Dating Double Standard

[Malthus]

@Ludovic

The problem here is that many women categorize men pretty quickly as “friends” and thus negate the possibility of going out with them since they don’t want to “ruin the friendship”.

The problem is, by the time you are comfortable asking her out more formally many women will have categorized you and thus written you off. Some men do this too, but far far fewer.

Although I think this could tip the scale toward more men getting asked out, I don’t see it resulting in more rather than fewer dates total. But it would certainly result in higher-quality dates.

I don’t advocate waiting around forever before you show your interest - far from it; I believe in really listening and paying attention to what a woman is telling you (and it may be by glance, smile, body language) - and then, revealing your own interest as she reveals hers.

This process may take a while; on the other hand, it may take only one night - in the right circumstances.

For example, say you meet a woman at a party. You start to talk to her, in a scrum of other people. Does she appear really interested, or is she glancing around, looking for some friend of hers?

If she is interested, offer to move to a more quiet part of the room. Will she go with you?

If she does, say to a sofa, is she sitting tilted towards you? Is she smiling at you? Do you feel you have a real “connection”?

Now you have been talking a lot with her that night. You may move around, but somehow you always find yourself talking with this one woman. She seems to welcome this, or even makes it easy for you - reserves your seat on the sofa to when you go to get a drink, that sort of thing. You now have a choice.

If you want to play it safe and take it slow, you say something like “it’s getting late, I gotta go, but I must admit I have had a really fun time with you tonight. Do you want to keep in touch?” If she says “yes”, and gives you her number, you call her soon and make plans to go out for coffee or drinks, or to go do something fun; and at this later meeting, you indicate your interest - if it seems appropriate.

Alternatively, if you are feeling bold, you say something like “It’s getting late, this party is breaking up - do you wanna continue this at my place?”. If she goes back to your place, chances are she is interested in the same things you are.

Worst she can do in either case is say “no” (and if she does, don’t press!). Chances are, if she has been having as good a time as you think, that she won’t. Why should she? She’s had a good time with you so far. If she wasn’t interested in you, she would have let you know, by indicating that she would rather talk to someone else, or by body language.

And if she does say “no”, so what? There are a million reasons someone doesn’t want to get physical with you - maybe she really likes you, but she is comming off a bad relationship. Whatever the case, you can be sure it isn’t because she wishes to humiliate you or something bad like that - just play it casual, no hard feelings, and try again with someone else.

Use this approach and you are guarenteed to not lack for female companionship.

[Beware_of_Doug]

@Malthus

The process doesn’t have to be painful or humiliating.

I want very much to believe this, but I just can’t. So many people put themselves through so much misery trying to find someone that, honestly, I’m a bit resentful that you fluff it away as just poor technique. (Maybe because I’ve always been very bad at learning signs and body language, and not looking forward to going back into that minefield with a detector I know to be faulty. Oh well…)

[Men] take the fact that a woman doesn’t want a physical relationship with them as a wounding personal rejection, rather than simply a preferance.

I think you’re missing something here. This feeling is something deeply socialized into men: we have to prove ourselves as men constantly, to women, other men, and ourselves. Very high on the list of requirements (if not #1) is that you make the grade as a sexual being. The sexual turndown, I think, implies we are a 3-way loser. We fail in competition with another man (even if there is no actual man to compete with), we fail to please a woman as a man, and we fail to live up to our own expectations as well.

All by way of saying that we can’t just shed these erroneous assumptions like dirty socks. They are often deeply part of us.

[CanvasShoes]

@Robot Arm

CanvasShoes, I think you read more into my post than I intended. I certainly wasn’t trying to say that women have it easy when it comes to initiating a date. In the grand scheme of relationships, I don’t have an insightful answer to this; I’m still trying to understand and clarify the question.

Oh…I think I was more answering some of the other posters on that response, not so much yours. It was more of a general all purpose response

Is that really still true, after decades of Cosmopolitan covers and six seasons of Sex and the City? (Unless the boundary-pushing naughtiness sends the message that good girls don’t do those kinds of things.) I’ve never heard a guy criticize a woman for taking some initiative and asking him out.

If you really say that society discourages women from doing this, I’ll take your word for it. But it would help if you could try to explain it a bit or give some [examples.

You know, I’ve never seen Sex and the City, and I stopped reading cosmo years ago. But out in public is what I’m talking about. People you work with, other popular entertainment, stuff like that.

That’s NOT to say that there isn’t also some evidence of those trying to turn the tide, but there are plenty of people still clinging to the old ways, and judging those that don’t.

As I said, even back when it was completely de rigeur I didn’t really adhere to societal “wisdom” But the pressure is still there.

What’s wrong with the guys on this board, then?

They’re all taken, or at the least 1500 miles away, or both.

And on a bit more serious note, you can dismiss anyone by saying “well, apart from them.” If you skip over the ones you already know about, then there isn’t really an answer to your question.

I know, if was more of a frustrated annoyed rhetorical question than it was one with any real hope of an answer.

Now, where are all the interesting women?

Well, I happen to live in Anchorage.

[Malthus]

@Beware of Doug

I want very much to believe this, but I just can’t. So many people put themselves through so much misery trying to find someone that, honestly, I’m a bit resentful that you fluff it away as just poor technique. (Maybe because I’ve always been very bad at learning signs and body language, and not looking forward to going back into that minefield with a detector I know to be faulty. Oh well…)

I’m not saying that the process isn’t painful and humiliating for a lot of people; I’m just saying that it doesn’t have to be.

It is like any other skill. It requires learning and attention, and some people are better at it than others - but anyone can learn to do it okay; and unless you want to be a Cassanova, you don’t really need to be an expert - good enough to obtain a single woman is good enough for anyone, I think!

Now, I’m not claiming to be incredibly skilled at this - after all, being married for a decade, I haven’t actually done it for a long, long time.

But I do know that going into it with an attitude like it is hopeless and will cause you pain and humiliation, is a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Put yourself in a woman’s shoes, think about the experience from her point of view. How can you make the experience more enjoyable for her?

@Beware of Doug

I think you’re missing something here. This feeling is something deeply socialized into men: we have to prove ourselves as men constantly, to women, other men, and ourselves. Very high on the list of requirements (if not #1) is that you make the grade as a sexual being. The sexual turndown, I think, implies we are a 3-way loser. We fail in competition with another man (even if there is no actual man to compete with), we fail to please a woman as a man, and we fail to live up to our own expectations as well.

All by way of saying that we can’t just shed these erroneous assumptions like dirty socks. They are often deeply part of us.

Okay, I understand.

I was never much like this, but I can appreciate the problem.

The best way to think about the subject is this. All you have to do to “win” is to find a single solitary woman. You only have to succeed once to be a “winner”. If you do, you will have a girlfriend and thus “make the grade”.

Now you have a goal. How best achieve this goal?

I really believe that following the advice I have given is the best way - that is, to not take a turndown as a devistating blow to your pride, but just part of the game.

If you don’t, then you will fear the consequences of making your interest known (a devistating blow) so much that you won’t do it easily or often - and, as a result, you won’t get a relationship with a woman, which is an even worse blow to your pride!

Sure, it isn’t going to be easy the first couple of times. But like any other test of courage, it will get easier through repetition.

[Malthus]

Just to correct my previous post - I myself don’t think of women as a prize to be won - I’m just pointing out that if one does, the same approach I already advocate ought to work as well.

For myself, I think of the real “prize” as getting cuddles, feeling happy, someone to talk to and dream with, and of course sex. I’ve never cared much about “masculine achievement”, “proving myself”, or rating myself against others - if other people are having a good time, so much the better!

[Green_Cymbeline]

@June

The rejection hurts just as much, but you can pretend to brush it off as if it weren’t a big deal and save the crying fits and suicide attempts for later that evening.

Being rejected is one of the most soul-crushing experiences in the world.

Dude. Wow. Suicide attempts for getting turned down for one date? :eek: I know rejection hurts, but on such a small scale? Try to put it into perspective. Try getting dumped for no apparent reason by your significant other of 9 years. Now that rejection hurts.

@June

Maybe she has emotional problems. Yeah that’s it.

Sounds to me like you have some problems too.

I am a girl and I have asked guys out many times. It’s easy.

Think about it this way. You’re asking someone out for the first time and they say no. What have you lost? You had not invested anything in her. You don’t even know her. You are not in love with her. You just wanted to go get coffee. The worst you should feel is a slightly bruised ego. Suck it up and move on, and try again.

[Robot_Arm]

@CanvasShoes

I know, if was more of a frustrated annoyed rhetorical question than it was one with any real hope of an answer.

Yeah, I know the feeling.

I’ve never seen Sex and the City either, or read Cosmopolitan; I just know them by reputation. But the reputation is that standards of proper behavior for women have loosened up considerably in the last few decades.

And I thought Alaska was supposed to be crawling with available guys.

[Sevastopol]

Need sex?

Find an insecure woman who drinks.

There, the secret’s out.

[CanvasShoes]

@Robot Arm

And I thought Alaska was supposed to be crawling with available guys.

Well, that’s a mistaken holdover from the heyday of the pipeline days when the ratio was around 10:1.

Now it’s almost even 1.05:1.

But haven’t I done TOLE you guys and TOLE you?

Re: Alaskan men (decades old alaskan girl saying)

The odds are good, but the goods are VERY odd.

[blowero]

Excellent OP! I think a lot of guys feel that way, even if they don’t admit it. If women always had to ask men out, there would be a lot less dating going on.

@Martin Hyde

Personally I always used the pray and spray dating method. Say if I’m in a club/bar with 100 people in it. Let’s say it’s the kind of bar/club I usually end up in and the breakdown is 60 guys 40 women.

And then there’s about 20 women that are actually not there with some guy.

Of those 20 women let’s say I find 10 attractive.

In these situations I’d ask all 10 of them out if I had to.

And even after I had a date set up I might collect phone numbers, if I woman gives out her number that says she’s probably pretty willing in this day and age.

As it is, my method resulted in a lot of flat out “no,” “sorry nos”, “no thanks” et cetera type things. At the very beginnign that’s hard and there’s no lying about it. After rejection number 10-15 it’s just like “eh, I’ve learned if I ask enough out one will say yes, no use dwelling on the misses.”

Kudos to you, Martin. But not everyone is emotionally tough enough to do that.

[blowero]

(I’m sure it’s a lot easier if you’re really attractive, too.)

[Malthus]

@blowero

(I’m sure it’s a lot easier if you’re really attractive, too.)

I strongly suspect that being shy and/or not having an attitude condusive to attracting women is the problem for most men, rather than being unattractive physically.

Heck, I’ve always been overweight, I’m not ugly but I’m no prize either … yet I used to manage okay.

In my experience, enough women will go for the guy who maybe isn’t perfect physically, but who is funny and interesting, over the perfect “10” who is moody and self-absorbed - and remember, you only need one.

Unless you are of Quasimodo-like hideousness, looks should not be an impediment - seriously, guys have the advantage here, as guys are (in general, and of course subject to numerous exceptions) much more selective on the basis of looks than women!

[CanvasShoes]

@Malthus

I strongly suspect that being shy and/or not having an attitude condusive to attracting women is the problem for most men, rather than being unattractive physically.
…
Unless you are of Quasimodo-like hideousness, looks should not be an impediment - seriously, guys have the advantage here, as guys are (in general, and of course subject to numerous exceptions) much more selective on the basis of looks than women!

I submit that the range of “goodlooking” regarding women’s wants and needs contains a LOT broader variety overall than that of men’s concept of “goodlooking”.

A lot of us not only accept, but PREFER the teddy bear types (the big strong chubby ones).

It is a LOT more "personality’ than looks. As many Self Proclaimed Nice Guys (no, NOT anyone here) claim, women only want “bad boys”. When the reason that so many women go for so-called “bad boys” is that they exude the personality traits that initially attract us. They’re lively, fun, they CONTRIBUTE to the conversation, they smile and laugh a lot, and so on.

Now, it is true that a man who is a true jerk won’t get to keep the woman should that all turn out to be false and he’s really a jerk. But what we’re talking about in THIS thread is the initial ability to attract us. And for that, as malthus said, unless you’re quasimodo hideous, it’s MUCH more about the personality than it is the looks.

That a specific woman isn’t into you merely means that you’re not her type, NOT that you aren’t attractive in either personality OR looks.

[Syntropy]

Good point. And this leads me to add: Don’t be surprised if the drop dead gorgeous woman you’re salivating over ends up with a guy less attractive than you. It has nothing to do with her vanity, much as you’d like to believe it. More to do with the fact that the guy she’s with appreciates her for more than her looks, and treats her like she’s more than a trophy.

[Gfab912]

Little advice from the peanut gallery, don’t treat the “date” as a “less eat, go out and maybe kiss afterwards” affair. Look at it as two friends hanging out to eat and catch up with what’s going on in each other’s life. If you weren’t so bashful, I’d give you other advice, but this “politically-correct” time we live in, just be yourself… that’s the person she asked out.

[Robot_Arm]

@CanvasShoes

I submit that the range of “goodlooking” regarding women’s wants and needs contains a LOT broader variety overall than that of men’s concept of “goodlooking”.

I’m still not convinced that’s true. Supermodels get all the magazine covers (that’s why they’re called “supermodels”), and the aggressively vacuous type seems to be popular these days, but that’s not what all guys are looking for. There are men who prefer the smart, shy, librarian types.

I personally have a huge weakness for women with glasses. Dorothy Parker didn’t know everything.

[CanvasShoes]

@Robot Arm

I’m still not convinced that’s true. Supermodels get all the magazine covers (that’s why they’re called “supermodels”), and the aggressively vacuous type seems to be popular these days, but that’s not what all guys are looking for. There are men who prefer the smart, shy, librarian types.

I personally have a huge weakness for women with glasses. Dorothy Parker didn’t know everything.

Well, I didn’t really mean supermodels. I meant that even with the few additions or subractions of standard beauty characteristics, it seems that for a large percentage of men the concept of “goodlooking” falls under a narrower range.

Generally they must be no more than a size 8, have certain types of features, big baby eyes, shiny specific colors of hair, etc. It’s funny, I always hear men say “Oh, I don’t like very much makeup if any on a woman:”, but Miss Maybelline with 9 inch lashes walks into the room and their tongues reel out, and their eyeballs bug out of their heads.

I’m not saying this in a bitter way, more of a roadwearied amused one. I understand that men by and large (of course not all) have a tendency to be more motivated by what they see, where women (and of course not all) have a tendency to be motivated (not to mention remember FOREVER :D), what they hear.

And of course, we women, when confronted with the emotional equivalent of the “hot” man our hearts fall out, and our ears bug out of OUR heads. Similar reactions, different stimulus. Please don’t think I’m making some judgment on men for this particular characteristic.

It does exist, and just like the little quirks of women, it does affect the outcome of dating, and pre-dating situations.

[Robot_Arm]

@CanvasShoes

…specific colors of hair,…

Okay, you got me on that one. I generally go for blondes, brunettes or redheads, and apart from that it just doesn’t work.

And I really am trying to be serious about this. (Well, honest, but frivilously expressed.) Of course, I can really only give my own opinion on this. I’ve heard guys rave about some woman who just doesn’t do a thing for me, and I’ve seen women I thought were drop-dead gorgeous that nobody else seems to notice. I don’t know how wide a range it covers, but I know we aren’t all looking for the same thing.

[CanvasShoes]

@Robot Arm

Okay, you got me on that one. I generally go for blondes, brunettes or redheads, and apart from that it just doesn’t work.

[/quote]
And I really am trying to be serious about this. (Well, honest, but frivilously expressed.) Of course, I can really only give my own opinion on this. I’ve heard guys rave about some woman who just doesn’t do a thing for me, and I’ve seen women I thought were drop-dead gorgeous that nobody else seems to notice. I don’t know how wide a range it covers, but I know we aren’t all looking for the same thing.
[/QUOTE]

Well, you’re one of the "good’ ones then.

[bitwise]

@iamthewalrus(:3=

Actually, what men get out of the traditional model of dating is an optimal pairing for themselves at the expense of a pessimal pairing for women.

Although it might seem counter-intuitive, pairing up mates based on a system of one group always initiating contact and the other will greatly favor the asking group. Professor Stephen Rudich at CMU has a lecture on an iterative dating process called the Traditional Marriage Algorithm that demonstrates this. Unfortunately, I can’t find a good explanation of it anywhere. If people are interested, I’ll try to rederive it.

Rudich’s site is still up. Unfortunately, it seems that he took down all the non-ppt versions of his lectures, and I have not bothered to install PowerPoint at home. If anyone is interested, the ppt file is here.

http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/afs/cs.cmu.edu/academic/class/15251/discretemath/Lectures/dating.ppt

iamthewalrus(:3, just out of curiosity, what year are you? I graduated 2002.