Well, an adult doesn’t whine about the unfairness of the world; an adult is proactive and goes for what he or she wants. In other words, whether you’re a man or a woman, if you want to go out on more dates you should ask more people (of the appropriate sex) out.
Screening out the obvious dealbreakers is one thing. Obvious it’s a poor use of time to go out with anyone and everyone.
But beyond that, yeah. If we don’t already know each other too well, I truly don’t think it is very respectful to engage in too much speculation about what your long-term potential could be besides “Hey, it’s possible”…and most people don’t get too let down when a “hey, it’s possible” kind of thing doesn’t work out. That’s more of an “it was worth a shot” moment.
It’s kind of like how I wouldn’t meet a black dude at a party and start thinking about how he’d be be a great rap partner and we could record an album together and market it in Japan and be famous, or be in a social club with a guy in glasses and dreaming about how he’d be interested in joining my startup and being my tech director and we could sell it to Microsoft and make a fortune, or meeting a fit lady and start thinking of all the time we could spend being gym buddies and how I’m going to lose ten pounds because she’d just be such a GREAT gym partner.
It’s much more respectful to approach people as people, not fantasies. Then you can figure out your common ground. If they dude says he loves rap music, then you can plan your album together. But it may turn out that he really likes punk rock. Then you can go find someone who likes rap, or you can maybe think of dabbling in punk rock. But it’s not useful to get all sulky about being “rejected” by someone you knew relatively little about.
Boy, you sure do read alot of baloney into what other people say and wax verbose about it.
Right, because having a great relationship and/or marriage is exactly as likely as making a rap album and becoming famous in Japan.
I get that you kind of have an image of yourself that you long to project of someone who is iconoclastic and deep and too unconventional to be immediately understood by the masses, but you honestly just come off to me as a bit clueless and self-absorbed when you’re posting about relationships.
You folks may or may not find it a “useful convention”.
Me, I didn’t attend that convention, didn’t wear the convention hat, didn’t bring home the t shirt or anything. Over the years there has probably been some action I’ve missed out on, some relationships that I didn’t get to experience, and so forth.
But there’s also been a lot of heavily gendered and hostile territory I didn’t have to drag my emotional belly across. Frankly, way back in the days of my virginity, I chose to boycott the male-as-sexual-aggressor courtship role.
All I ever asked for was to be met in the middle. And maybe perhaps the tiniest hair over on my side, just to be sure, since we’re all overexposed to conventional expectations, you know?
Even farther back, recalling early puberty, the girls at 12, 13, 14, they didn’t have any disinclination to make overtures. And as long as the girls were reaching out, I was comfortable doing likewise. If someone wasn’t interested, no harm no foul, you know? But once female folk began indicating annoyance and resentment and expressed resentment that so many boys were so often only after one thing, I tended to give them space. I like that stuff, oh yeah, but I like girls and I can wait. You got too many guys poking and pulling and wheedling at you for sex sex sex and you want more connection first. Fine. So now it’s your serve. You probably assume I’d like it if sexual things happen, so why should I restate the obvious? OH BUT THEN THERE’S THIS ‘DATE’ THING. Date, pass, whatever, it’s really all the same process, you know. I don’t even need each and every one of you to meet me halfway, just “on average”. But seriously, you’ve got to take some initiative. You did when you were 13. You know you did. And you liked it. It was fun. What happened to you girls?
It’s silly to be all heartbroken and crushed just from getting shot down upon a first approach (after about age 18). And it is not good for your own well being to become irrationally emotionally invested before you even know if you have any chance – not sure how it’s an offense against the other person, but that’s how the OP feels.
But that still does not remove the fact that even in the absence of such, the first-approach scenario IS a stressor. ISTM that part of the position, as I’ve understood it, is that the “man makes the first move” convention may be arbitrary, but that the potential failure is so trifling and insignificant for the man, that it should continue to be so. Then there are those that seem to feel there must be something wrong, maladjusted, with the man for whom it is any more stressful than trying a new brand of beer.
But that is itself unrealistic. Of course a normal, sensible person may be more or less comfortable making the first move, and it may have taken more effort to take the chance; just as a normal, sensible person who is the object of the approach may be more open or more defensive about it. Yes, he should dust himself off and move along, but he still got dust on himself, don’t deny it. *If it’s indeed such a trivial nothing for anyone “well adjusted”, then BOTH males and females should be equally on the spot for it. *
Otherwise, it would seem to me not so much an “unfair burden” but rather something of a cheat, by using the first-move convention as a method to screen out the “socially awkward”(*) male right at square zero (meanwhile his female counterpart is probably in the tough situation of being actively hit upon when it’s always uncomfortable).
(Y’know, these sorts of discussions make me feel better about my reputation for being “signals-oblivious”. Since I don’t notice in the first instance that I am being invited to make a move, I am spared the whole song and dance until she grabs me by the collar 
)
JRD
(*How long until we see ads for a treatment for Social Awkwardness Disorder - possible side effects include blurred vision, slurred speech, dizziness, fainting, vomiting, incontinence, memory blackouts; do not drive or operate machinery, do not use if pregnant or planning to be pregnant)
I don’t understand who in this thread is advocating this. Nobody’s saying “You know, sulking about being rejected is a great idea.” Nor, for that matter, do I understand how you know what’s going on in someone’s head when they ask you out. Nor, to add a third confusion, do I understand how someone fantasizing to themselves is “offensive.”
To use a crasser example, if you’re even halfway attractive - and IIRC you are - a LOT of guys, like hundreds and hundreds of guys who’ve met you, have fantasized having sex with you. In a lot of really elaborate and interesting ways, in a variety of fascinating scenarios. If you’re offended by people fantasizing about you, believe me, you should be offended by almost every male you meet who isn’t a family member.
Or you could take the position of being offended by people’s actions and words, not some hypothetical projection of why they elect to pursue the mates they do. Really, you’re laying the responsibility for being the asker-outer on us. I can take that. Would you please mind at least letting me pick who I ask out based on whatever criteria I want?
I can’t speak for all the other girls and women, but while I enjoyed asking guys for dates, because I was all liberated and shit, I DIDN’T like the way most of them figured that I wanted to get laid on the first date when I asked THEM out. I wanted to get to know them well enough to find out if I wanted to have sex with them, and for me, that takes more than one evening.
Yes it is an unfair burden! :mad:
The simple truth of the matter is the type of guys who give a shit about approaching a woman as “people” or trying to find common ground, aren’t the ones who you are going to find confident.
If I had any advice for the Der Trihs types of the world who (based on what I gather from this thread) have difficulty making an approach, it is that I’ve had good success in terms of getting laid in my 55+ years primarily because I don’t view any woman as an ends but as a means to getting something I want. The interaction has nothing to do with her interests and desires, but how I can read them and feed stuff back to her that will make her interested in me until I get what I want out of the arrangement.
Most people are incapable of looking at the world as I do, so my advice then is to fake it. Think only of yourself and think of yourself as being intrinsically superior to any woman you ask out. I can say with 100% honesty I’ve never asked anyone out who I didn’t feel superior to, and for that reason rejection matters not at all because I don’t mind being rejected by someone who I look down on.
I’m stealing that and passing it out at rehearsal tonight. That’s a great comic monologue to use for auditions. I might even post a copy of it this weekend when we do auditions for our next show. I think the director might get a kick out of it.
Enjoy,
Steven
Not necessarily. Probably about 30+ years ago I realized in many ways I’m not the average homo sapien, I do view any woman I date as a means to entertainment and fun, but not solely as a sex object. For one, this is by its nature the only way I can view any romantic partner. I actively dislike spending too much time with people, I abhor the thought of living with another person, of sharing a life with another person, I can only tolerate friends and family on my terms and in limited amounts. A long time ago I quit worrying about trying to find someone I could tolerate living with so I could do the whole white picket fence thing because I realize I don’t want that life. I also realized that my desire to even see women was cyclical and primarily based on me being bored doing other things, so periodically I’ll date.
I also have what I would consider (based on other men) a below-average sex drive. The joke about men thinking about sex every 8 seconds…I’m as far from that as it gets. To be candid, I don’t even like or have ever liked pornography, I never saw the appeal. In general I desire to have sex and do things like go out on dates every few months, so I’ll see someone for a month or so then dispense with it until I feel the desire again, which may be 2-4 months later. Since I have these desires, but never a desire to form a permanent bond, it is intrinsically not possible for me to view a woman as anything other than a means. But that is not the same as me viewing them only as a sex object. When dating, it is part of the fun for me that we both have fun going and doing interesting things and etc, I’m not the only one who gets anything out of these arrangements, and I’m not in it purely for sexual pleasure, either.
I find it interesting that so many people complain about having to ask women out. Would you rather be in a traditional woman role and have to sit around waiting for someone to ask you?
If I had to choose between the traditionally masculine or traditionally feminine role, I would pick the traditionally masculine role. It gives me greater freedom than the traditionally feminine role.
But it’s a false choice. I want neither the traditionally masculine nor traditionally feminine role in dating, family, work etc.
Some men/women differences are inescapable and a result of biology (e.g: women can bear children, men are statistically stronger). The elements which are inescapable don’t need to be backed up by social mores if they really are inescapable. If we feel the need to enforce through through social mores, it is precisely because they are escapable, otherwise the social mores would be pointless.
It’s also not just about me or men. A lot of women are worse off because of traditional gender roles when it comes to dating.
Can’t it be both useful and unfair? Most things are, to some degree.
The presumption here is that “guys ask girls out” because of social programming about proper gender roles. Surely some it has to do with this, but some of it could also be due to differences in what turns men on vs. what turns women on.
When I’m going about on my day or even when I’m at a bar, rarely if ever do men catch my attention. I am generally oblivious to them. Even if I physically notice them, “potential romantic interest” isn’t generally the first thing that comes to mind. For a guy to be attractive to me, I need to hear his voice and see an inkling of his personality. Without that information, he often won’t be on my radar. (Unless he’s exceptionally handsome.)
Men, so I’ve heard, as more visual creatures. Women who are perfect strangers to them can still catch their attention, even if they aren’t exceptionally gorgeous. While personality is important to most men, I don’t think it’s as critical of a factor when it comes to getting their attention. So a guy can be in a bar and identify at least 4 or 5 women he wouldn’t mind chatting it up with, based only on what his eyes see.
A woman, in contrast, could scan the same room and maybe only identify 1 guy (the extraordinarily handsome one in the corner being mobbed by 20 other women). Why? Because the vast majority of men aren’t going to get her attention just on the basis of sight. A guy with average looks often doesn’t become appealing until he shows some charm, and charm is hard to pick up on in the absence of communication. Yes, she could initiate that communication, but the drive to do so often just ain’t there. It’s much like a guy initiating conversation with a woman who he’s only physically neutral about.
This is why it doesn’t make sense for men to complain about women not asking them out. I think this attitude is men projecting their ideas of attractiveness on women. Matthew McConaughey probably has tons of women asking him out, but unless your looks on par with his, you’ll need to use your personality. You can’t do this if you sit back and wait for her to come to you.
face,
You make a convincing argument that it’s usually better for men to initiate communication with a woman than the other way around.
But not that men should ask women out rather than the other way around, unless you’re only talking about cases where one person asks out the other without any interaction beforehand.
Yes, most men will have interest in a woman without having communicated with her. Yes, most women will require communication with a man before being interested in him.
Once they have both seen each other, communicated with each other and gotten an impression of each other’s personality, I see no non-sexist reason why the onus should be on the man to ask the woman out or why the woman should refrain from doing so.
But those aren’t the two choices today. Right now it’s Women get pursued and if they feel like it can pursue as well. Men only really have the chance of pursuit. There’s no question that women have the advantage in modern dating.
But men and women are in essentially the same position. The difference is that for men, every women pings, and for women, no men ping. Essentially it is the same situation because no information exists. If I walk into a bar with mostly people my age, I would say it breaks down as 5-10% really hot, 80% of some level of doability, and 5-10% unattractive. The perceived difference is that men place far less importance on the act of sex. So if they are reasonably horny, they will go home with any of that 85-90%.
That is the exact same for men. Most women have average looks and personality is what tips it.
But that’s the thing. Women very often ask guys out in these situations. I wouldn’t be surprised if most men who have been asked out by women were friends or acquaintances with them first, not strangers.
Framing it as having the “onus” still strikes me as flawed. It’s not about duty or obligation, but rather assumptions (wrongly or rightly) about how men express interest. “If he’s interested in me, he’ll ask me out” is that assumption. Maybe you think women shouldn’t have that assumption, but you ignoring reality in favor of shoulds doesn’t get you very far in life.
(bolding mine)
They might be in the same position, but their ping frequency is different, so I don’t understand how your point alters mine.