she sounds like a neglectful parent - it's not like she said , "no honey, we'll be eating dinner at home tonight" etc- to reply in the way she did was implying that she wouldn't be getting dinner because it cost money, so if she wanted somene to buy her dinner she would have to get married- terrible parenting

Oh GOOD GOD! You've got to be freakin' kidding me. :rolleyes: This whole thread and what it's turning into is terrible.

[gemma-dahl]

I wanted to puke. When I was growing up my parents told me I could get a job to pay for the stuff I want, I was shocked that parents were teaching their daughters this crap.

I know its just one case, but its one of many.

And it's also anecdotal evidence, and it's also selective filtering. Seriously, I work in a male-dominated field, so I am more attuned to examples of discrimination against women in technology. I'm probably ignoring more examples of women who excel in my field than I think. We all have cognitive biases, and we tend to remember those instances that reinforce those biases. It's subtler than you'd think.

I also know that your opinion isn't based off of who you've dated. That's why I addressed my comment "to anyone." You know, there are people out there who hold a whole range of opinions that are bound to offend someone on this board. Some examples of such opinions include: breastfeeding is the only way to rear a child, women MUST work while they raise kids, you MUST own a home by age 30 or you're a loser, meat is evil, sugar is evil, public healthcare is evil, privatized healthcare is evil, cities suck, suburbs suck. Why not ignore people whose opinions offend you, or better yet, open up a dialog with them? (And I don't mean on here, I mean in real life.)

[gemma-dahl]

Oh GOOD GOD! You've got to be freakin' kidding me. :rolleyes: This whole thread and what it's turning into is terrible.

The thread's original premise - writing off an entire gender based upon a few bad examples - was not so great, I've gotta say.

Not aimed at you at all winney, but we also can't judge someone's parenting abilities based upon half of a conversation we heard on the street. If, we in fact, even heard it correctly. (I agree that not buying fast food for children is generally a good idea.)

[KCboy]

or better yet, open up a dialog with them? (And I don't mean on here, I mean in real life.)

I'm just as fearless about starting dialog in real life as I am here :D

I have...I pretty much just ask what the reasoning is behind their belief. I have yet to hear a good answer - its typically "tradition", "I don't know", or the fact that the man makes more money (which is a generalization).

They frequently come back with, "if you dated a rich woman, would you expect to pay for all your own stuff?" To which I answer, "First of all, yes. Second of all, we aren't talking about rich people, we are talking about normal people."

[KCboy]

based on her response, she sounds like a neglectful parent - it's not like she said , "no honey, we'll be eating dinner at home tonight" etc- to reply in the way she did was implying that she wouldn't be getting dinner because it cost money, so if she wanted somene to buy her dinner she would have to get married- terrible parenting

I didn't take it that way at all.

I seriously doubt they went home and she sent her kids to bed without food.

[KCboy]

it's also selective filtering.

I know, I took psycholgy too.


how many bookstores did you pass on the way to work today? :D

[pawnstar3]

I didn't take it that way at all.

I seriously doubt they went home and she sent her kids to bed without food.

Here's what i know- when i was a kid my mother would never deprive me of food and certainly not respond in that manner- she could've said a million different things to that child, but her response was the kind of thing you'd say to an adult, not a child - also, think about what she's really saying- she didn't say, "fast food is bad for you, we're having dinner at home, etc" or a ton of other normal responses- what she was specifically referring to was the fact that she didn't want to pay for it - and that if the kid wanted someone to pay for their food, they should get a husband - actually, a parent is supposed to take care of their kid's basic needs, esp at a young age - so to say something like that to a child is ludicrous

And what's amazing to me is that the OP made very derogatory remarks against women and no one seemed to care about that and yet when i question someone's parenting abilities some people on here get all worked up over it - that's just bizarre

[winneythepooh7]

The thread's original premise - writing off an entire gender based upon a few bad examples - was not so great, I've gotta say.

Not aimed at you at all winney, but we also can't judge someone's parenting abilities based upon half of a conversation we heard on the street. If, we in fact, even heard it correctly. (I agree that not buying fast food for children is generally a good idea.)

Agreed with you 110%. On both points. Given the histories of most of the prime responders, and what they write about with their relationships, I think many of them should be the last people in the world to be assessing others abilities or shelling out "advice" in general.

[KCboy]

And what's amazing to me is that the OP made very derogatory remarks against women and no one seemed to care about that and yet when i question someone's parenting abilities some people on here get all worked up over it - that's just bizarre

actually, the words "cynical!", "scary", and "seek therapy" were some fo the first responses in this thread.

and I don't think anyone was worked up over what you said, they just disagreed with your perception and focused more on the fact that a mother was denying her child fast food.

I didn't take it the way you did because when I was a kid and asked for luxuries (toys, shoes, going out to eat), my parents would say something to the effect of "get a job and buy it yourself" (as opposed to "marry a man who can buy you stuff"), but that never meant that they wouldn't feed or clothe me.

[KCboy]

Given the histories of most of the prime responders, and what they write about with their relationships, I think many of them should be the last people in the world to be assessing others abilities or shelling out "advice" in general.

wow.

ouch.

[pawnstar3]

Agreed with you 110%. On both points. Given the histories of most of the prime responders, and what they write about with their relationships, I think many of them should be the last people in the world to be assessing others abilities or shelling out "advice" in general.

First of all no one here is an "expert" on anything - we can only give our opinions and viewpoints- and actually it's the people that live through things that can better assess situations than those that give advice and haven't had any experience with the topic

Let's assume i was one of the people you were referring to in your comment - i may have had some issues in my last relationship (who doesnt) and maybe i was too honest with everyone on here, but i still had a normal and healthy relationship, esp compared to some of the things people have mentioned on here- things may have turned sour towards the end, but while it was happening things were for the most part really good or else i wouldnt have stayed in it as long as i did

With regards to parenting, i came from a great family who never abused me in any way or deprived me of anything- maybe i'm in the minority with that, but i can detect bad parenting when i see it because i see it all too often and i hear people complain about their parents frequently

[Agadefe]

Giving and getting advice from strangers with the same problems that you have is the purpose of these message boards no? If only people who had problems asked questions and only people who 'had everything figured out' answered, then I think there would be very little variety and good advice would be hard to come by.

[pisces2473]

Sorry guys, you can't judge a person's parenting skills (or ANY skills, really) from ONE encounter on the street.

Maybe the kid had been pestering her mom all day for McDonald's and the mom's patience was wearing thin and the usual excuses to the kid weren't working.

I'm not a parent and yeah, I might make judgments (did so today after seeing a 7 yr old kid crawl around the floor at DSW) but you know what? I'm not his mother, father or caretaker. I don't have to deal with that child. I don't know if that kid had been good up til that point in the day or had been a brat all day OR if that kid has autism and can't help why he's doing that.

I have been around kids and their parents for long enough periods of time and multiple times to know that kids act up and parents cannot always say or do the "perfect" thing every time. Because...news flash: Parents are humans!!! So don't think that just b/c ONE time you hear a mom say something quasi-sexist to her daughter it's going to ruin ALL women.

[KCboy]

So don't think that just b/c ONE time you hear a mom say something quasi-sexist to her daughter it's going to ruin ALL women.

yes, that's exactly what I said :rolleyes:


and "quasi-sexist" is a bit of a stretch.

[gemma-dahl]

I know, I took psycholgy too.


how many bookstores did you pass on the way to work today? :D

None, KC, nor am I drawing from college. I know about cognitive distortions because I do science and technology writing, which requires that I study the subject areas those types of writing encompass. Besides, knowing human psychology is just good business sense.

On this thread generally: I'm still puzzled as to why posters are surprised that the original thread - making generalizations about women based on some bad examples - garnered such a strong reaction from members of that gender. Just imagine if this thread had assigned the same stereotypes to a race or religious group. You can bet your sweet mama that every member of that race or religious group would be up in this thread, and rightfully so.

Giving and getting advice from strangers with the same problems that you have is the purpose of these message boards no? If only people who had problems asked questions and only people who 'had everything figured out' answered, then I think there would be very little variety and good advice would be hard to come by.

The problem is that there's very little we can do for someone who has decided, "To hell with women." If that's the verdict, we really can't convince someone otherwise. You'll notice, similarly, that if someone's made up his or her mind to quit a job, hate on a city, or anything else, no amount of discussion will dissuade him or her. These types of threads tend to become endless tethers of bullcrap precisely because they begin and end with a foregone conclusion.

It's one thing to make a thread like "I am dating this girl and she is a gold digger and did such and such" and provide specific examples so we can provide advice or support. It's quite another to dismiss half of the world's people because you had some unsavory encounters. If dating women sucks that much, quit. If you've already decided to quit, then there's nothing else we can do for you.

[winneythepooh7]

On this thread generally: I'm still puzzled as to why posters are surprised that the original thread - making generalizations about women based on some bad examples - garnered such a strong reaction from members of that gender. Just imagine if this thread had assigned the same stereotypes to a race or religious group. You can bet your sweet mama that every member of that race or religious group would be up in this thread, and rightfully so.





Or if someone said that the majority of male posters on this site seem crazy, I am SURE that they'd all have issues with it ;).

[pisces2473]

yes, that's exactly what I said :rolleyes:


and "quasi-sexist" is a bit of a stretch.

You don't have to get snarky.

As for the second comment--oh come on...like I'm sure you have never engaged in any kind of stereotypical male behavior regarding women.

[wordsmith]

And what's amazing to me is that the OP made very derogatory remarks against women and no one seemed to care about that

I cared...I was curious to see how people would respond to such blather.

[bamagal2384]

Wow. Just wow.

I can't believe I missed out on this fun discussion!

Anyway, it's been my observation/experience that the men who complain the most about women-in-general are the ones who have the most difficulty attracting and interacting with them. So they determine, since they have poor taste in women and attract less than stellar mates, that all women are evil/slutty/spoiled/stupid/insert whatever random insult here.

The men who are happy and secure with themselves don't seem to complain as much about women. They just find them. If it doesn't work out with one they move on to the next one because they understand that not all women are the same.

I've known several guys who would say things like the OP. What did they all have in common? All were single and frustrated that they couldn't find a mate. Sure, every once in awhile they might score a date but never a second date. They just couldn't imagine that the problem might be their own attitude and lack of social skills.

I'm just sayin'.

[AznHisoka]

I've known several guys who would say things like the OP. What did they all have in common? All were single and frustrated that they couldn't find a mate. Sure, every once in awhile they might score a date but never a second date. They just couldn't imagine that the problem might be their own attitude and lack of social skills.

I'm just sayin'.

I agree. I think it all starts with the mental attitude. If you believe all women are evil, you're just not gonna be open and do what it takes to attract the right woman. It's like if you believe all human beings are naturally evil, you're just not gonna act kind and compassionate to peeps

[Bocheezu]

They just couldn't imagine that the problem might be their own attitude and lack of social skills.

We're well aware that it is. We're not stupid. Obviously, when somebody has no trouble attracting people and we do, they are doing something differently that we aren't. Often, we know exactly what it is. That doesn't mean we have to skills to mimic them.

Some people's confidence gets shaken very easily and it takes a long time for them to recover. Not everybody can just bounce back like it's nothing. And the shit just snowballs -- you feel less confident, the women are attracted to you less, you get even less confident, etc. To the point that you're so surly and depressed that nobody will talk to you anymore. There aren't any super-caring women out there that will cut you a break and try to bust through any wall that you build up over yourself. There's way too many confident guys they can give attention to.

It's just very difficult to dig out of that hole. You have to withdraw and sort of enter a state of personal self-improvement. You do things you enjoy so that you're not depressed all the time, and work out a bunch to improve your appearance. It can take a couple years to get out of the hole, and sometimes you just end up falling back in again.

[wordsmith]

There aren't any super-caring women out there that will cut you a break and try to bust through any wall that you build up over yourself. There's way too many confident guys they can give attention to.

Untrue.

There are definitely women who are fine with nurturing a person they care for, going the extra mile if a guy is what they're looking for, and don't expect every guy they meet to be issue-free or a finished product. There are women who will be in your corner, your cheerleader, who will build you up as a person, and be by your side and help you grow, if they see something in you that makes it worth the emotional investment. Women may lack confidence, as well, and are more likely to give a guy with confidence issues some slack/be empathetic. They'll want you to do the same for them.

I suspect that often, the guy in question would prefer that the woman be a finished, issue-free product, however. The same things that low-confidence guys have baggage regarding are the things that often make THEM write off the women who WOULD give them a time of day, if they see anything resembling those things in women who are interested and would overlook their own weaker points. It's akin to those guys who are "5s" who always want women who are "10s" and being unwilling to punch in their own weight class, so to speak. If you have shaky confidence and some issues, chances are there are women who will give you the time of day, because they, being imperfect themselves, understand that people are not perfect. But they might come with issues of their own that they might need YOU to be forgiving of. They're not going to be the perfect, benefactress saviors who mold you into emotionally functional human beings. They're going to be flawed...just like you. Can you guys live with it? Or do you expect things from women, such as tolerance, a blind eye to flaws, lack of shallow, judgmental behavior, etc. that YOU'RE not prepared to give to them?

[StepOnIt]

I was thinking scary. I'm sorry you've had such bad experiences, but that's not a reason to hate all women. Maybe you should see a therapist to deal with your anger issues before you become violent.

Why don't we have them brought up on rape charges while we're at it?

Come ON! Just because they're bitter that doesn't mean they're a hair away from turning violent!

My feelings on the main points of this thread: there are certain 'warning signs' of whether or not a woman is after your money: lack of conversational interest in anything other than clubbing and shopping is one example. Increase the number of women you talk to and you'll figure out the differences.

[hoodie]

The OP's post wasn't just bitter; it was hateful.

The very statements "I HATE women" and "I prefer to just put women in their place" were used. It kind of makes me wonder HOW the OP intends to put women in their place. If he just wants to ignore women, fine. But there's a huge difference between ignoring a population and trying to put them in their place. The attitude that women need to somehow reminded of their station in life is pretty common in abusive guys. I don't think people who found the original post troubling are flying off the handle at all.

Those of you flying to the OP's defense: do YOU feel women need to be "put in their place"?

To stereotype women as being only interested in guys' money, clubbing, shopping, and talking about themselves is one of the most unfair and ridiculous things I've ever come across on these boards in three years of posting.

As gemma said earlier, it wouldn't take a lot of searching to find dozens upon dozens of threads where the girls here have been led on, dragged through the dirt, and even abused by some awful, awful men. Similarly, I don't deny that there are some awful, awful women out there. Dating is a hard game all around! But it takes a pretty hard-core cynic to decide the entire population is _____. Maybe it's better some of the people making these nasty blanket statements are giving up, ignoring the opposite gender, and taking themselves out of the dating pool altogether. The majority of people who are out there fighting the good fight and looking for functional relationships with good people won't miss them and their attitudes at all.

But seriously, putting women in their place? What century are we living in?!?

(P.S. - KCBoy, from some of your other posts, I think you legitimately have come across some women with money issues. You are not one of the people included in this statement, in fact it's not aimed at any one poster in particular, save for the OP on this thread - just trying to raise some important questions.)

[StepOnIt]

Those of you flying to the OP's defense: do YOU feel women need to be "put in their place"?


If a man interferes with my work, wastes my time, tries to cheat me or insults my integrity, I put him in his place. If a woman does any of the above, I put her in her place. To behave any differently would be chauvinistic.

[hoodie]

Of course. But there's a difference between putting a woman (or man) who is acting out of line and ALL women in their place. That's the difference between a normal person and one who might be a little scary.

[kmv2005]

yeah, but considering as about half the population is female, that's a pretty broad generalization. :rolleyes:

Agreed. When you talk about cutting women from the equation, do you mean all women in general, or only when it comes to dating/relationships/sex? I can understand if you don't want to try to find a relationship or you don't want to date, etc, but you can't just stop talking to all women.

[pisces2473]

Unless you become a cloistered monk.

[bamagal2384]

Untrue.

I suspect that often, the guy in question would prefer that the woman be a finished, issue-free product, however. The same things that low-confidence guys have baggage regarding are the things that often make THEM write off the women who WOULD give them a time of day, if they see anything resembling those things in women who are interested and would overlook their own weaker points. It's akin to those guys who are "5s" who always want women who are "10s" and being unwilling to punch in their own weight class, so to speak. If you have shaky confidence and some issues, chances are there are women who will give you the time of day, because they, being imperfect themselves, understand that people are not perfect.

THIS is absolutely true. I have to say those aforementioned guys with the low self-esteem were always extremely picky, especially when it came to physical appearance. They said they wouldn't date a woman who wasn't petite, or wasn't blonde (or whatever the hair color of choice was), or didn't wear enough makeup, or dress in a certain style, etc. It was the craziest phenomenon I've ever observed. I understand having preferences, we all do, but these guys literally could find something wrong with a supermodel!

My ex's roommate was like this. He was single forever, then managed to date a girl for 3 years who was overweight and not up to his "standards." He was critical of her the entire time they were together until she dumped him. That was 3 years ago. He still calls, emails, or texts her every few months to see if she'll get back together. He always was trying to get my ex to break up with me because "women are too much trouble and too expensive." Yeah my ex took me out a lot and took me on nice vacations, but I offered to pay on more than one occasion and he turned me down. He LIKED treating me. That's just the way he was. It's not always some horrible thing.

[wordsmith]

Most people, male or female, actually like doing the treating if it's their choice to do so. Nobody likes to feel taken advantage of, or as if their footing the bill is expected and taken for granted. But those of us who offer to treat the people we're with do it because we like to. Not because we think we have to. Gratitude and turnabout are always appreciated.

[kmv2005]

I'm completely baffled that guys are so afraid of women taking advantage of them for their money. I realize that some girls do this, and from the posts it seems like it happens fairly often, but nevertheless, I'm astounded.

First of all, I'm not entirely comfortable with a guy paying for things all the time. I like it to be even. Otherwise I feel guilty, like I'm not pulling my own weight, and I'm just not comfortable with people doing things for me in general. That's just me. Second of all, I've never dated a guy who would be considered wealthy enough to treat me to expensive vacations or jewelry or whatever. Income is very low on my list of priorities when I'm looking for a relationship. It matters more to me what kind of person they are, and I'm only interested in what they do for a living because that says a lot about someone's personality.

My only experience close to this is that I dated a guy who seemed to think how much money he had was uber-important. When we first started dating he made it seem like he was doing very well financially - he took me out on his parents boat and implied it was his, he implied the house he lived in was his but it was his brother's, etc. After we had been dating for a few months he told me that he didn't have as much money as it seemed and he started to complain about bills and money constantly. I broke up with him because I felt he was dishonest with me at the beginning and I realized he was so fixated on money that we just weren't compatible. I have a feeling that, with his attitude, he will end up with one of those girls who is only interested in a bank account. Because what you put out there is what you attract.

[pisces2473]

I'm completely baffled that guys are so afraid of women taking advantage of them for their money. I realize that some girls do this, and from the posts it seems like it happens fairly often, but nevertheless, I'm astounded.
Imagine if all we posted about was that all guys wanted was to get into our pants? :rolleyes:

[Stuck_in_a_RUT!]

LOL! Jesus, this thing really took off. Anyway, I suppose what I should have said in my original post was NOT that I HATE women, but more so the NEW idea of them; the stereotype that they ALL seem (at least in my experience) to be trying to live up to- the sex and the city whore. I have NEVER in my entire life met a girl my age that wasn't like this.

I grew up thinking that women were all sweet and classy/proper; an example would be Kate Winslet in Titanic (however, interestingly enough she also whored it up in that movie), maybe not. I can't really think of a universal example, maybe Kate beckensalle in pearl harbor (no, she too whored it up), forget the example, but you guys have to know what I'm talking about (as weird as it sounds think grandma when she was in her twenties) and to be honest I was pretty crushed when I found out that women (again, in my ENTIRE life's experience) were not only not like this but the exact opposite.

I admit that I idolized them for the better part of my young life; I put the "pussy on a pedestal," so to speak and no I wasn't looking for a perfect women but what I found was nowhere near what I had envisioned. Courtship was over and dating had taken its place. What does that mean exactly? It means that it is no longer enough to simply tell a girl how you feel about her directly, hell there isn't even a setting for it nowadays. I mean think about it, you walk up to a girl at a bar and tell her that you think that she is the most beautiful women you have ever seen, and that you imagine spending time, even a small amount, with her would make you a better person, and that you would like her to be yours and you hers.

What do you think that her response will be? I guarantee that it would not be a simple courteous yes or no, but more along the lines of one of those fucking wide eyed, are you serious faces that all women seem to have, followed by a harsh as hell NO, some laughter and a dash of social awkwardness.

Women nowadays do NOT want direct talk, genuine interest, or even dare I say romance= courtship. What they want instead is subterfuge, a fledgling interest or at least the facade of fledgling interest in order to keep them interested (games), and to be treated basically like their shit don't stink (badly at times)=dating.

Women now, prefer dating, and the only reason that I can give for this is that women have a bloated sense of their own worth or maybe its that they undervalue themselves either way their thinking is the same; "MEN JUST WANT TO GET IN OUR PANTS." This mindset leads to dating because they think if they can't tell if the guy is into them then he must be a higher value then them ( a 10 to their 8), of that if he has options he is also of a higher value, or if he treats them bad every now and then he, again, must be a higher value; all of these situations lead the women to ask herself "DOES HE WANT TO GET INTO MY PANTS?" and if you can get a women to ask herself that you MUST be special. That's why nowadays you see so many women with douche bags.

All this ties into my situation because I want the women of the past; the REAL women. Not the one that I do in fact HATE of today, that is in reality an insecure girl pretending to be a WOMEN!

[AznHisoka]

My original suggestion stands: Get a foreign girl. Some of them aren't polluted with social conditioning.

[DaneCA]

THIS is absolutely true. I have to say those aforementioned guys with the low self-esteem were always extremely picky, especially when it came to physical appearance. They said they wouldn't date a woman who wasn't petite, or wasn't blonde (or whatever the hair color of choice was), or didn't wear enough makeup, or dress in a certain style, etc. It was the craziest phenomenon I've ever observed. I understand having preferences, we all do, but these guys literally could find something wrong with a supermodel!

I have a theory that many of these guys are really just insecure. They convince themselves and others that they're super picky and use this as an excuse for being perma-single, when in reality, they're just terrified of getting rejected. It's easier to say "I have really high standards" than it is to admit to having low self-esteem. Pickiness can be a front for the fact that success with women doesn't come naturally. We women often are more comfortable admitting to our weaknesses, so this phenomenon isn't one to which we can really relate.

[Tayl405]

LOL! Jesus, this thing really took off. Anyway, I suppose what I should have said in my original post was NOT that I HATE women, but more so the NEW idea of them; the stereotype that they ALL seem (at least in my experience) to be trying to live up to- the sex and the city whore. I have NEVER in my entire life met a girl my age that wasn't like this.

Women nowadays do NOT want direct talk, genuine interest, or even dare I say romance= courtship. What they want instead is subterfuge, a fledgling interest or at least the facade of fledgling interest in order to keep them interested (games), and to be treated basically like their shit don't stink (badly at times)=dating.

Women now, prefer dating, and the only reason that I can give for this is that women have a bloated sense of their own worth or maybe its that they undervalue themselves either way their thinking is the same; "MEN JUST WANT TO GET IN OUR PANTS." This mindset leads to dating because they think if they can't tell if the guy is into them then he must be a higher value then them ( a 10 to their 8), of that if he has options he is also of a higher value, or if he treats them bad every now and then he, again, must be a higher value; all of these situations lead the women to ask herself "DOES HE WANT TO GET INTO MY PANTS?" and if you can get a women to ask herself that you MUST be special. That's why nowadays you see so many women with douche bags.

I have a problem with statements such as "ALL women" and "NEVER in my life have I met a girl...". How about the cashier at the grocery store? Or the girl at work with whom you've only had professional discussions? Are they "sex and the city whores"? How well do you know these women you are judging? I certainly hope I wouldn't be sized up as a "whore" - or anything for that matter - in 5 minutes of conversation.

Don't profess to know what women want. Obviously you don't know what they want or you wouldn't be so confused and cynical. And women are not all the same. Women are people, just like men, and everyone is different and wants different things.

With your attitude, it's no wonder you can't find a girl.

[Tayl405]

I have a theory that many of these guys are really just insecure. They convince themselves and others that they're super picky and use this as an excuse for being perma-single, when in reality, they're just terrified of getting rejected. It's easier to say "I have really high standards" than it is to admit to having low self-esteem. Pickiness can be a front for the fact that success with women doesn't come naturally. We women often are more comfortable admitting to our weaknesses, so this phenomenon isn't one to which we can really relate.

I completely agree.

[Bsig84]

I have a problem with statements such as "ALL women" and "NEVER in my life have I met a girl...". How about the cashier at the grocery store? Or the girl at work with whom you've only had professional discussions? Are they "sex and the city whores"? How well do you know these women you are judging? I certainly hope I wouldn't be sized up as a "whore" - or anything for that matter - in 5 minutes of conversation.

Don't profess to know what women want. Obviously you don't know what they want or you wouldn't be so confused and cynical. And women are not all the same. Women are people, just like men, and everyone is different and wants different things.

With your attitude, it's no wonder you can't find a girl.

I totally agree. And also, what exactly is your definition of "whoring it up?" Are you saying that because a woman has sex before marriage that is "whoring it up?" If that is the case and you are looking for someone that saves herself for marriage then that is completely your right (however, it is really offensive to say that a woman is a whore just because she has sex before marriage). There are plenty of women that do save themselves but looking for them in bars may not be the best place to look.

There are also plenty of women (myself included) that do want romance and do want a man to tell them how he feels. Dating rituals are different now than they were in our grandparents time, but that doesn't mean that women are to blame.

[gemma-dahl]

With your attitude, it's no wonder you can't find a girl.

It seems like the OP wants to go back to the days of calling cards and courtship. If we're going to do that, let's also get rid of the internet (which would necessitate that this message board cease to exist, so he couldn't complain), reinstate the draft, and all get typhus and whooping cough, too.

Also, while we're at it, bring back Jim Crow laws, Prohibition, the Confederacy, and child labor, so when the OP finds his perfect wife and they have some kids, the kids can work in a factory by age 4, and half of them won't live to adulthood. Life really WAS better before all of this modernity, no? ;):

I I certainly hope I wouldn't be sized up as a "whore" - or anything for that matter - in 5 minutes of conversation.

Don't profess to know what women want. Obviously you don't know what they want or you wouldn't be so confused and cynical.

Remember, a whore is a woman who won't date just any man. But a whore is also a woman who has sex (before marriage, on the eleventeenth date, ever in her life). Therefore, "whore" and "woman" are synonyms. It's really a can't-lose situation for linguistics aficionados everywhere!

[wordsmith]

I'm completely baffled that guys are so afraid of women taking advantage of them for their money.

Yes, it seems needlessly adversarial.

Learn to be a good judge of character. Suspect that somebody's using you (be it for money, for sex, for social acceptance, for a ride to work, whatever)? Pay attention. Be honest with yourself about what's going on. Address it and move on - enough said.

But don't go into every interaction assuming you're going to get used. It makes you a big fat drag with a chip on your shoulder, and not really any fun. Be smart, cautious, observant, what have you, but don't go in already deciding somebody's there to use you.

OP - maybe quit assessing women based on fictional characters in film and TV shows. Might give you a more realistic outlook. From your posts, it's becoming more and more evident that the issue is you...not the women you run into.

[ScottyTheBody]

I have a theory that many of these guys are really just insecure. They convince themselves and others that they're super picky and use this as an excuse for being perma-single, when in reality, they're just terrified of getting rejected. It's easier to say "I have really high standards" than it is to admit to having low self-esteem. Pickiness can be a front for the fact that success with women doesn't come naturally. We women often are more comfortable admitting to our weaknesses, so this phenomenon isn't one to which we can really relate.

That's funny. That's my theory for many women. Hence why I and most guys that I have talked to know never get asked out by women.

To be completely honest though I would say that it COULD apply to both genders.

[DaneCA]

That's funny. That's my theory for many women. Hence why I and most guys that I have talked to know never get asked out by women.

To be completely honest though I would say that it COULD apply to both genders.

Yeah, that's probably true. I've just noticed it more with the guys I know, while my girlfriends really ARE that picky. Add to this that the guys I'm talking about are nervous about approaching girls and, unfortunately, many women are still conditioned to wait for a guy to make the first move, so nothing much happens for these guys because the more confident ones get to the girls before the shy ones muster up the courage.

[Stuck_in_a_RUT!]

LOL! WTF! The characters that I called whores in my examples, are in my opinion whores. Kate Winslett in Titanic cheated on her fiancee with Leonardo DiCaprio (cheating and lying about it= "whore") and Kate Beckinsale in Pearl Harbor slept with Josh Hartnett like a day after she found out that Ben Affleck was killed (sleeping with the best friend of a war hero the week that he dies=whore). As far as saying that every girl that I've come across is a whore that's not what I meant, saying that every girl that I've come across in the awesome world of dating is, yes, a sex and the city whore.

Now, mind you that's not your average whore, this sex and the city whore is a new breed; who's symptoms include an obsession with social status, wealth, and above all the ease with which she sleeps with men of the douche bag variety. An example of the sex and the city whore of the modern era is a girl that I used to work with who had sex with her boyfriend simply because she had been with him for six months (she's of the "time in" variety). She didn't love him, she didn't get lost in passion one night and sleep with him, her words where "I've been with him for six months," basically saying that he had earned the right to sleep with her because he had hung around her so long (translation- he payed her to have sex with the currency of time).

Anyway, I like how nobody had anything to say about the dating template that I laid down. And as far as that one person was saying, that because I said that I preferred courtship over dating (both my definition of each) that I was also saying that I somehow wanted the 40's back I have no idea where the hell that came from.

When I said that I put women in their place I didn't mean their place as a women beneath a man, I meant that I let them know that I'm not going to put up with there bull shit look at me antics and then watch as they then go tongue kiss their boyfriends right in front of me, and all similar scenarios.

[pawnstar3]

LOL! WTF! The characters that I called whores in my examples, are in my opinion whores. Kate Winslett in Titanic cheated on her fiancee with Leonardo DiCaprio (cheating and lying about it= "whore") and Kate Beckinsale in Pearl Harbor slept with Josh Hartnett like a day after she found out that Ben Affleck was killed (sleeping with the best friend of a war hero the week that he dies=whore). As far as saying that every girl that I've come across is a whore that's not what I meant, saying that every girl that I've come across in the awesome world of dating is, yes, a sex and the city whore.

Now, mind you that's not your average whore, this sex and the city whore is a new breed; who's symptoms include an obsession with social status, wealth, and above all the ease with which she sleeps with men of the douche bag variety. An example of the sex and the city whore of the modern era is a girl that I used to work with who had sex with her boyfriend simply because she had been with him for six months (she's of the "time in" variety). She didn't love him, she didn't get lost in passion one night and sleep with him, her words where "I've been with him for six months," basically saying that he had earned the right to sleep with her because he had hung around her so long (translation- he payed her to have sex with the currency of time).

Anyway, I like how nobody had anything to say about the dating template that I laid down. And as far as that one person was saying, that because I said that I preferred courtship over dating (both my definition of each) that I was also saying that I somehow wanted the 40's back I have no idea where the hell that came from.

When I said that I put women in their place I didn't mean their place as a women beneath a man, I meant that I let them know that I'm not going to put up with there bull shit look at me antics and then watch as they then go tongue kiss their boyfriends right in front of me, and all similar scenarios.

It's funny because i was attacked for calling some girl a slut on a different thread and to me her actions were very slutty - i don't generalize and say that every girl is a whore, but i will say that MOST girls in today's dating scenes do exhibit at least to some degree this "sex and the city" vibe that you're talking about - it's the equivalent of a male player that woman always complain about - and yet they always wind up with those types of guys - from my experience and the people i know, women seem to be more promiscuous this day in age- it's almost startling actually

[DaneCA]

LOL! WTF! The characters that I called whores in my examples, are in my opinion whores. Kate Winslett in Titanic cheated on her fiancee with Leonardo DiCaprio (cheating and lying about it= "whore") and Kate Beckinsale in Pearl Harbor slept with Josh Hartnett like a day after she found out that Ben Affleck was killed (sleeping with the best friend of a war hero the week that he dies=whore). As far as saying that every girl that I've come across is a whore that's not what I meant, saying that every girl that I've come across in the awesome world of dating is, yes, a sex and the city whore.

Your first post detailed your total lack of experience. What do you even know about "the awesome world of dating?" If you're basing your opinions on big-budget, fictional Hollywood films that take place in the early 1900s and 1940s, respectively, then it's no wonder no woman meets your dubious standards.

I wouldn't recommend going for foreign women, as one poster did, because I'm pretty sure most of them are just as "whorish" as we American women are, and they're even less used to being courted. Maybe a 12-year-old is more up your alley; get her before she has a chance to develop a mind of her own and turn into a "whore." If so, she's welcome to you. Or, travel back in time to the "glory days" when women had no choice but to put up with oppressive men because they had no rights of their own. 99.9% of modern, self-sufficient, independent women wouldn't want you, anyway, with your sucky attitude, blatant sexism and total lack of self-awareness.

[gemma-dahl]

Or, travel back in time to the "glory days" when women had no choice but to put up with oppressive men because they had no rights of their own. 99.9% of modern, self-sufficient, independent women wouldn't want you, anyway, with your sucky attitude, blatant sexism and total lack of self-awareness.

My partner and I were watching this last night on the History Channel:

http://www.history.com/shows.do?episodeId=464960&action=detail

It is a show I recommend to anyone who believes that the sexual revolution began with Sex in the City, or to anyone who is interested in what roles men, women, and the GLBT community played in the modern dating world. (After this, we watched Pawn Stars (http://www.history.com/content/pawn-stars), which I liked even more, and which I also recommend.)

[pawnstar3]

Hey they stole my name lol

[winneythepooh7]

Or if someone said that the majority of male posters on this site seem crazy, I am SURE that they'd all have issues with it ;).

I am really beginning to notice some male-poster-pattern behavior on here.

[hoodie]

I think we found the one person who actually watched Pearl Harbor!!! :D

[Bocheezu]

I am really beginning to notice some male-poster-pattern behavior on here.

Not crazy, just mysogynistic, which I guess can be thought of as "crazy" if you're a woman. The guys here probably would never act like that in front of a woman in real life, but the internet allows for that sort of stuff. From a guy's perspective it's pretty common, maybe a little over-the-top for effect, but I wouldn't view anything guys say on here as crazy.

[gemma-dahl]

Not crazy, just mysogynistic, which I guess can be thought of as "crazy" if you're a woman. The guys here probably would never act like that in front of a woman in real life, but the internet allows for that sort of stuff. From a guy's perspective it's pretty common, maybe a little over-the-top for effect, but I wouldn't view anything guys say on here as crazy.

Oh, I was always aware of hidden misogyny, and I'm well aware that some men have already formed an opinion of me (even over the Internet) simply because of my gender. That's not really my issue. What is a shame about threads of this type, as I already said, is that the posters who start them are really neither seeking to solve a problem, nor to commiserate (if they were, they would have a different tone and a different approach). Instead, they're looking to shit-stir and to get attention.

It's got nothing to do with gender, or really, even the topic being discussed - which can run the gamut from work to dating to attending grad school to what music is the best.

[Bocheezu]

nor to commiserate (if they were, they would have a different tone and a different approach)

This is the guy form of commiserating, meant to be said in a group of a bunch of other guys. Couldn't get a more wrong forum to post it on, though.

[gemma-dahl]

This is the guy form of commiserating, meant to be said in a group of a bunch of other guys. Couldn't get a more wrong forum to post it on, though.

Agreed. Wrong tone, wrong forum.

Women vent about other women, too. And many men vent to women about other men...my partner prefers women friends for example. So ya never know what people are saying offline, but sometimes you have to know who your audience is online.

[KCboy]

the posters who start them are really neither seeking to solve a problem, nor to commiserate... Instead, they're looking to shit-stir and to get attention.

so, the OP's opinion would have been received better had it been in the "RANTING" thread?

[gemma-dahl]

so, the OP's opinion would have been received better had it been in the "RANTING" thread?

My guess, no, but I don't know. I'm never in that section. Probably wanna ask the site owner or a moderator about that.

[pawnstar3]

The problem with this thread (and i'm a guy) is that it came across as offensive and over the top - suggesting that all women are a certain way, etc. seemed a bit much- on the other hand, a lot of the women on this board probably over-reacted a bit

It's one thing to vent and it's another to insult - this thread came across more as insulting than venting IMO - however, since it's a message board there is a certain level of freedom of speech that should be respected on here and oftentimes isn't

[vinsanity]

LOL! Jesus, this thing really took off. Anyway, I suppose what I should have said in my original post was NOT that I HATE women, but more so the NEW idea of them; the stereotype that they ALL seem (at least in my experience) to be trying to live up to- the sex and the city whore. I have NEVER in my entire life met a girl my age that wasn't like this.

I grew up thinking that women were all sweet and classy/proper; an example would be Kate Winslet in Titanic (however, interestingly enough she also whored it up in that movie), maybe not. I can't really think of a universal example, maybe Kate beckensalle in pearl harbor (no, she too whored it up), forget the example, but you guys have to know what I'm talking about (as weird as it sounds think grandma when she was in her twenties) and to be honest I was pretty crushed when I found out that women (again, in my ENTIRE life's experience) were not only not like this but the exact opposite.

I admit that I idolized them for the better part of my young life; I put the "pussy on a pedestal," so to speak and no I wasn't looking for a perfect women but what I found was nowhere near what I had envisioned. Courtship was over and dating had taken its place. What does that mean exactly? It means that it is no longer enough to simply tell a girl how you feel about her directly, hell there isn't even a setting for it nowadays. I mean think about it, you walk up to a girl at a bar and tell her that you think that she is the most beautiful women you have ever seen, and that you imagine spending time, even a small amount, with her would make you a better person, and that you would like her to be yours and you hers.

What do you think that her response will be? I guarantee that it would not be a simple courteous yes or no, but more along the lines of one of those fucking wide eyed, are you serious faces that all women seem to have, followed by a harsh as hell NO, some laughter and a dash of social awkwardness.

Women nowadays do NOT want direct talk, genuine interest, or even dare I say romance= courtship. What they want instead is subterfuge, a fledgling interest or at least the facade of fledgling interest in order to keep them interested (games), and to be treated basically like their shit don't stink (badly at times)=dating.

Women now, prefer dating, and the only reason that I can give for this is that women have a bloated sense of their own worth or maybe its that they undervalue themselves either way their thinking is the same; "MEN JUST WANT TO GET IN OUR PANTS." This mindset leads to dating because they think if they can't tell if the guy is into them then he must be a higher value then them ( a 10 to their 8), of that if he has options he is also of a higher value, or if he treats them bad every now and then he, again, must be a higher value; all of these situations lead the women to ask herself "DOES HE WANT TO GET INTO MY PANTS?" and if you can get a women to ask herself that you MUST be special. That's why nowadays you see so many women with douche bags.

All this ties into my situation because I want the women of the past; the REAL women. Not the one that I do in fact HATE of today, that is in reality an insecure girl pretending to be a WOMEN!

Your OP was full of drivel, so I'm not really going to address it (since everyone else has already), but there's actually alot of stuff I can agree with in this post.

Yes, it was a big mistake for you to put the "pussy on a pedestal", since I too have observed that the strong, classy women have been largely displaced by the fickle "Sex and the City" types. Which is more unfortunate for them than it is for us. And here's why: the problem with this new attitude you describe is that it gives women an unfounded sense of empowerment that usually screws them over in the long run.

Case in point: women (disclaimer: I'm not talking about ALL women) learn to manipulate a man for whatever gain she seeks, be it wealth, social status, shoes, whatever. This manipulation, by definition, causes the man to be mislead as to the terms of the relationship, which eventually collapses, leaving two bitter parties in a lose-lose situation.

So instead of ranting, you have to ask yourself how you're going to adapt to dealing with this new "Sex and the City" type of female so that both of you get something out of the relationship. Because let's face it, all we've accomplished so far is 6 pages of internet bickering.

[pawnstar3]

And another thing too is that a lot of promiscuous or "sex and the city" type of women today who think they have it great or have a stronghold on the whole dating game wind up alone and miserable and here's why - their promiscuity allows guys to use them for sex and move on - a guy will rarely if ever commit to a girl who he knows for a fact sleeps around or gives it up too easily

I remember seeing an interview on some show where a female college professor was talking about this phenomenon and how the rise in female promiscuity has wound up hurting women in the long run and i've always said that - of course it may be okay for some, but the collapse in relationships has a lot to do with that

[Tayl405]

That would be understandable if the guys weren't sleeping around also... but here comes that double-standard. :rolleyes:

[winneythepooh7]

And another thing too is that a lot of promiscuous or "sex and the city" type of women today who think they have it great or have a stronghold on the whole dating game wind up alone and miserable and here's why - their promiscuity allows guys to use them for sex and move on - a guy will rarely if ever commit to a girl who he knows for a fact sleeps around or gives it up too easily

I remember seeing an interview on some show where a female college professor was talking about this phenomenon and how the rise in female promiscuity has wound up hurting women in the long run and i've always said that - of course it may be okay for some, but the collapse in relationships has a lot to do with that

Weren't you the same guy though who was contemplating getting back with the ex who sleeps around? :rolleyes:

[DaneCA]

That would be understandable if the guys weren't sleeping around also... but here comes that double-standard. :rolleyes:

AGREED! Don't even get me started on how unfair it is that women are most often the ones blamed for promiscuity. Maybe the guys who post here aren't having casual sex, but a lot of men obviously are in order for these women to be doing it, too!

[pisces2473]

AGREED! Don't even get me started on how unfair it is that women are most often the ones blamed for promiscuity. Maybe the guys who post here aren't having casual sex, but a lot of men obviously are in order for these women to be doing it, too!

Hahaha good point! Every promiscuous guy needs a girl who is willing and able.

[hoodie]

It was so much easier back in the old days when only the men had multiple partners. :p

I kid. Obviously. I hope...

[vinsanity]

Actually, my theory is that a smaller proportion of the men are hooking up with a larger proportion of the women, if only to explain why there are so many guys left out of the dating pool.

[hoodie]

I'd want to see some numbers to back that up.

I think it's a farce that women have no problem getting laid and that they can "get some" whenever they want.

Honestly, I think a good number of men and women are excluded from the dating pool due to looks, social awkwardness, or similar type issues. I'd guess pretty equal, but beyond my guess, I'd have to look for numbers too.

[DaneCA]

I think it's a farce that women have no problem getting laid and that they can "get some" whenever they want.



I totally agree. Have you ever noticed that it's most often sexually-frustrated men who make this claim? :rolleyes:

[vinsanity]

I'd want to see some numbers to back that up.

My *theory* is still in its early stages of development...

I think it's a farce that women have no problem getting laid and that they can "get some" whenever they want.

I never claimed that.

[hoodie]

Oh no, I wasn't implying as such. But I've heard it quite a few times over on these boards and out in the real world too!

[vinsanity]

I totally agree. Have you ever noticed that it's most often sexually-frustrated men who make this claim? :rolleyes:

Nice job using the charged term. Why would a guy (or girl, for that metter) who's not sexually frustrated voice his complaint or even question a system when it's been working to his advantage in the first place?



Oh no, I wasn't implying as such. But I've heard it quite a few times over on these boards and out in the real world too!

It's cool, I know you get tired of hearing it as much as we get tired of hearing women complain that "there aren't any good men left". Even though I might totally understand why a woman would say that, I can see that it's far from the truth.

[DaneCA]

Nice job using the charged term. Why would a guy (or girl, for that metter) who's not sexually frustrated voice his complaint or even question a system when it's been working to his advantage in the first place?



Very true. I just get really tired of hearing men talk like it's SOOO easy for women to get laid; all they have to do is walk out the door, and, bam! Job done! If a girl isn't having sex, it's because she doesn't want to! Trust me, it doesn't work that way. But, like you said, I'm sure it's just as annoying for guys to hear women complain that it's impossible to find a decent guy.

[gemma-dahl]

I remember seeing an interview on some show where a female college professor was talking about this phenomenon and how the rise in female promiscuity has wound up hurting women in the long run and i've always said that - of course it may be okay for some, but the collapse in relationships has a lot to do with that

Eh, I think that woman's ideas are pretty misogynistic, too. Kinda like the war on porn. Why not let people make their own choices and stop blaming everything in society for the way individuals make their decisions?


Yes, it was a big mistake for you to put the "pussy on a pedestal", since I too have observed that the strong, classy women have been largely displaced by the fickle "Sex and the City" types. Which is more unfortunate for them than it is for us. And here's why: the problem with this new attitude you describe is that it gives women an unfounded sense of empowerment that usually screws them over in the long run.

Case in point: women (disclaimer: I'm not talking about ALL women) learn to manipulate a man for whatever gain she seeks, be it wealth, social status, shoes, whatever. This manipulation, by definition, causes the man to be mislead as to the terms of the relationship, which eventually collapses, leaving two bitter parties in a lose-lose situation.

Interesting assessment. I guess I have to say, first, that Sex in the City is such a boring show. I don't understand why anyone would care to emulate any of the characters. I never even saw it until a few months into dating my partner, and I thought the women were awfully fickle and uninteresting. I guess, if anything, I feel sorry for people who act like characters in that show, and find it empowering to just be myself with men - with everyone, actually.

I can also say with certainty that many women find themselves in similar situations. My friends have. Men manipulate them for sex, they are mislead as to the terms of the relationship, and everyone loses out. Had they communicated, or had they understood, "Oh, this is just a fling," both parties would have felt better. And if a woman outearns a man, the scenario you mention above can easily happen with gender reversal (think of the deadbeat druggie/hardworking girlfriend combo).

So instead of ranting, you have to ask yourself how you're going to adapt to dealing with this new "Sex and the City" type of female so that both of you get something out of the relationship.

That seems just as lose-lose, just as empty. I think people can also opt to have adult relationships that are mutually satisfying. They're harder to find but much more rewarding.

[gemma-dahl]

Here is a poll I found on sex. http://abcnews.go.com/Primetime/PollVault/Story?id=156921&page=1



Average # of partners for men is 20, median is 8. Average # of partners for women is 6, median is 3. You can read the poll and see how many people have over 100, 500, etc. partners.

"Women are more conservative about sex in other ways. They're more apt than men to say there's too much sex on TV, 84 percent to 62 percent. They're less likely than men to condone sex before marriage, 54 to 68 percent. And 61 percent of sexually active women, compared with 50 percent of men, call themselves sexually traditional, not adventurous."

"Young singles (under age 30) are less inhibited in some ways, but it isn't quite "Sex and the City" out there. Indeed, young singles have sex less frequently than people in a committed relationship (naturally -- they lack a ready partner). As noted, they're less likely to be in a sexual relationship."

"Young singles also are no more likely than anyone else to have had sex on a first date, or to watch sex movies. Compared to all adults, more young singles are virgins (16 percent), particularly young single women."

"Divorced or separated men are twice as likely to have been unfaithful in their marriage."

"Among people who are married or living in a committed relationship (or formerly married), 16 percent have cheated on their partner (nearly twice as many men as women)"

[ScottyTheBody]

Here is a poll I found on sex. http://abcnews.go.com/Primetime/PollVault/Story?id=156921&page=1



Average # of partners for men is 20, median is 8. Average # of partners for women is 6, median is 3. You can read the poll and see how many people have over 100, 500, etc. partners.

"Women are more conservative about sex in other ways. They're more apt than men to say there's too much sex on TV, 84 percent to 62 percent. They're less likely than men to condone sex before marriage, 54 to 68 percent. And 61 percent of sexually active women, compared with 50 percent of men, call themselves sexually traditional, not adventurous."

"Young singles (under age 30) are less inhibited in some ways, but it isn't quite "Sex and the City" out there. Indeed, young singles have sex less frequently than people in a committed relationship (naturally -- they lack a ready partner). As noted, they're less likely to be in a sexual relationship."

"Young singles also are no more likely than anyone else to have had sex on a first date, or to watch sex movies. Compared to all adults, more young singles are virgins (16 percent), particularly young single women."

"Divorced or separated men are twice as likely to have been unfaithful in their marriage."

"Among people who are married or living in a committed relationship (or formerly married), 16 percent have cheated on their partner (nearly twice as many men as women)"


I would take this with a BAG of salt though. Polls about number of sex partners are often very incorrect. Some assume you have to "do the act" for it to count as "sex". Some say if it's oral it counts. If they even touch it counts or as Jerry said it "if the nipple makes it's appearance" even if they didn't actually "do it" some people count that as sex. Guys will also be more likely to inflate their numbers to appear MORE like a "stud" and women will deflate their numbers to appear LESS like a "slut".

The first line of evidence is proof right there. Mathematically for every woman having sex there is a guy having sex with her. It's a 1:1 ratio most of the time. The averages WILL be the same. The medians might not be but the averages will be.

[wordsmith]

I wouldn't take it anymore with any salt than I would the grand generalizations made on this thread by a variety of guys, which typically read as some version of, "I once experienced blah blah blah (or, I knew a guy who blah blah blah)....so I know this to be true of all women."

[pawnstar3]

Here is a poll I found on sex. http://abcnews.go.com/Primetime/PollVault/Story?id=156921&page=1



Average # of partners for men is 20, median is 8. Average # of partners for women is 6, median is 3. You can read the poll and see how many people have over 100, 500, etc. partners.

"Women are more conservative about sex in other ways. They're more apt than men to say there's too much sex on TV, 84 percent to 62 percent. They're less likely than men to condone sex before marriage, 54 to 68 percent. And 61 percent of sexually active women, compared with 50 percent of men, call themselves sexually traditional, not adventurous."

"Young singles (under age 30) are less inhibited in some ways, but it isn't quite "Sex and the City" out there. Indeed, young singles have sex less frequently than people in a committed relationship (naturally -- they lack a ready partner). As noted, they're less likely to be in a sexual relationship."

"Young singles also are no more likely than anyone else to have had sex on a first date, or to watch sex movies. Compared to all adults, more young singles are virgins (16 percent), particularly young single women."

"Divorced or separated men are twice as likely to have been unfaithful in their marriage."

"Among people who are married or living in a committed relationship (or formerly married), 16 percent have cheated on their partner (nearly twice as many men as women)"


First of all, men usually lie up and women lie down and that's why these stats are useless

Let me address of few of the other points on here that have been discussed - first of all, i'm not saying that women shouldn't be promiscuous - i'm just saying that i think what winds up happening is that women act this way because they see how glamorous it is in the media (sex in the city etc) and they go out and sleep around and then ultimately they're the ones suffering more consequences than guys will suffer

And as far as women can get sex much easier, that is a FACT - every single girl i know has even told me that - of course its not 100% true but it's for the most part true - , women can very easily get laid - and for guys it's a much different story - it is so much harder for guys to get laid - some of them can get it easily but a good portion of guys have a much harder time of it

[winneythepooh7]

As a woman, I really don't think a lot of us are trying to be like the characters on SATC/the media in general. That's a ridiculous generalization, as always. I for one rarely watch TV, and when I do, it's usually only shows like Law & Order or the History Channel.

[pawnstar3]

As a woman, I really don't think a lot of us are trying to be like the characters on SATC/the media in general. That's a ridiculous generalization, as always. I for one rarely watch TV, and when I do, it's usually only shows like Law & Order or the History Channel.

I'm using SATC as an example and i'm not saying that's EVERY girl is like that- but trust me, the vast majority of women today act in that manner and just like the women on that show, they scratch their heads and wonder why they're still single

[winneythepooh7]

Actually, if I recall the women on that show are not single. Samantha was but that was by her choice. And what's wrong with that? I still think your idea of "vast majority" is completely off-base. What, the women you know in your immediate circle? C'mon. Get a life.

[Bsig84]

I'm using SATC as an example and i'm not saying that's EVERY girl is like that- but trust me, the vast majority of women today act in that manner and just like the women on that show, they scratch their heads and wonder why they're still single

The vast majority? Really?

And have you even watched the show? Samantha slept around a lot, sure. She chose to be single and just have fun. She was HAPPY being single. Charlotte always wanted to get married and have a family (and she did). Carrie was with Big for a long time (and married him). And Miranda was off and on with mostly one guy that she ended up marrying. So when you say the "vast majority of women today act in that manner and just like the women on that show" not only are you making a huge generalization about women but you are also generalizing the characters on the show.

[pawnstar3]

Actually, if I recall the women on that show are not single. Samantha was but that was by her choice. And what's wrong with that? I still think your idea of "vast majority" is completely off-base. What, the women you know in your immediate circle? C'mon. Get a life.

First of all, I know A LOT of people, male and female, from all different age groups, etc. - vast majority is not completely off base- and to tell someone to get a life because you disagree with them is rude and immature

[pawnstar3]

The vast majority? Really?

And have you even watched the show? Samantha slept around a lot, sure. She chose to be single and just have fun. She was HAPPY being single. Charlotte always wanted to get married and have a family (and she did). Carrie was with Big for a long time (and married him). And Miranda was off and on with mostly one guy that she ended up marrying. So when you say the "vast majority of women today act in that manner and just like the women on that show" not only are you making a huge generalization about women but you are also generalizing the characters on the show.

Maybe you were watching a different show - let me break it down for you- when the show first started, the women were all in their 30's and were all single and promiscuous- by the end of it, only charlotte was married and that's partly because she toned down her promiscuity and wanted to get serious - samantha was VERY promiscuous as you've mentioned, carrie was stupid enough to let a great guy like aidan go so that she could run back to Big who was a scumbag, and miranda slept around a lot as well and was on and off with steve but still in nothing serious

My whole point (which you seem to be missing) is that when women sleep around unfortunately for them it carries greater consequences that they aren't even aware of in most cases- some women look up to the SATC lifestyle but in reality it's a pathetic existence

[winneythepooh7]

First of all, I know A LOT of people, male and female, from all different age groups, etc. - vast majority is not completely off base- and to tell someone to get a life because you disagree with them is rude and immature

I still stand by what I said. Obviously you don't know much about life by the generalizations you are constantly making.

[pawnstar3]

I still stand by what I said. Obviously you don't know much about life by the generalizations you are constantly making.

Once again, an immature thing to say - your basic statement is that if someone has a different opinion, then they don't know much about life. I can easily say the same things about you, but i would rather choose to debate than to resort to insults.

[Bsig84]

Maybe you were watching a different show - let me break it down for you- when the show first started, the women were all in their 30's and were all single and promiscuous- by the end of it, only charlotte was married and that's partly because she toned down her promiscuity and wanted to get serious - samantha was VERY promiscuous as you've mentioned, carrie was stupid enough to let a great guy like aidan go so that she could run back to Big who was a scumbag, and miranda slept around a lot as well and was on and off with steve but still in nothing serious

My whole point (which you seem to be missing) is that when women sleep around unfortunately for them it carries greater consequences that they aren't even aware of in most cases- some women look up to the SATC lifestyle but in reality it's a pathetic existence

The end of the show was actually the movie and they were all married except for Samantha.

Some women may look up to other strong, independent women who choose whether to be in a relationship instead of feeling like the only way their lives are fulfilled is to get married.

You lose credibility when you make generalizations about the "vast majority" of a population. You do not know the vast majority of women so you cannot make a generalization about that population. Yeah, some women sleep around and that doesn't hurt them in the end. Some women save themselves for marriage. Some women have a few partners that they are in love with. Same as men.

[Tayl405]

"Sleeping around" is relative anyway. For some, sleeping around could be having one sexual partner before marriage. For others, it could mean having 5-6 sexual partners, or 20+, or cheating, or whatever... Sleeping around means something different to everyone.

And how many sexual partners someone has is their own choice and should not be judged by others. Just as it's each individual's choice as to whether they enter into a relationship with someone who has had many sexual partners (or none, for that matter).

It's none of anyone's business (except the person I am in a relationship with) how many sexual partners I've had. And if anyone were to judge me by that I would never, ever be with them.

[pawnstar3]

"Sleeping around" is relative anyway. For some, sleeping around could be having one sexual partner before marriage. For others, it could mean having 5-6 sexual partners, or 20+, or cheating, or whatever... Sleeping around means something different to everyone.

And how many sexual partners someone has is their own choice and should not be judged by others. Just as it's each individual's choice as to whether they enter into a relationship with someone who has had many sexual partners (or none, for that matter).

It's none of anyone's business (except the person I am in a relationship with) how many sexual partners I've had. And if anyone were to judge me by that I would never, ever be with them.


First of all, i'm not judging people that sleep around - i never said that and if you go back and read my posts maybe you would understand my point- i'm merely pointing out that promiscuous women oftentimes think it's liberating and in the end it winds up hurting them because they truly seek something more (again, a feminist professor even held this opinion)

And you can't look at the movie and say "oh see how things turned out in the end" since for the majority of the series that wasn't the case- one of the reasons they all were moving on in the end was because they were makin that decision- meanwhile, when they were sleeping around, they weren't landing guys to marry them- those guys were just using them and moving on and they were wondering what they were doing wrong as if it takes a rocket scientist to show women that when men realize you act like that, they aren;t going to take you seriously

Again, i'm not saying that's the way it should be or that i support that or not - i'm just pointing out that that's the reality of it

[Bsig84]

First of all, i'm not judging people that sleep around - i never said that and if you go back and read my posts maybe you would understand my point- i'm merely pointing out that promiscuous women oftentimes think it's liberating and in the end it winds up hurting them because they truly seek something more (again, a feminist professor even held this opinion)

And you can't look at the movie and say "oh see how things turned out in the end" since for the majority of the series that wasn't the case- one of the reasons they all were moving on in the end was because they were makin that decision- meanwhile, when they were sleeping around, they weren't landing guys to marry them- those guys were just using them and moving on and they were wondering what they were doing wrong as if it takes a rocket scientist to show women that when men realize you act like that, they aren;t going to take you seriously

Again, i'm not saying that's the way it should be or that i support that or not - i'm just pointing out that that's the reality of it


I don't think anyone has had a problem with you saying that women that sleep around a lot hoping for a serious relationship are probably not doing the right thing. However, saying that the vast MAJORITY of women are doing that is incorrect. If you say something like that, you need to prepare yourself for backlash.

[Tayl405]

First of all, i'm not judging people that sleep around - i never said that and if you go back and read my posts maybe you would understand my point- i'm merely pointing out that promiscuous women oftentimes think it's liberating and in the end it winds up hurting them because they truly seek something more (again, a feminist professor even held this opinion)



My comments were directed at you in particular, but were in response to a number of posters' comments about women sleeping around.

[pawnstar3]

I don't think anyone has had a problem with you saying that women that sleep around a lot hoping for a serious relationship are probably not doing the right thing. However, saying that the vast MAJORITY of women are doing that is incorrect. If you say something like that, you need to prepare yourself for backlash.

Maybe what i should have said is the majority of women THAT I KNOW - then there wouldn't have been a backlash- but saying majority doesn't apply to all - it's like when women say the majority of guys are assholes - i'm not an asshole so i dont take offense to it and i actually agree with that statement to a degree, since i see the way guys treat women usually - again i didnt mean for it to offend anyone when i used the word majority

[pisces2473]

Um, re: Sex and the City--you don't think that there were women like those characters BEFORE Candace Bushnell wrote the book and created the show??? Hello, of course there were...who do you think was her inspiration? I don't think women watched the show and suddenly decided to become like them. If you really think that, then why aren't there more dudes cage fighting b/c they watch UFC?

[vinsanity]

If you really think that, then why aren't there more dudes cage fighting b/c they watch UFC?

Maybe not actually cage fighting, but it's hilarious to see the number of dudes strutting around Las Vegas wearing buzzed heads and Affliction t-shits 2 sizes too small in this day and age compared to the number of them in the late 90's-early 00's.

[Tayl405]

Um, re: Sex and the City--you don't think that there were women like those characters BEFORE Candace Bushnell wrote the book and created the show??? Hello, of course there were...who do you think was her inspiration? I don't think women watched the show and suddenly decided to become like them. If you really think that, then why aren't there more dudes cage fighting b/c they watch UFC?

LOL! I needed a good laugh today.

[pawnstar3]

Um, re: Sex and the City--you don't think that there were women like those characters BEFORE Candace Bushnell wrote the book and created the show??? Hello, of course there were...who do you think was her inspiration? I don't think women watched the show and suddenly decided to become like them. If you really think that, then why aren't there more dudes cage fighting b/c they watch UFC?

Of course women like that existed before the show - i'm only using the show as an example - someone else on this board earlier brought up the show so im continuing that example

More women nowadays have progressed towards this promiscuous behavior - that's just evident in everyday society- even if you want to deny that it's the majority of women (which i still stand by) the fact remains that more women ARE promiscuous in today's society- I'M NOT SAYING THAT'S A GOOD OR BAD THING - i'm just saying that's how it is

[pisces2473]

I'm going to disagree with your promiscuity assumption. There have always been promiscuous women, even in the Bible. In prior times, there wasn't paparazzi or amateurs with cameras following people around and displaying everything on TV and the internet for the entire planet.

[Tayl405]

And again, define promiscuity.

[pawnstar3]

And again, define promiscuity.

First of all people def have different opinions on how they define promiscuity and of course there are also different levels of it - but you can't deny the fact that people today are also becoming sexually active at a younger age which gives them more years to have more partners (and in hs and college apparently a lot of people sleep around)

My idea of promiscous is someone who is sleeping with people outside of a relationship - and then the number of times they do this/number of partners determines just how promiscuous they are

I remember there was an episode on SATC where the girls were discussing how many partners they had and i remember miranda saying that she was pretty conservative and that she slept with something like at least 40 guys (maybe more, i can't remember) - to me that is VERY promiscuous - i would imagine that a woman in her 30's should have easily slept with less than 10 guys to not be considered promiscuous

[cheshrcarol]

Pawnstar, do you have the same judgment against men, or is it only not ok for women to be "promiscuous"?

[pisces2473]

Your arguments are ridiculous.

First off, women used to get married when they were like 16 (and that would be the first time they had sex) because they died in their 40s.

Your last paragraph basically backs up your first

Last
i remember miranda saying that she was pretty conservative and that she slept with something like at least 40 guys (maybe more, i can't remember) - to me that is VERY promiscuous - i would imagine that a woman in her 30's should have easily slept with less than 10 guys to not be considered promiscuous

First
First of all people def have different opinions on how they define promiscuity and of course there are also different levels of it

Yeah, so if everyone is different and everyone has different ideas, WHY are you continuing to generalize???? Not everyone has the same world view of promiscuity as you!

[pawnstar3]

Pawnstar, do you have the same judgment against men, or is it only not ok for women to be "promiscuous"?

Once again, let me start by saying for the 1 MILLIONTH time - I DONT HAVE A PROBLEM WITH WOMEN BEING PROMISCUOUS - THAT WASNT MY ARGUMENT AT ALL - it's funny how people see what they want to see- i suggest you go back and read all my posts - there's nothing more frustrating than someone who jumps to conclusions without reading all the info

[pawnstar3]

Your arguments are ridiculous.

First off, women used to get married when they were like 16 (and that would be the first time they had sex) because they died in their 40s.

Your last paragraph basically backs up your first


Yeah, so if everyone is different and everyone has different ideas, WHY are you continuing to generalize???? Not everyone has the same world view of promiscuity as you!

Um, YOU ASKED ME TO DEFINE PROMISCUITY AND I DID - so what's your problem - i also said that different people have different opinions on it and i proceeded to say what mine were - so what problem do you have with that? you're the one that asked me - remember?

[pisces2473]

No, that was Taylor. haha

[pawnstar3]

No, that was Taylor. haha

Well i knew someone asked me - i felt like i was being bombarded from all different sides lol

[Tayl405]

Well i knew someone asked me - i felt like i was being bombarded from all different sides lol

Geez, get it straight! ;):

[KCboy]

Maybe not actually cage fighting, but it's hilarious to see the number of dudes strutting around Las Vegas wearing buzzed heads and Affliction t-shits 2 sizes too small in this day and age compared to the number of them in the late 90's-early 00's.

Everyone seems to think these guys are total douche bags…except for the hot women they always seem to be with.

[vinsanity]

Everyone seems to think these guys are total douche bags…except for the hot women they always seem to be with.

No, those ones only think that ALL men are jerks :rolleyes:

[cheshrcarol]

Well, promiscuous has a pretty negative connotation. And in this quote right here, you're saying that women should have a limit on how many partners they have. So my question is, are guys restricted to the same limitations?

I remember there was an episode on SATC where the girls were discussing how many partners they had and i remember miranda saying that she was pretty conservative and that she slept with something like at least 40 guys (maybe more, i can't remember) - to me that is VERY promiscuous - i would imagine that a woman in her 30's should have easily slept with less than 10 guys to not be considered promiscuous

[gemma-dahl]

That is an interesting thought, Carol. I've had more partners than what pawnstar defines as promiscuous, and I can honestly say that it's never been a deterrent for me in dating. I have easily been able to date interesting people, and when a relationship didn't work, it was for other reasons, such as different career goals, geographic incompatibilities, or personality disorders.

When I was younger, I was in an almost-two-year relationship with a man who was irate that we had the same amount of experience (at the time). He held men and women to different standards on this matter and in many others. But that wasn't REALLY the problem. He also called me lazy and a bitch, kicked me out of the house whenever he was angry (he took a poll about whether I "was a bitch or not" at a party after we broke up), routinely insulted and embarrassed me in front of others, called me a loser, screamed at me for falling asleep at a club one time when I got up at 5 am, and once, tried to have sex with me when I was passed out in bed. Meanwhile, he was semi-employed and owed me a significant amount of money. By the end, he couldn't hold down a job because basic things, like getting up on time for work and doing the work his boss asked him to do, were beneath him. (By the way, there ARE men out there who expect to be taken care of by women. Oh yes, there are.)

The relationship ended not because I was "promiscuous" (according to some definitions) but because, by failing to control his anger and his feeling that he was owed a living and all the great things in life, he acted like an asshole and a loser in every sense of the word. He also demanded standards of me that he was incapable of reaching himself.

Now, my partner is loving, gentle, and wonderful. Our "numbers" are the same, and he is glad that I have the same experience he does. Last night, he called me the love of his life, and we have a mutually satisfying and supportive relationship. So I guess, since we're going ALL from anecdotal evidence, that I'd share that having "lots" of "promiscuous" sexual experience does NOT doom women to a life of misery and loneliness.

And for the record, I've not had a one-night stand or been a player. I am always faithful when I'm in a serious relationship. It's worked for me. As has being pleasant and decent, being financially independent and solvent, being caring and supportive, and most importantly, not acting like the dating world owes me. I recommend it to anyone. This is coming from a computer geek who watches the History Channel, by the way, and whose role models are mostly jazz musicians and writers.

[pawnstar3]

Well, promiscuous has a pretty negative connotation. And in this quote right here, you're saying that women should have a limit on how many partners they have. So my question is, are guys restricted to the same limitations?

No i'm not saying that - i'm saying this: If a woman chooses to sleep around unfortunately for her, it usually has negative consequences if she's looking for more than just that - in other words, if she's sleeping around with the hope of finding mr right, it's gonna be hard for her- that's the unfortunate reality

And i would call guys promiscuous as well if they sleep around - the difference is that in our society guys can generally get away with it more since it's not looked down upon as much- i don't know how much more clear i can be about what i'm trying to say and that i'm not downing promiscuous women

[pawnstar3]

That is an interesting thought, Carol. I've had more partners than what pawnstar defines as promiscuous,.[/B]

But I never gave a number as to what i think is promiscuous - i'm assuming you're saying that you've slept with a lot of guys outside of a relationship- is that a fair assumption to make?

[KCboy]

But I never gave a number as to what i think is promiscuous

i would imagine that a woman in her 30's should have easily slept with less than 10 guys to not be considered promiscuous

.....

[KCboy]

he took a poll about whether I "was a bitch or not" at a party after we broke up

so, what were the results?

[Tayl405]

No i'm not saying that - i'm saying this: If a woman chooses to sleep around unfortunately for her, it usually has negative consequences if she's looking for more than just that - in other words, if she's sleeping around with the hope of finding mr right, it's gonna be hard for her- that's the unfortunate reality

Really? I wasn't aware this was a fact.

[vinsanity]

If I sleep with a girl, and then she turns around and sleeps with another guy, then I'm not investing any more effort into pursuing the girl after that.

I can only extrapolate that she's blown more than one opportunity with a Mr. Right that way.

[gemma-dahl]

so, what were the results?

Haha, that he was unequivocally a jerk, according to mutual friends in attendance.

[hoodie]

If I sleep with a girl, and then she turns around and sleeps with another guy, then I'm not investing any more effort into pursuing the girl after that.

I can only extrapolate that she's blown more than one opportunity with a Mr. Right that way.

That makes sense. But...what if she was all about you, but somehow you found out her number was, say, double yours. Would that bug you at all? I'm not assuming anything; just curious what dudes other than pawn think about the notion of "promiscuity".

[vinsanity]

That makes sense. But...what if she was all about you, but somehow you found out her number was, say, double yours. Would that bug you at all? I'm not assuming anything; just curious what dudes other than pawn think about the notion of "promiscuity".

Personally, it doesn't bother me, but unfortunately, there are guys who think that same way, because it's intimidating, in a way. Kind of like finding out your gf earns more $$$ than you.

[ScottyTheBody]

Is it possible that the "slutiness" of Hollywood (Paris Hilton, etc) and celebrities who are merely famous for being famous or having secret sex tapes and scandals or the bombardment of sex in the media contributing to an illusion of promiscuity?

[winneythepooh7]

Kind of like finding out your gf earns more $$$ than you.

I see nothing wrong with that.

[winneythepooh7]

Is it possible that the "slutiness" of Hollywood (Paris Hilton, etc) and celebrities who are merely famous for being famous or having secret sex tapes and scandals or the bombardment of sex in the media contributing to an illusion of promiscuity?

Definitely makes sense to me!

[pawnstar3]

Is it possible that the "slutiness" of Hollywood (Paris Hilton, etc) and celebrities who are merely famous for being famous or having secret sex tapes and scandals or the bombardment of sex in the media contributing to an illusion of promiscuity?

Maybe to some degree, but not really - i really don't know what kinds of people all of you know or where you live, but i live around the new york area and i can honestly tell you that the girls that i know directly or know about through other people generally range from somewhat promiscuous to absurdly promiscuous - it's not an illusion- it's just the way things are in current society- of course it;s NOT ALL WOMEN- but it's a very large amount, at least in the area i live in

[KCboy]

Personally, it doesn't bother me, but unfortunately, there are guys who think that same way, because it's intimidating, in a way. Kind of like finding out your gf earns more $$$ than you.

I have no problem with a woman that makes more money than me (in fact, I more than expect her to be able to at least hold her own financially), but I would have a problem with a woman that slept around a lot. I don’t even like talking about how many guys they’ve slept with – I can’t deal with that image in my mind.

[cheshrcarol]

It's funny, I always thought guys liked girls with experience. I even used to be embarrassed at how few partners/experience I had. But my SO is completely not like that :).

[pawnstar3]

It's funny, I always thought guys liked girls with experience. I even used to be embarrassed at how few partners/experience I had. But my SO is completely not like that :).


When guys wanna get laid, they care about a girl with experience- when they wanna settle down or be in a serious relationship, promiscuity is a big turnoff - and i'm sure women feel the same way about men

[KCboy]

It's funny, I always thought guys liked girls with experience. I even used to be embarrassed at how few partners/experience I had.

when guys talk about their girls, the words, "you won't BELIEVE how many guys she's banged; you could fill an arena" are not generally met with high fives and congratulations.

[gemma-dahl]

Personally, it doesn't bother me, but unfortunately, there are guys who think that same way, because it's intimidating, in a way. Kind of like finding out your gf earns more $$$ than you.

I outearn my partner and he's happy for me because it means we both can enjoy a better lifestyle. He also counts on me to save for us for the future. I guess it depends on the guy. Mine is proud of my accomplishments. And I'm proud of him, too. He works a blue-collar job, and a lot of people look down on that as well. I guess someone is always going to have an opinion on the way others live their lives, and I've assumed that's part and parcel of being human.

Is it possible that the "slutiness" of Hollywood (Paris Hilton, etc) and celebrities who are merely famous for being famous or having secret sex tapes and scandals or the bombardment of sex in the media contributing to an illusion of promiscuity?

Oh hells yeah. Actually, we know a few beautiful girls who've only had a few partners. They're very selective. But some people think they're sluts because they look cute or dress like "Sex in the City." Perhaps some of this name-calling is based in perception as opposed to reality.

When guys wanna get laid, they care about a girl with experience- when they wanna settle down or be in a serious relationship, promiscuity is a big turnoff - and i'm sure women feel the same way about men

I prefer a man with experience for the long term myself; however, I wouldn't be opposed to dating someone with less experience, either. People can learn all kinds of new sexy moves.

My partner, as I already said, is happy I have experience. He says he would not prefer to date a girl with less experience. And he's not a slut, and he doesn't have one-night stands. I understand and appreciate that you have an opinion, but when you state the opinion as though it were fact - as though it were the case for ALL people - it becomes less credible.

[pawnstar3]

I prefer a man with experience for the long term myself; however, I wouldn't be opposed to dating someone with less experience, either. People can learn all kinds of new sexy moves.

My partner, as I already said, is happy I have experience. He says he would not prefer to date a girl with less experience. And he's not a slut, and he doesn't have one-night stands. I understand and appreciate that you have an opinion, but when you state the opinion as though it were fact - as though it were the case for ALL people - it becomes less credible.

There's a difference though between experience and sluttiness - i def want a girl with experience, but someone who is promiscuous, that's a turn off

[gemma-dahl]

There's a difference though between experience and sluttiness - i def want a girl with experience, but someone who is promiscuous, that's a turn off

Of course, those delineations are personal and your choice - I would certainly hope that you date someone that you feel comfortable with.

Each of us has a choice of who to date and who not to date, so long as we don't assume or demand that all other people must prefer the same things or define things the same way. That's what most of life is about...living the way you want to live, and expecting that other people might choose different ways of living that you might or might not agree with.

[vinsanity]

I outearn my partner and he's happy for me because it means we both can enjoy a better lifestyle. He also counts on me to save for us for the future. I guess it depends on the guy. Mine is proud of my accomplishments. And I'm proud of him, too. He works a blue-collar job, and a lot of people look down on that as well. I guess someone is always going to have an opinion on the way others live their lives, and I've assumed that's part and parcel of being human.


I don't personally have a problem with the concept or idea, but in reality, people are judgmental on a guy who earns less than his wife/gf (as you have already illustrated). Maybe I shouldn't really care, but I'm not secure enough with myself career-wise to just let it go.

It's just like how lots of women dont want to date a guy who's thinner or "prettier" than them.

[gemma-dahl]

in reality, people are judgmental on a guy who earns less than his wife/gf (as you have already illustrated).

I actually said that people are judgmental of others in blue-collar professions. And that's too bad, because some of those professions, such as plumbing, earn people better salaries than many white-collar jobs.

[Tayl405]

I actually said that people are judgmental of others in blue-collar professions. And that's too bad, because some of those professions, such as plumbing, earn people better salaries than many white-collar jobs.

And are probably a lot harder!

[winneythepooh7]

but i live around the new york area

Oh geez, gimme strength. :eek:

[hoodie]

Is it possible that the "slutiness" of Hollywood (Paris Hilton, etc) and celebrities who are merely famous for being famous or having secret sex tapes and scandals or the bombardment of sex in the media contributing to an illusion of promiscuity?

Late weigh-in, but I definitely think the media is a huge factor in how many aspects of people & society are perceived and this is no exception.

At the end of the day, it comes down to what gemma said - personal choice. Hopefully everyone dates someone they're comfortable with dating. This thread has gone around and around and around, but basically here's what we get:

1) generalizations are not smart to post on a message board and they piss people off
2) people have different standards and ideas about very abstract ideas such as promiscuity (as with beauty, success, and a million other abstract concepts).

[pawnstar3]

Oh geez, gimme strength. :eek:

I'm not sure what you mean by this cryptic comment - do you care to elaborate?

[pisces2473]

I'm not sure what you mean by this cryptic comment - do you care to elaborate?

I think what she means is just because you live in the metropolitan area (and FYI, so does Winney, and so do I) does not mean that you "know" all women in said metro area.

Jesus H Christ. :rolleyes:

[kmv2005]

I came across this today and thought it might help out some clueless guys out there... :rolleyes:

http://dating.personals.yahoo.com/singles/relationships/24320/dating-tips-9-simple-things-women-want/;_ylc=X3oDMTNkODNkdHMwBF9TAzI3MTYxNDkEX3MDMjE0MjQx MzQ1MQRrAzkgU2ltcGxlIFRoaW5ncyBXb21lbiBXYW50BHNlYw NmcF90b2RheQRzbGsDZGF0aW5nLXRpcHMtOS1zaW1wbGUtdGhp bmdzLXdvbWVuLXdhbnQ-

[vinsanity]

I came across this today and thought it might help out some clueless guys out there... :rolleyes:

http://dating.personals.yahoo.com/singles/relationships/24320/dating-tips-9-simple-things-women-want/;_ylc=X3oDMTNkODNkdHMwBF9TAzI3MTYxNDkEX3MDMjE0MjQx MzQ1MQRrAzkgU2ltcGxlIFRoaW5ncyBXb21lbiBXYW50BHNlYw NmcF90b2RheQRzbGsDZGF0aW5nLXRpcHMtOS1zaW1wbGUtdGhp bmdzLXdvbWVuLXdhbnQ-

I'd focus mostly on #9

[pawnstar3]

I think what she means is just because you live in the metropolitan area (and FYI, so does Winney, and so do I) does not mean that you "know" all women in said metro area.

Jesus H Christ. :rolleyes:

And YOU know all the women in said metro area? give me a break

[ScottyTheBody]

I came across this today and thought it might help out some clueless guys out there... :rolleyes:

http://dating.personals.yahoo.com/singles/relationships/24320/dating-tips-9-simple-things-women-want/;_ylc=X3oDMTNkODNkdHMwBF9TAzI3MTYxNDkEX3MDMjE0MjQx MzQ1MQRrAzkgU2ltcGxlIFRoaW5ncyBXb21lbiBXYW50BHNlYw NmcF90b2RheQRzbGsDZGF0aW5nLXRpcHMtOS1zaW1wbGUtdGhp bmdzLXdvbWVuLXdhbnQ-

I hate to say it but I would say that most of the guys complaining here have tried all that stuff and have had no success. They then see guys applying the opposite tactics and have great success and thus causing the confusion.

Despite popular belief it's not some magical formula and often is not something like "I should have been more like this or that or should have tried this or that". Some people sometimes are not supposed to be together. Some women will want these things that are listed BUT that's only with the person that they already want. Doing those things does not create the "want" which many guys don't understand. Doing those things may in some cases increase the "want" BUT it never creates the "want". If the woman doesn't have that "want" for you inside of her even in the slightest you are screwed and there's nothing you can do about it.

[pisces2473]

And YOU know all the women in said metro area? give me a break

I never said I did, nor have I alluded to it.

I do know Winney though.

[Tayl405]

Despite popular belief it's not some magical formula and often is not something like "I should have been more like this or that or should have tried this or that". Some people sometimes are not supposed to be together. Some women will want these things that are listed BUT that's only with the person that they already want. Doing those things does not create the "want" which many guys don't understand. Doing those things may in some cases increase the "want" BUT it never creates the "want". If the woman doesn't have that "want" for you inside of her even in the slightest you are screwed and there's nothing you can do about it.

I completely agree. And if those things are missing, it could cause some problems, regardless of how much you "want" someone.

[pawnstar3]

Despite popular belief it's not some magical formula and often is not something like "I should have been more like this or that or should have tried this or that". Some people sometimes are not supposed to be together. Some women will want these things that are listed BUT that's only with the person that they already want. Doing those things does not create the "want" which many guys don't understand. Doing those things may in some cases increase the "want" BUT it never creates the "want". If the woman doesn't have that "want" for you inside of her even in the slightest you are screwed and there's nothing you can do about it.

But i think it also depends on the time of life for a woman - in other words, when women want to settle down, they generally do go for guys that have certain qualities, as opposed to just going for the guy they really feel something for - these things are always on a case to case basis though, because everyone is different

And sometimes the girl may find a guy that she "wants" to be with and he doesn't have the qualities she's looking for, and that's doomed to fail as well- because in the end, we all want EVERYTHING we want and it always feels like settling when someone doesn't have it all - i think that's just human nature