online dating service
REGISTER | MAIL/PROFILE | HELP | NOW ONLINE | SEARCH | RATING | FORUMS | SUCCESS STORIES

 

     
Posted In Forum:
Home   login   MyForums  
Show ALL Forums  
 
 Author Thread: Love and being in love
 x_file
Joined: 6/25/2006
Msg: 22 (view)
 
Love and being in love
Posted: 11/19/2009 4:06:46 PM

My opinion, since you asked, is this:
Marriage vows say "to love, honor and cherish" and not "to BE in love, honor and cherish" for a reason. Love is an action, a behavior, a commitment. Real love is not a feeling you enter into or exit at random. Nor is it a phenomenon one "falls" into or out of.


You have it some what backwards, and some of it is just wishful thinking. I will tackle one thing at a time.

Real love, real in the sense of what actually happens between couples, is many ways what you attribute to "fake love". Couples do fall in love and do fall out of love - that's the reality of it. Some couples do fall in love for a long, long, long time, some till death, and some only for a short period of time.

Real love, or the "essence of love" is way beyond the comprehension of many. Philsophers have for millenniums tried to understand the mysterious of love, the first well known such philosopher being Plato - and to my understanding without much success.

Any person with a little common sense can see that love is not a commitment. Thinking it is, is wishful thinking on your part. Many people have made a commitment without loving the other person and for reasons other than love. And many people have made a commitment because they love the other person. But love comes before commitment, and thus cannot be commitment. Commitment is an expression of love, not love itself. A distinction you would if know what love is.

Love is a behavior.... well it's not but it is close so I'd partially agree. Love is more like a mind state and mind states are responsible for behaviors...

Just out of curiosity, in the vows "to love, honor and cherish", what does the church actually mean by "to love"? Clearly today's understanding of "to love" includes "to have sex with".

Also, the vows are a fairly ridiculous promise a person can make to another. That's my option. I know I can't force myself to love another, so what's the point in making an eternal promise knowing all too well that if the love is gone, I can do nothing to bring it back? All I can do is "pretend to love" - thought I respect myself enough so I can't even do that.

OP,
For practical purposes love and being in love are more or less the same. The person who is "in love" is obviously under the influence of love.

If you want a simple distinction, "in love" is when you want to do him/her, and love is when you have had sex, and see the real the person (their soul if you will), and still want to have sex with him/her.
 x_file
Joined: 6/25/2006
Msg: 1607 (view)
 
Why women want guys to come to THEM
Posted: 9/29/2009 10:21:33 PM

Nope, HERE's a suck-sinked version of the last million pages:

Men: I am right, you are wrong, if you don't agree that I'm right, you are one of those entitled biotches.

Women: Here's how I feel, and here's my perspective on it.

Men: NO YOU ARE WRONG YOU HAVEN'T PROVEN ANYTHING AND YOUR PERSONAL EXPERIENCE MEANS NOTHING. Now, here's my personal experience, which is the only valid way of looking at things...


A better summary of the last 50+ pages is as follows:

Men persist asking few simple questions, while women do everything else but give an adequate honest answer.

At the heart of this thread there is a question which requires nothing to be proven, nor any experience to be consulted, only an honest thoughtful answer.



Red I never said you or any names, so if you take my silly posts to heart then you have issues more than what can be helped by posters on POF.


Your posts are not silly. Some of your posts are highly offensive.



Its a joke man, all the posts are for fun, this is entertainment.


You have a cruel sense of humor.

And not all posts here are for entertainment. Some posts have merit beyond that of "entertainment".



Nah, "power" is a man's game. That's man-think.


It's a woman's game too.



And then the women are sitting here, confused, saying, "But I just want to be loved?! Is that so wrong?!"


They are doing a lot more than just that.



Countries with even more stringent equality laws than we have, like Sweden, still have a persistent gender gap of about 12% with women earning .88 one the dollar compared with men. They have conducted extensive research into what causes the gap to persist and have concluded it is the choices women make rather than inequality of opportunity or gender bias in pay.


Concise and to the point.



We truly have not achieved economic equality by a longshot, yet there are some men on here who are adamant that we pay equally in the cost of dating.


Belle Lass, you condemn equality in one post, then turn around and praise it in another.

Also, both of your assertions in the above statement are false, and off topic.



Their reasoning being somewhat misogynistic, I feel. I hear the rant "You wanted equality, well, ya got it! Pony up."


You hear wrong then.



In my personal situation, I don't have that issue, but I do feel for many women who are feeling obligated to pay for a possibly over-budget dating lifestyle because the man feels entitled to take her money in the name of fairness and equality.


You do not know what you are talking about. Please copy and paste or link to the post(s) which say what you just implied.



Let's get facts straight here. I'm not asking a woman to pay for me. She shouldn't have to pay for "both" of us; that would be unfair, right? But if women like you "expect" men to pay for themselves "and" the woman, it's perfectly acceptable. Gotcha.


As Chris Rock so bluntly put it:

"**** cost money, but****is free! Any money you (a woman) spend on****is a bad investment. Nothing dries up a **** quicker than a woman reaching for her wallet."



When Savona got up on her hind legs and spoke her piece, a few posts back, she did not name names


I disagree with that. She was referring to all the guys that write in the forums, so by inclusion she did name names.



I thought I was the only one who picked up on that.



If a man had done it, he'd gotten treated worse by me.


If a man made that post, he'd would have been banned.



Actually x-file, lemme answer this one! What I was specifically taught was "NICE girls don't ask boys out. NICE girls don't call boys. NICE girls don't chase boys".

And when I railed about what a double standard this was and how unfair it was I was specifically told "Yeah, it sucks and yeah it is not fair and yeah, it is a double standard, but it is the way life IS and you need to deal with the way life works and not how you wish
it would work. The times might be changing, but they haven't yet."


Regarding the first part, I want to know if your parents specifically said to you, "Don't ask boys out", not "Nice girls don't ask boys out", etc., for that can be nothing more than an observation they were sharing with you rather than trying to teach you how to behave when it comes to dating.

I mean, "Nice girls don't ask boys out", is not quite the same as, "You should not ask boys out" for the first only applies to you if you happen to be a nice girl, whereas the second applies to you regardless.

As to your the second point, I don't quite see its relevance. I read the paragraph few times and the main point seems to me to be "Make lemonade if life gives you lemons". I don't think that person was saying, "Men ask women out. That's how life is. Therefore don't ask men out."



Where as most men on here are full of bull shiit.




I thought it was just most posters. Now it's most men on here. Just come out an say it, most men on the planet are full of bullshit.



They pretend to be so open minded to many types of women, but hey we know the truth. Most of the men posters still dream that this 5'9 blond bombshell will just ask them out, pay her own way and be at least 5 - 10 years younger than the men.


What horrible dream to have!!! Bad men!

I'd reply to the rest of your post, but it is way off topic. We already did the "Who pays for first date?" thread.



Depending on how gorgeous men perceive them, there’s no shortage of guys that have no problem bending over backward supplying this obedience and worship.


Yep. And thus men are partly to blame for the current dating chaos.



The truth was I was not actually referring to any one poster in particular. SOME posters ... ok well MANY of the men posters on here, who spend half their posts trying to justify why it is the woman's fault that they don't get asked out and WANT the woman to ask them out is just one for a good laugh.


Currently there are about 1630 posts. For simplicity lets assume half are by men and half by women. That means 815 posts were made by men. The most favorable interpretation of "MANY" is 51%.

51% of 815 posts is about 415 posts.

Therefore, you should be able point to 415 posts in which a man blames a woman or women for not being asked out.

Why don't you back your claim by providing, say, just 5 posts in which a man blames a woman or women for not being asked out.

I've read this entire thread from start to finish. I can tell you are making false accusations. You are blaming most men for something they never did.
 x_file
Joined: 6/25/2006
Msg: 1350 (view)
 
Why women want guys to come to THEM
Posted: 9/26/2009 7:14:50 AM

^^^I can assure you that I am not making anything up---33 years ago (yes, my friend well before you were born) things were pretty much the same as they are today, if not more so: boys asked girls out. And yes being 14 years old in 1976 and starting high school my parents did talk to me about sex, dating and expectations. At no time did my parents ever suggest that girls asked boys out. It was always the other way.


So your parents explicitly said to you: "Don't ask boys out"?



And yeah..this is typically what most girls and boys my contemporaries at the time were taught/modeled about dating and relating.


I know many people your age, but not one who was TAUGHT "Don't ask boys out".



You can believe me when I say that there isn't any young person that wants to be doing something at that age that is different from any of their friends, or to stand out. I was no different.


Social pressure was mostly likely why you followed certain dating practices rather than because you were taught.



^^^It's unfortunate that you didn't read earlier in the thread because this answer was written specifically to address one of verity's points.


I have been following this thread since it began and have read every single post. Btw, you misunderstood verity's question/point.

He asked a comparative question. That is, he wanted to know why some women feel "A successful relationship takes work", but do not feel "I should make my interest known to a man I like". The connection being that dating is the first stage of a relationship, therefore if women believe relationships take work, they also ought to believe dating takes work...the work consisting of finding the right man and asking him out.

Your reply has little to do with his question for he wasn't suggesting there was a lack of effort, he knows there is a lack of effort, and he wanted to know "Why?" given what I've just said in the last paragraph.


I used to think this was unfair, and then I did a tally of the things guys are expected to do by society vs. the things girls are expected to do vs. society.

Guys do not get the short end of the stick.


Care to share your "tally" with us?



This perception just proves how incredibly biassed some of the parties are. Because most of the threads I've read in here it is the MEN dictating all of these things, all as knee jerk reactions to what supposedly some women are doing in their lives;


There is no bias on verity's part. The bias is actually with you. Most of the threads you've been reading do not have men dictating those things, but rather trying to have an equal say in them, precisely because they don't. If they did, they will be on the defensive, like women are.



it appears the forum in many of these topics is nothing mroe than a backlashing... in which case women are being made to pay for other woman's sins; and we are being told the way we "should be doing it now".


You are projecting. I don't see how, in this particular thread, any man is making any woman play for the sin's of another by thinking that if women ask men out, dating will be a bit easier for men and women.



It is not us dictating anything whatsoever. It is us being taken to task by *some* men to change what we're doing for THEIR comfort; with them assuming we are in our rosy nirvana worlds and they are suffering the indignities of the dating gauntlets alone while we cruise discomfort-free, pain-free, work-free.


Once gain, you are projecting.

I can't see how my comfort will improve or degrade if women begin to ask men out. No particular man benefits from women asking men out.



I can't help but wonder how many of those who expressed these sentiments, if they changed bodies with one of us for even a week would absolutely be shocked out of their gourd, and I think be almost embarrassed by how totally and completely out in left field they are in what they believe our situation and what it is actually like being a female in this climate.


Moot point. People of both genders have it bad. You pick a women to switch bodies, and I will always be able pick a man who she will not want to switch bodies with.



How that is women making it women versus men I'm sure I don't know. Just goes to show how a person's own viewpoint, if one person is allowed to say their own experiences and another is not, one person is allowed their own beliefs and another person is not, one person is allowed their own opinion and another is not,

well, like I said, irony 101... generalities do not bring understanding. They bring prejudice, and unfairness, and misassumptions.


The irony here is twofold!



oh well... more power to everyone. But thanks again DCoffman, yours was an incredibly refreshing post.




It doesn't take much to make an "incredibly refreshing post"! Just pander to women, right? Hardly refreshing.
 x_file
Joined: 6/25/2006
Msg: 1344 (view)
 
Why women want guys to come to THEM
Posted: 9/25/2009 7:54:39 PM

I'm not sure what your point is.


You said:



The REASON things "are the way they are" (generalized) is because they work, for the most part.


My point is that the way things are do NOT work for the most part. You are only looking at the end result... you think because women still hook up with men and vice versa dating works. If you look at dating little closer, for the most part it is chaos. Men find a woman by the least efficient method: brute force. Men send hundreds of emails before receiving a rely, and probably thousands of e-mails before getting a date. Even at clubs, bars, and other such places, men still rely on "it's a numbers game", which is another way of saying, "brute force".

On the other hand, women who receive the hundreds of e-mails are becoming more and more impatient, and are less and less likely to find "Mr. Right"... for he often gets lost in the many emails that just get deleted because they can't be all read.

To put in simpler terms: every 8 out of 10 attempts to get a date fail... and online that probably 90 out of every 100.



I think that's how this WHOLE thread (and another one where a guy claimed we are lazy in dating and relationships and how it sucks to be him) started, some guy came on here crabby because he wasn't getting the results he wanted, and mad at women because they WERE getting the results they wanted. What people have basically been saying is "If it works for you, continue. If it doesn't, change what you are doing."


That sounds a lot like "tough luck". I guess you haven't considered the fact that such men might actually have a point, even if they express it an way that is similar to whining.



It seems mostly men are telling women to change it up so that THEY, the men, get better results. That's a futile argument.


Suppose women say, "Okay, we will ask men out"... how does it follow that THOSE men will get better results, or that any particular man will get better results?

I think your argument is futile.



Because generally speaking people model an ingrained ritual of mating and part of that behavior/expectation is what we were taught.


Taught? Come on! Now are you just making up stuff.

I have never, never, ever heard a mother or a father say to their daughter, "Make sure you don't ask any guy out"! NEVER!



However, to pull back and regroup on this in a a larger context...the answer is that most women don't have to go and make their interest known because in many if not most instances men are only too willing and even happy to do so. That's the answer. That's always been the answer and that my friend will continue to be the answer to infinity and beyond! ;)


The question is: Why women want guys to come to THEM?

Your answer answers this question: Why aren't women likely to initiate first contact with men?

It doesn't matter that SOME women have plenty of guys chasing them, we can still ask the question "Why women want guys to come to THEM?", because even the women who have guys chasing them STILL want men to come to them. Get it?
 x_file
Joined: 6/25/2006
Msg: 1330 (view)
 
Why women want guys to come to THEM
Posted: 9/25/2009 7:19:49 AM


It's always going to be more reliable way to catch a fish, when it's already jumped up into your boat...


My thoughts exactly.



So that women don't suffer the possibility of rejection of "cold calling" on men, like men do when pursuing women, by only "pursuing" an overture led by a man?


I think the rabbit hole goes much deeper than just avoiding rejection. I think that rejection is just a bonus, an icing on the cake.



I personally found (after YEARS of dating), that when I showed interest & went out of my way to please a man, he would lose interest almost immediately. If I persisted I was a "stalker".

Yeah.

So I started NOT going out of my way to please the men, and what do you know...they were MUCH more interested in me when I treated them casually and made them do the work.


Actually the same happens to some men - we call those men "nice guys". They show interest, they try to please the woman, treat her well, only to have her put them in the "friends zone" and go for the jerk.

In either case, you, both, were doing something wrong: you showed interest AND went out of your way to please the other person. Perhaps keep it simple and just show interest.



I know. ^^^^^^^^^
The REASON things "are the way they are" (generalized) is because they work, for the most part. And for the most people.


I guess you haven't heard the stories of many "nice guys". It doesn't seem to be working for them. Apparently so for some "nice gals".

But even if true, the current state of affairs, the way things are, are more beneficial to women than men.
 x_file
Joined: 6/25/2006
Msg: 1322 (view)
 
Why women want guys to come to THEM
Posted: 9/24/2009 10:31:45 AM

The bolded portion of your statement apparently happens quite often according to divorce stats. That is where the M/W complex is displayed.. Even when a man is getting NO LESS amount of sex than he did during the initial stages of his courtship.. he will still seek more and, to be satisfied she must be the complete sexual opposite of his chosen life mate. In other words he is only left unhungry when he has both types of women. Some "feminists" mistake the Madonna/Whore complex as being one women who is able to display both traits.


Madonna-whore complex:

According to Freudian psychology, this complex often develops when the sufferer is raised by a cold and distant mother. Such a man will often court women with qualities of his mother, hoping to fulfill a need for intimacy unmet in childhood. Often, the wife begins to be seen as mother to the husband—a "Madonna" figure—and thus not a possible object of sexual attraction. For this reason, in the mind of the sufferer, love and sex cannot be mixed, and the man is reluctant to have sexual relations with his wife, for that, he thinks unconsciously, would be as incest. He will reserve sexuality for "bad" or "dirty" women, and will not develop "normal" feelings of love in these sexual relationships.

We are not talking about the same thing.



Interesting. My thoughts are initially he will consider her unworthy. However; if the woman that plays her sex-card is around or, in the company of the non-sex starved man long enough, and she continues to play her sex card.. then eventually he will take advantage of the opportunity.. strictly for what she offers. Subsequently we often see a thread from the sex-card playing woman calling all men users and players .. O_o


Yep. Nicely worded.



I don't see them as the "enemy" at all....but, I have learned to be cautious because , there are too many that can't be trusted for any number of reasons. ( and it has a lot more to do with my heart than my vagina...)..as I am sure there are women, as men have said too. Men are just as mistrustful in my experience...at least the ones in what should be my general dating age....about different things...and I don't treat any man as the enemy...I actually prefer them to be friends...and treat them as such till they give me reason not to...


I wasn't talking about you. I was stating a general observation. Just because you don't, it doesn't mean the majority of women don't.



I do not...I have been saying this for ages...and even when I prove it with my brilliant ( logical) mathematical example..I am ignored, or , If I remember correctly...you dismissed that very argument as being too abstract...lol...


I didn't dismiss the argument for being too abstract.

You said:



There is apparently no such thing as "equal" but, not same. ( Except in math...I love this one: 2+3=1+4..equal, but, not same. )



To which I replied:

It seems like you are giving this as an argument (from mathematics) that we can be different but equal. If you think about for a bit longer, it's also an argument for how we can be different, but equal, but also UNJUST.





I don't think we are the same...I think(feel?) and hear that on here a lot...requests not to be fair or equal really...but, to be just like men?


I don't understand what you mean by "to be just like men". So far, I have considered it to mean: "Equal to men", "The same as men", "Behaving like men", "Doing things like men", and it seems like you don't mean any of those. At this point I think you need to clarify what you actually mean.



No,. I don't think it's right....but, I neither think I can change them, nor have the right to..bad people will be bad..and I did say immoral (which I think this is) is wrong...but, I can't control other people's MORAL behavior...only express an opinion about it...and stay away from those I think behave in immoral ways...by my definition...and no where can I even begin to see anything I do or don't do in dating as remotely immoral...not by my standards....I was speaking of different approaches, not immoral behavior...


Okay. By your definition of what's immoral/moral, can you explain why it is immoral or moral for women to ask men out?



It is one thing for men to say they would really like it if women would approach or do it more often ( like if I said I really would like it if more men would actually be more clear about what they are looking for) than to call it immoral, or call them names for disagreeing...it isn't whats being said, for me, but, how it's said..and the absolute "rightness' with which it is said...


What do you say to women who claim we are equal, but also want, expect and insist men to ask them out, but THEY themselves will not ask men out?

Almost all the arguments I've made are to show that such women (it's a particular group) are indeed being hypocrites.

Since you ask men out, you don't belong to that group, but for some reason you are defending women that do.



I don't play the "sex card" if I am understanding your meaning...however..tell me in a world where men are complaining that they will never be in another sexless relationship, or bad sex relationship again, want first date sex, and guarantees of compatibility from the get go...how a woman is supposed to interact without the possibility of sex being implied?


Have you observed how the majority of women try to get the attention of a man/men and compare it, say, with how they get the attention of other women?

Sex is in a sense always implied, but how much so when she is wearing a short skirt showing half her ass, and her titties are mashed up and popping out of her see-through turtle neck, and acts more horny than a convicted priest? I'm somewhat exaggerating for effect, but not by much.



If she doesn't..the word frigid is thrown around..among other less kind ones..it still seems as a damned if you do, damned if you don't thing...if men keep insisting that sex is the number one important thing that attracts them....women would be stupid to ignore that, no?


Few men, if any, will label a woman "frigid" because she didn't play the sex-card. The sex-card is usually played as a means to create initial attraction (based on sex or the promise of sex). The label "frigid" comes about from knowing a woman for some time.

Sex is important to men, no doubt. But I don't see why it's important for women to act like a slut, for example, to attract a man, or why use sex at all to attract a man. Women can't attract men without resorting to men's like of sex?



Do men really ignore the things women find important ( other than the sex) and are successful at attracting or keeping them?


Some do, some don't. Actually, many do, few don't.



Doesn't matter how pretty a man thinks I am, or how much he likes my personality...if he doesn't feel sex in the air, or as a good possibility...he isn't interested...


Remarkable!



With rare exceptions, I have never had a man not be flattered by my approach, or even fascinated sometimes....I don't doubt that for a second...the problem is..it often overshadows whether they have any sexual or romantic interest ( or they misinterpret it)...I never said it doesn't work..I said it doesn't have the same effectiveness for all, nor is it as reliable yet (maybe someday it will be) as when they approach me...so, I'm not throwing the baby out with the bath water...




This, in combination with the last paragraph, is a pretty good answer to the question of this thread.
 x_file
Joined: 6/25/2006
Msg: 1294 (view)
 
Why women want guys to come to THEM
Posted: 9/23/2009 6:53:50 AM

However; it doesn't explain why some men will pick a "demure" woman to commit to and eventually marry but then will supplement her ("demureness") with a mistress who readily and joyfully displays her sexcard. The complex exists.


I did not know I was to offer an explanation. Now that you mentioned it, I can think of such an explanation that has little to do with the Madonna complex and which is probably much simpler. It goes like this:

Each man likes a certain among of sex - which generally is not negotiable. If a man underestimated the importance of sex, and settled for a "good girl", his sexual need will eventually grow on him and become dominant to the point where a mistress will be looked for - and as you pointed out, preferably one that joyfully displays her sex-card. Such a man is picking the lesser of two evils, for one hand he has his sexual need not being satisfied, and on the other the feeling of being exploited. It is a sorry state of affairs cause by a false judgment on his part.

In simpler terms, using an analogy: If you were starved for a week (or starved yourself), you will likely run to the first place that offers food, and pay nearly any price.

If that's true, then the two cases can not be compared because in the first we have a man (who's need for sex is perhaps mild) and in the second case, a man who has been sexually starved, so to speak. Obviously, due to their different circumstances, they will behave differently.

The interesting case is when a man is sexually satisfied, and a woman plays her sex-card... what does he think of her in this case, and why?
 x_file
Joined: 6/25/2006
Msg: 1292 (view)
 
Why women want guys to come to THEM
Posted: 9/22/2009 8:16:26 PM

Nurture: in Western culture the ideal woman is innocent and demure. Men chase.


You think it's a matter of maintaining an image? But why?


Perhaps it's because far too many men in western culture suffer from Madonna/Whore complex and sub-conscienciously consider any woman who initiates to be the whore and they can get off on her sexually only. They think any woman who is the Modonna (demure) is worthy yet, they find her boring once they've settled down with her.




Possible, but unlikely. To me this explanation is conjecture or wishful thinking. I am skeptical of the Madonna complex to begin with, and I certainly doubt its proposed popularity or wide spread. I know Freud is wrong, for we see similar behavior in animals... regardless of how they were raised by their mother. I know a male dog will go for a female in heat rather than one in not in heat. Also, one can explain what Freud did with Biology, the latter explanation, in my opinion, being superior.

I think the average man knows a whore when he sees one. Whether she initiates or not is irrelevant. The "If she initiates, she will likely be seen as a whore" claim is most likely projection. Men know that "whores", gold-diggers, etc., initiate. But they also know that not all women who initiate are of the aforementioned type. As I said, I think the average man knows a whore when he sees one. She doesn't have to innate to make her nature apparent. There are hundreds of other clues that reveal her nature.

How a woman initiates plays a large role in how a man will see her. Most women play the "sex card" when they want to get a man... which is probably why many men seem them as "whores". He knows that she can attract him with her personality or natural beauty (for example) but she chooses sex instead, so by comparison he labels her a whore - though whore here is not quite the right word.



It's time these "too many men" realized that just because a woman takes action that she's not any less worthy, but that will take another couple of generations by the looks of things ..


If what I said about is true, the problem isn't just men.

Also, the explanation as to why men see women who initiate as less worthy is fairly straight forward. As I already stated, most women play the "sex card" when they want to get a man. In other words, most women who initiate play the sex card.

When a woman uses sex as means to attract a man, for reasons not quite clear to him, deep down he feels she is exploiting him. For that he resents her and resentment breeds dislike and dislike leads to worthlessness. Therefore women who play the sex card are seen as less worthy.

The same dynamic happens in women, but not quite for the same reason.
 x_file
Joined: 6/25/2006
Msg: 1287 (view)
 
Why women want guys to come to THEM
Posted: 9/21/2009 6:10:47 PM

I guess I'm asking: what I am hearing is that true equality can only be reached by women being able to do everything that men can, and vice versa..rather than individuals who have abilities/talents/skills/likes that vary , not necessarily by gender.


You are misunderstanding something. We can speak of "equal actions", but equality is more than that.

Even if women can do everything men can, that won't necessarily make them equal to men. Actions alone are not sufficient for equality.



Besides being fair and not asking for more than I can give ( in dating)...what, specifically is it that some men ( like you), think we should be doing that we aren't...like do I have to learn to do things I don't know how to do, to prove equality?


In high school I recall asking one of my teachers, "What do I have to study to pass the test?" to which he replied, "If you study in order to pass the test, then you are studying for the wrong reasons."

In the same way, if you want to know what to do in order to prove equality, then what you want to know, you want to know for the wrong reasons. As such, I give no specifics.



What is it, specifically , that you all think we fall short on?


I don't know about ALL, but certainly a lot of women fall short on understanding equality. Unfortunately, so do many men - which is probably why both genders can justify bs behavior... the other not knowing any better.

Also, it has come to my attention that women's image of men, is that of an enemy. In other words, women, as a whole, treat men, as whole, as their enemy - full of mistrust and always on guard against a possible invasion on vagina-ville.

Thus, a lot of women fall short on compassion towards men. If a woman said "Men are pigs", it's rare that other women will come to mens' defense - as evident from this and other threads.



Besides the dating things ( who approaches, who buys, etc)...let me try to put this bluntly: what is really ticking you off?


Haven't I said it many times now? It's the hypocrisy!



And does it have anything to do with the fact that a lot of women have abandoned what was traditionally considered "women's work"?


No.

I actually find it offense that there is such a thing as "women's work" - as it seem to imply, falsely, that only women can do it. If there is some job that all women can do, but no man can, then "women's work" is an appropriate phrase.



Now, I think that is vague...lol..for one thing, isn't human equality theoretically supposed to mean both genders? The constitution should apply to all Americans...regardless of gender, race, creed, religion, etc...this still allows for individuality, doesn't it? Why does there need to be "gender" equality at all? And why does anyone's beliefs, behaviors, talents have to fall inside some kind of gender definition or have to be like the other at all?


Women in the 60's and 70's basically wanted to be equal to men, not quite sure, or clear what that meant, they proceeded to establish "gender equality". They obviously didn't think The Constitution was enough, and felt the need for "gender equality". It's those women who should answer why there needs to be "gender equality", for they proposed it.

It's clear to me that "gender equality" is a subset of "human equality" - which is why I said if you have established "human equality", then "gender equality" should be fairly easy to derive. Women in the 60's & 70's thought the two were different. I think they made a distinction without a difference.



As above...does this definition of equality mean everyone being the same?


The answer is, "No". You seem to think that "same" means "equal".

Two things can be equal, but not same - like two sticks and two stones are equal in terms of number, and possibly even weight or other attributes, but sticks are not the same as stones.



I guess I am lost about what the concern is beyond dating behaviors..and I believe any gender has the right to be/do anything they want and are suited for ( barring illegal and immoral acts , of course)..I don't think either should be dictated to on how to behave, or what jobs to have, or what constructs to form relationships on?..and every person has individual choice to conduct their lives the way they see fit?


Lets talk about just dating behavior(s), can we? Do you think both genders should behave as they see fit when it comes to dating? You don't think it's wise that we agree on certain respectable behaviors?

If a man is a player, and he lies to a woman to get her in bed, that's okay? After all isn't he conducing his life as he sees fit? If so, then why are some women complaining about the behavior of players?

Isn't a person who cheats on their spouse just conducting his or her life as s/he see fit? Isn't then cheating justified? By your line of reasoning, if you are to be consistent, you must agree that cheating is justified, and that it's okay for players to "use" other people by virtue of them being entitle to live their life as they see fit. I doubt you would agree - which answers your question.



This was kinda my point..but, to be honest..I don't see a lot of sympathy or understanding around here about how women may feel about the whole thing...or even meeting in the middle...


LOL! It's clear how women feel about asking men out. I can summarize it too. I goes like this: "Are you drunk? No freaking way!".



have you considered that way back in sex ed class you learned that the little swimmers in sperm cells make the long arduos journey to the egg, or that in most mammalian species the male approaches the female? Just sayin.... the clues are everywhere in the natural order of things




You must be replying to a different question. The question is "Why women want guys to come to THEM?".

It's not about what some guys naturally do. It's about why women (some I suppose) WANT guys to come to them.



Nurture: in Western culture the ideal woman is innocent and demure. Men chase.


You think it's a matter of maintaining an image? But why?
 x_file
Joined: 6/25/2006
Msg: 402 (view)
 
Justifying Cheating?
Posted: 9/13/2009 11:02:19 PM

If it is reasonable to expect sex and ones partner does not participate shouldn't the responsibility to leave the relationship be on the denier?


Assuming a certain definition of "denying" - saying "No" for no good reason - I certainly see your point. Sex occurs naturally between two people who like each other. There is no denying going on as each is hungry for the body of the other. When denying does occur one can't help but conclude the denier no longer likes their partner - which if true, puts the onus to leave on the denier.

However, on the other hand, if the above is the case, I personally see it as my responsibility to leave a woman if I sense she no longer likes me. I have no desire to be with a woman who doesn't' like me - not even for "just sex" - which is being denied in this hypothetical case.

In terms of responsibility, an argument can be made that both, the denier, and their partner have equal responsibility to leave.
 x_file
Joined: 6/25/2006
Msg: 31 (view)
 
Don't know what is going on.....
Posted: 9/13/2009 7:43:16 PM

Please let me know what you think.


Me, me, me, me. Me? Meeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee! Me, damn it! Did I mention "me"?

That sums it up.



He has been worried about his mom bc she has cancer but I don't know why he hasn't been calling me or texting me.


Tough one. What could the answer be? Lets see... what takes precedence, mother's cancer or two-week-girlfriend?
 x_file
Joined: 6/25/2006
Msg: 1205 (view)
 
Why women want guys to come to THEM
Posted: 9/2/2009 10:13:48 AM

x-file: I started to answer you, but, didn't have anything that didn't perpetuate the conscription thing...I would ask: what is your solution?


The simplest solution is to abandon conscription all together.



Do you really think true equality between the genders...as in all of us can do anything...is really possible..heck, even within a gender, all can't do everything, can they?


Your question is vague. Can you elaborate?

But, consider:

If we can establish "human equality", as the founding fathers did in the The Constitution of the United States, "gender equality" ought to a breeze in comparison.



Where do you draw the line between what would be true, entirely equal behavior?


I'm not sure what you are asking.



Especially as gender roles get more and more blurred...and how do we fix the resentment on both sides?


Identifying the major reason(s) for it, might be a helpful start. This is a topic for another thread as it is off topic, unless you think women don't ask men out because on some basic level, women resent men.
 x_file
Joined: 6/25/2006
Msg: 1186 (view)
 
Why women want guys to come to THEM
Posted: 8/31/2009 11:22:34 AM


x-file: I may be wrong...but, I don't think ,here in the USA, the public has ever voted on conscription...I believe Congress and the President make that decision.


Who elects Congressmen, and Congresswomen and the president? Voters do, don't they? That's why I said your vote has the potential to bring about conscription. You don't vote on conscription, but the people we elect, do.

I won't discuss conscription any further, not in this thread... I only mentioned it as an example of how we are NOT equal in the eyes of the law and duty.



Also, wouldn't that theory apply to women's issues that men aren't affected directly by?


It's not a theory. It's an issue (inequality) that has been brought to the attention of Congress.

Also, it is entirely possible that men vote on women's issues that men aren't affected directly by. I don't know of any such issues at the moment. Do you know one? Do you know a women's issue as important as conscription?



And a majority always wins, which means that often things get passed that I don't agree with either..and when women didn't vote..men made those decisions for them too, didn't they? ( Just an intellectual question...)


In a fair system of democracy, the majority wins. The key words being "fair" for elections can rigged, and "democracy" for in dictatorship the majority has no say.

When women didn't vote, and by that I'm assuming you mean "didn't have the right to vote", for there is a difference between "not voting" and "not having the right to vote", we know that men passed laws which women didn't agree with, and that if women had the right to vote, those laws might have not been passed.

But that's moot point, as it dwells on the past.
 x_file
Joined: 6/25/2006
Msg: 1166 (view)
 
Why women want guys to come to THEM
Posted: 8/29/2009 1:52:12 PM

I understand totally what you are saying. However, I don't think I can convince YOU that my feelings are any good judgment of what is just or right.


You can say that your feelings are the source of your judgment, and that they are a good indicator of right or wrong for you, but beyond that, there is little I would agree with.

I always point out that what you think is right for you, is not necessarily right. It's the same with feelings. Nearly everybody does what they think/feel is right for them, yet somehow a lot of people are unhappy and live unfulfilled lives - they are always do the right thing, but often get the wrong results.



Because you don't process that way...but, for myself...feelings, gut instincts..whatever you want to call it...have never failed ME when dealing with what feels right or off, or doesn't make sense.


I feel sadness, joy, regret, fear, etc., much in the same way you do.

There is a difference between instincts and feelings. But for the moment it matters not, for I am yet to see anyone explain why instincts or feelings are better than common-sense, or logic.

From personal experience, and the experience of other people, going on instincts produces the desired outcome about 50% of the time - half of the time the instincts were correct, the other half, incorrect.

Again, I think this statement needs repeating: Nearly everybody does what they think/feel is right for them, yet somehow a lot of people are unhappy and live unfulfilled lives - they are always do the right thing, but often get the wrong results.



I see it as a gift from God, because I can't think logically about things that are important to me...more logical thinkers will never get it..it doesn't make any sense to them...and I don't think that is a bad thing..just different...and I happen to appreciate it, because it isn't one of my talents...and I do learn from it sometimes...


Simple question. In a relationship, who's judgment is to be followed when it comes to decisions that concern both people, but neither agree with the other? Shall the man go with the woman's instincts, or should the woman go with the man's logic/common-sense?



Well, I think , as I just said...there is a difference between how I "feel", as an emotion ( sad, happy, afraid) and my gut instinct of what is right and what is wrong...and that doesn't change very often, if at all..some things, no matter how logically presented..just feel off to me...I do have very good intuition too...and that is what I meant.


You can't have a good intuition, and yet no matter how logically something is presented, it feels off to you. That's somewhat of a contradiction.



I think there is a big disconnect on what , generally, men vs women ( though it can be individuals) , define as "equality" is...who specifically defined it? And was it written down somewhere for everyone? Did everyone have the same influences, exposure? Did everyone understand it the same?


Who defines it? I hope people who know what they are talking about who have dedicated their life to understanding human nature and justice and who themselves are virtuous.

But, in the 60's and 70's, the majority of women defined equality.

Whether everyone understood it the same, it matters not. The majority decided, and thought they understood it, and that version of equality is here with us now.



I'm not sure if I believe in "equality" or not...I guess it depends on who's definition it is...


That's a different issue.



I will tell you that everything I read, heard, and interpreted ( and I grew up in the middle of it) never said anything about dating rules or traditional dating behavior even being an issue ( I think it became one for men for some reason...not sure why entirely, though I get some of it)..it was about choice mostly...and being equal as a human being...not as female or male.


Just like all the implication of "Do unto others as you wish others to do onto you" cannot be explicitly stated, the same goes for equality. At the time, the focus was on the most important implications... the things women wanted. That's why the things you mentioned were not discussed.



...It was about having the right to vote on issues that concerned us directly...


Your vote (or the right to vote) extends far beyond things that concern you directly. The right to vote has the potential to send men to war, or worse, to bring about conscription and REQUIRE men go to war. Even though women go to war too, in time of conscription they are NOT required to, yet women have the right to vote and bring about conscription. That's NOT equality. You have a say in anther person's life via your vote, yet they don't have the same say in your life.



It was about being seen as equal as human beings, with human rights. It was never about forcing men ( not in my head, or anyone I grew up with) to be like us either, or to give up anything they wanted ( that wasn't abusive)..it was about choice for them too.


How will women be like men if they begin to ask men out? Your reasoning is somewhat flawed. Strictly speaking, women will be like men, when women ask WOMEN out, for that's what men do - men ask women out.



There are still men and women who are traditonal, like it, and want to be that way...should we force them to be different?


I like to drive 200+ km/h on highways. I'm "German fashioned"! Should people have the right to force me to drive at 100km/h by passing laws that punish anyone who doesn't?

Men and women who traditional in their ways can do whatever they want, so long as they don't make statements such as "Men should ask women out", or "Men should pay on the first date", and believe that's what EQUALITY means or that somehow those things follow from equality. Perhaps that was true in their era. BUT we have UPDATED the meaning of equality, so they should get with the program, if not by changing their ways, which might be difficult, and I understand why they might not want to, then by at least by not making outdated claims.



Yes, it is...but, I am going to go out on a limb and say it requires cooperation and compromise from both genders....not one telling the other how they should behave?


By saying, "Men should ask women out", aren't some women telling men how men should behave?

If we are equal (as human beings, entities of the universe, children of Earth, whatever you wish), and you feel you have the right to have a say in my doings, then I have the right to have say in doings, by virtue of us being equal.



( rationally, btw...women being conscripted doesn't happen for a lot of sociological reasons...and the fact that most men don't want them in combat for a lot of reasons...besides he fact..that logically again...some women can do it and excel at it..but, they are a minority....there are a lot of women who would fail miserably...and probably get people killed...I cry when I have to kill bugs? I'd last about 30 seconds in the military...( And yes, there are men not suited to it too..and I believe they either don't get accepted, or flunk out at some point?) Besides..if you send all the young fertile women to war....what happens to population growth if a large percentage of them die? And who takes care of their kids while they and the father are gone? Doesn't sound practical in theory, if it does in idealism. )


You missed the point. You completely missed the point.

Your vote (or the right to vote) extends far beyond things that concern you directly. The right to vote has the potential to send men to war, or worse, to bring about conscription and REQUIRE men go to war. Even though women go to war too, in time of conscription they are NOT required to, yet women have the right to vote and bring about conscription. That's NOT equality. You have a say in an area of anther person's life via your vote, yet they don't have the same say in your life. Equality demands that either both have a say in each others' affairs, or neither does.



I have choice..just talking about how it sometimes sounds like that is what is being asked? Or demanded.


If you are wishy-washy, who is going to take you (or your point) seriously? And besides, a lot of the times, hard opposition means harder thinking on my part - which I don't mind most of the time.



I don't think this is a gender thing...


It's not. If men when and claimed, "Only women should ask men out", they will receive the same speech from me.



This theory would apply if everyone was operating by the golden rule...but, my experience is...there are still a lot of men who divide things by gender...all places are not that progressive...


LOL! Women too divide things by gender, even by age, and status, etc. Not the point.



I wouldn't ask any man to do the reverse...so, is it fair to say they shouldn't ask me to?


Lets not go into a million other things, and just talk about "Who should ask who out". If you think that by asking men out, you are chaining your whole personality, or undermining your integrity, or womanhood, or whatever, then you got a lot of explaining to do.

I can think of things that women do, that undermine the things I just mention many times over. If a simple, "Hi! I find you attractive. Will you join me for a cup of coffee?", is that detrimental to your core personality, then you know something I don't.
 x_file
Joined: 6/25/2006
Msg: 1153 (view)
 
Why women want guys to come to THEM
Posted: 8/27/2009 11:06:20 PM

Can't relate...I don't behave this way...and I have never dated a man yet who ever did anything because that is what I would have preferred...lol...must just be the kinds of men I date or something....lol...


The behavior is fairly subtle. A guy rarely wants to appear whipped. A woman rarely wants to appear "demanding" or "controlling".



I'll tell you..it is impossible for me to separate my feelings from my thought processes.


That's fine.

What I was trying to point is that feelings are not a valid form of reasoning. There are no "laws of feelings", but there are "laws of logic".

To state it more bluntly, I do not accept feelings as a form of an argument. No matter how good something feels, you cannot convenience me that just because it feels good, to you, or anyone else, it's just. And likewise, you cannot convince me that just because something feels bad, it's unjust.

A lot of women seem to be making "emotional arguments" such as, "I'm shy, that's why guys should as be ones to ask me out" or "I don't like rejection, so I expect guys to ask me out".

One of the problems with their arguments is that they do not stand the test of time. If ten minutes later she "feels" differently about the whole thing, how much validity or truth can such arguments have?

It's one thing to express your feelings and another to present them as if they are valid form of reasoning.



Hmm..some women wanted equality, some didn't, some didn't care, some didn't even know what was going on..and I'd say the same holds true now.


Perhaps. But it matters not. The majority want(ed) equality.



I fail to see any area of my life where I fail as to duty. ( and who defines that,
again?)


The particulars are defined by us, the people.

I rather not make this personal so I won't answer the first part of your question.



I fail to see where "duty" has anything to do with dating or romance...family, marriage, civic, religious..yes...but, I don't feel I have a "duty" to behave a particular way in dating because some men insist I do?


Lets see if I can make this clear.

I already defined "duty" as "What you ought to do". When I say "ought to", I mean there is a principle by which one can judge something much in the same way one judges the accuracy of a map by the terrain, or conversely a building by its blue prints - this will become evident in a minute.

If you posit, that is, if you claim, for example, that you love someone, certain things follow. If you beat the crap out of the person you supposedly love, I will point out that something doesn't add up because abuse does not follow from love. Your actions do not match your claim of love.

In the same way then, if women posit, or claim "We are equal" certain things follow. I will not discuss the nature of equality and what necessarily follows, but...

For simplicity, lets take equality to mean, "Do unto others as you wish other do unto yourself". What follows? A lot of things. I will just give few examples (the rest you can derive yourself once you get the pattern if you don't already know it):

1) If you want to be asked out, better have the same expectation of yourself, and ask other people out.

2) If you expect kindness from others, others can hold you the same ideal, and expect kindness from you. We can simplify this to: if you want others to be kind to you, be kind to others. I will keep the rest simple.

3) If you don't want to be asked out, don't ask out other people.

4) If you want to kill others, expect to be killed.

5) If you judge others, expect others to judge you.

6) If you want people to show interest in you, show interest in people.

7) If you want to be helped, help other people.

Can you see how "Do unto others as you wish other do unto yourself" gives rise to certain behaviors and duties for the person who believes it?

So to answer your last question, which I've answered before, you do not have to behave a certain way because some men insist you do. BUT, if you, hypothetically speaking, claim that you believe in equality (which for this purpose here I have assumed is the golden rule in order to keep things simple), then your actions can be judged and criticized, and I, and other men, and generally other people, can insist that you are not behaving according to "equality" which you claim you subscribe to (again, hypothetically speaking for I do not know if you do or you don't)

If a person subscribed to the golden rule s/he cannot not help others, yet hold the expectation that others should come to his or her aid. If a such a person did that, and I pointed out "You ought to help others if you want to be helped", I'm not insisting he or she does what I say, I'm insisting that their behavior does not match their claim(s).

It's because of this confusion that people, including you, often seem to take offense when they hear "You ought to do this", to which they often think to themselves, "Well, who the f*ck are you to tell me what I must or must not do! You are not my father/mother." Such people, a lot of the times, are missing the point.

Of course, sometimes, people are indeed trying to tell you what to do. You should know the difference and know when someone is pointing out an "inadequacy" or where you fall short of an idea/ideal you believe in, or claim to believe in, and when someone is trying to simply manipulate you.



And which men do I listen to...because you all aren't on the same page either...


I answered this a while back....

One day one of Buddha's disciples came to Buddha and said "Lord, whom shall I believe? One man telleth me this and another that, and both seem sure they are right." The Lord Buddha replied: "My son, believe not that which any man saith, not even I, unless it appeals to your common sense. And even then do not believe it, but treat it as a reasonable hypothesis until such time as you can prove it for yourself."



Love and romance are about feelings, IMO.., not duties, not rules , not
being told to behave a certain way...


You are taking the meaning of duty and rules too literally.

Romance, when you see it from afar, follows rules and a certain pattern of behavior. It's just that people rarely notice it.



Who's we? And again..what duty? The duty to do what men tell me I should
do? I can't make my decisions, choices, based on what I believe to be true?
This is again assuming that women just aren't capable of doing/behaving the
"right" way. Or, that we are so lacking in intelligence that we could never
come to our own conclusions?


By "We" I mean, "We the people".

Regarding the duty, I was speaking in general terms. I have already given particular examples...one of them being conscription. The rest I have answered in this post.



Neither did I.


You missed the point. The majority of women in the 60's and 70's started something which is here with us today, and which whether you agreed with, or disagreed with, or had or have no opinion about, it is something that influences our society, including laws, among another things, and which we have to deal with as it is evidently causing a lot of fiction among men and women.

To say, "Hey, I didn't ask for it, so my hands are clean", is nothing but an attempt to ignore the whole thing.



xfile: All I want is to be treated with respect, and have the choice to live my life the way I feel is best, and to not be treated as if , by being female, ( and not male)this means I am not worthy. I don't want to fight with men over what equality means. I just want them to try and understand where I am coming from, and not always make it sound like where I am coming from is wrong, because it isn't where they are coming from. That's what I mean by different...we can be different and still each have value in the differences.


I understand. Do as you wish. I'm not sure why you feel anything said in the forms dictates how you live your life.

My posts generally point out the hypocrisy by proposing women do what they want men to do - it's just the golden rule.

When a woman says "Men should ask women out", I reply with, "Women should ask men out", not because I believe that should be the case, but because I'm trying point out the hypocrisy. My claim is as good as hers, so I'm curious as how she will defend her claim without appearing a hypocrite.
 x_file
Joined: 6/25/2006
Msg: 1124 (view)
 
Why women want guys to come to THEM
Posted: 8/26/2009 11:39:24 PM

Women may complain about certain behaviors, but they don't insist men behave the way they want them to? We kind of accept men are men..nor do we feel (generally) we have the right to even ask? Certainly not demand.


The average woman need not insist. She only has to "prefer" a certain behavior. If a guy doesn't match the "preferred behavior" she desires, all she has to do is casually hint of the five other guys interested in her. And since the poor guy was lucky to even get a date, for he probably sent hundreds of email without receiving a reply, he is kind of in a desperate position, and will do what she "prefers", supposedly out of his own will, but yet for reasons not much different than when a hungry dog does tricks for food.

For more attractive people, the dynamic I just described generally does not hold because they hold the same "power" - an attractive woman has men waiting for her to become available, and an attractive man has women waiting for him to become available.



I had written this whole long post trying to explain my emotional reaction to some of the things men seem to be insisting women do/say/behave..and then I realized that most would neither get an emotional response...nor feel it had any validity.


For some reason women believe that their emotions are somehow an indication of "it being right". In other words if she feels "this way" about "this", then that's how it ought to be. I would be fine with it if all women have the same "feelings" for the "same things". Everyday I'm being reminded over and over again how each woman is different.

Feelings have their place - bonding with people for example. However, if you want to convince me of something, subjective feelings about the matter won't do. I accept reason as the authority in such matters.



In my mind, equality never meant drumming out all traditionally feminine behaviors or feelings...and to be honest, I am puzzled why some men like that idea...and I also believe that men changed a lot, for probably many reasons, but, most women aren't any different than they ever were.


There is too much in this sentence and I doubt I will be able to address it all.

It's women who want(ed) equality. And since equality gives rise to duty, all men are saying, or at least what I'm saying is:

Either except the equality and the duties that come with it, or forget about the equality all together. If you don't want the duty, give up the equality. You can't have the fire without the heat, and equality and duty are like fire and heat - and that's fairly easy to show.

I can show that if we claim to be equal in some way, then based on that equality certain behaviors may have to be unlearned or learned regardless whether those behaviors are traditional, or part of a person's nature.

Consider that "equality" often takes the form of a "law" (or a custom, or a tradition) and from law certain duties arise. Duty is what you ought to do (or what you ought not to do). Which is another way of saying, you ought to behave in a certain way. Which is another way of saying, you might have to change your behavior so that it aligns with the requirements of the law. Need I remind you that some people are in jail precisely because the behavior was not in accord with the law?

Take marriage for example. It's a type of equality express as a legal contract in which both parties have the duty, among other duties, to be faithful to one another. Men being "dogs", as per most women, are expected to change their nature and be faithful. Men are expected to change - to do the very thing you don't want to.

Some people have pointed out that we can be different but equal - which is true. But I find it hilarious that when I ask them how two things can different yet equal, those very people seem dumbstruck. Can you tell me how two things can be different but yet equal?

Even though we can be different and equal, in my opinion, a lot of the time, our different natures do not allow for equality simply because one of the genders cannot live up to the duty that follow from that equality- at least that's the case with the equality we are trying to establish.



Just another way women can never really be "equal" ( and boy I am beginning to hate that word...lol)..because, evidently, to be so..you have to think and behave, react, believe just like a man.


It has nothing to do with being like a man. It has everything to do with living up to an idea/ideal of equality which a lot of women burned a lot of bras for. Men didn't ask for this. For thousands of years men were happy to do it all, until women woke them up - which is kind of funny and somewhat ironic.



There is apparently no such thing as "equal" but, not same. ( Except in math...I love this one: 2+3=1+4..equal, but, not same. )


The distribution of quantity is different on each side, but the quantity is the same.This difference can be important: like when you have a 2 dollar bill, but you need 2 loonies for the car wash... noting here that 1+1=2. At other times, the difference is irrelevant - like when you buy a coffee at Tim Horton's - 2 loonies or a single 2 dollar bill is just as good.

It seems like you are giving this as an argument (from mathematics) that we can be different but equal. If you think about for a bit longer, it's also an argument for how we can be different, but equal, but also UNJUST. A lot of people seem to mingle or confuse equality for justice - probably because the two overlap.

The equality signs in mathematics works fine for numbers - a number being a well defined entity in mathematics, and equality (mathematical equality) being well defined concept.

If we are going by mathematics I can point out that two people are greater than one person, therefore utilitarianism is the best for of government as the happiness of the majority is more important than that of any one person by the argument that 1 person is less than 2 people. A dumb argument, but an argument nonetheless.

I can also point out, as I have done many times before, simply to provoke thought, that two oranges are less than one orange but if someone offers you two very small oranges and one really big orange, you'd pick the one big orange rather than the two small ones - especially if are being charged the same price for both offers.
 x_file
Joined: 6/25/2006
Msg: 408 (view)
 
Decoding the Female Language
Posted: 8/21/2009 7:31:17 AM

I like you...let's go out. Like I said, I think that put's the other person on the spot and frankly a little embarassing IN MY OPINION.


And if men do it? There's a difference?


Not to me there isn't. I don't like it either. In both cases someone's asking someone else a question they can't answer without any information. Physical attraction isn't enough, frankly.




Utter bullshit!

If you get embarrassed by being asked out, you likely have some issues. It's no different than if you get embarrassed if a stranger asked you the time of day.

As to being put on the spot, well, it's not a 4th year university math question you are being asked, it's a simple, "Yes or No" question to which if you don't know the answer, you should answer with "No!". Of course, say it politely in your own way. Give me one good reason why it must be more complex than that?

As to the question of physical attraction, well, physical attraction is MORE than enough to ask a person out. If people can go on blind dates, or speed dating events, people can easily go out on date with someone they find physically attractive.

Aren't "dates" and "dating" precisely so that you learn about the other person? It seems to me that some women want to know all the information about a guy before they agree to a date.
 x_file
Joined: 6/25/2006
Msg: 388 (view)
 
Decoding the Female Language
Posted: 8/20/2009 11:20:22 PM

But has it ever crossed YOUR mind to look at it from our point of view, I know that for me, I do things that come naturally, that includes how I communicate with people so just as you say you don't understand what we are trying to tell you.....we don't understand (honestly) how you could NOT.


I do try to look at it your from your point of view, and not just your point of view, but also from the point of view of biology, evolution, psychology, etc. I know, for example, that if I look at a room from each corner, it looks different, and each perspective adds something to my understanding of the room, so I often try to see it from all possible perspectives.

I really don't have an explanation as to why some men don't understand the non-verbal dating language. However, I do know, from my own experiences, this often happens:

http://www.ebaumsworld.com/video/watch/845150/

The point I'm trying to get across starts around the 4th minute and finishes at around the 6th.

It might be that some guys get the "signals", but they don't act on them because they are not sure what the signals mean this time around.

A question to the guys: Guys, has a girl ever flirted with you, but when you went up to her she told you she is doing it "just for fun"?



Like I said ealier, I guess it's because we ARE so observant and intuative and we CAN read between the lines and we CAN read body language, etc. that maybe we assume men should be like that also.


If such an assumption takes place, I think it is a mistake.



But just for the record, I'm not talking about something as ridiculous as putting on lipstick or playing with my hair and expect you to get "I like you from that"...I'm talking more along the lines as we are complete strangers...your at my place of employment....I'm attracted to you, we start talking and the subject is no longer buisness, and I mention that maybe he should come to so and so Thursday night.


If I were you, in this particular example, I'd be inclined to conclude that the guy is either retarded or he gets the signal but is not interested.

Look, we are actually the same in this matter, expect in different circumstances. For example, if a woman doesn't hear "I love you" from a guy who loves her, she begins to think he doesn't love her. In the same way, if I guy doesn't hear, "I like you" or "I want to go out with you" from a woman, he doesn't think she likes him even if she is displaying all the right signals - she might after all be "just flirting for the fun of it".



Ok, so yes, this is my way of saying hey...I'm attracted to you why don't you come to so and so Thursay so we can talk and see if we hit it off....but as rentahusband pointed out.....the guy would still be confused as to why I was asking him to meet me Thursday.


Hmm...I will let him explain and defend his claim.

I can see why your intentions might not be clear. Are you asking him out because you are interested in him, or perhaps because none of your friends could make it to the event, but you want someone's company, so you are asking him out?

No offense, but some women are really f*cked up! Example: I'm at a club, and after flirting with me she comes over and says, "I so want you." ? As I walk out with her, (she was hot, and I was single, high, and horny) a friend pulls me a side, and says, "I see you are into threesome"! So I turn to her and ask her, "Is someone else joining us?", to which she replied, "My boyfriend."

One girl showed interest in me solely so that she can hand me over to one of her girlfriends.



So all arguments and kidding a side, I honestly am starting to get the picture that men are clueless (I know you took that as an insult but it's not) when we are not precise enough when trying to communicate. And I will try to remember that.....but it will still be hard for me.


I didn't take it as an insult. I do know few men who are simply clueless and remain clueless even if you say up front, "I really like you. Will you go out with me?".

However, I meant to point out that "clueless" can also mean, "For the most part we get the major signals but we have seen them mean different things, and we are clueless as to what to make of them now that she, a stranger, is displaying them in front of us". It's not like women are consistent.

I'm often "clueless" in the way I just described.
 x_file
Joined: 6/25/2006
Msg: 349 (view)
 
Decoding the Female Language
Posted: 8/20/2009 1:11:30 PM

I agree that if men don't care to ask or don't care to decipher what women do, not dating anymore is a good move.


There are women who can express themselves in a clear, precise, and unambiguous way so that a man does not have to decipher her.

If someone expects me to decipher their meaning, and continues to do so after I have made it clear I don't understand them without any effort to improve their end of communication, but only expects me to improve my end, then I have to conclude such a person can't communicate.

In my opinion good communication is often about minimizing the need for deciphering, as well as minimizing ambiguity, misunderstanding, etc.

I know that when I want to get my point across, and be understood, I try to be as clear as possible in order to eliminate any unnecessary "deciphering" on my audience's part.

If a woman doesn't care to express her self in way so that I don't have to decipher her, she probably isn't that interested in me.

A man should try to understand women, and should want to, because it's beneficial to him. Understanding women however, does not mean he should bend to their will. If a woman does not want to understand men, but only wants to be understood, then not dating anymore is probably a good move for her.



See, I'm over here thinking that the men on here are just being difficult. I think MOST (I'm aware NOT all) women are so observant, intuative, can read body language, can read between the lines, KNOWS when someone is flirting with them, it's just hard to believe men are so, let's see how I can put this: CLUELESS??


We often do not get your no-verbal messages, and many times, to us, your words are ambiguous. We are not clueless. We are only clueless as to why you continue to do something we do not understand, and blame us for not getting it, while the thought of "May be I'm not communicating in a way that men understand.", hardly crosses your minds. You fully assign the blame to us, but none to yourself - at least that's how it seems from our perspective.

And the thing is, we know you can communicate better. You do it in other parts of your life - your carrier, with your children, with your friends, etc. But when it comes to men and dating, it feels like you want us to jump hoops.

There seems to be little effort on your part to help us understand you. When we do try to understand you, we rarely get a straight answer to a question. Often just talking about women is seen as anti-woman. And if a man points out a flaw in a woman, he is toast, even if he is speaking the truth.

You mostly just hint us what we should do, rather than explain why we should do it. And when you hint what we should do, it's not such a suggestion.



oh i do that ALLLLL the time, yes... as i ever-so-gently and quite innocently (accidentally on purpose) brush my hand across the nether regions of his inner thigh.... while leaning towards him just enough to press into the back of his arm with a stray boob.... while batting my eyelashes and crossing & uncrossing my legs at the same time! left... right... left... right... left... right... left... right... left... right... left... right... left... right... left... right... left... right... left... right... left... right... damn, i'm getting tired! sometimes i even wink! still, they're just not getting it!! i can't even make it past first base!!!


If I didn't know any better I'd think you had ADD. You can simply whisper in his ear: "I so want you." and get to any base you want.
 x_file
Joined: 6/25/2006
Msg: 935 (view)
 
Why women want guys to come to THEM
Posted: 8/18/2009 9:35:33 AM


Eh, that's not always the case with me. There's more to it than hotness - but I still appreciate it when I see it.


My point wasn't about it always being the case but rather it often being the case.



What shows, the fact that I don't care too much about owning shoes? I must have missed something.


Forget it. I over estimated your intelligence.
 x_file
Joined: 6/25/2006
Msg: 216 (view)
 
Decoding the Female Language
Posted: 8/17/2009 9:37:53 PM

I LIKE YOU. DO YOU LIKE ME? CHECK YES ___ OR NO ____




Some women would probably check both boxes, or will ask you to add the "MAY BE" box.

When you ask them why did they check both boxes when it says "Check Yes or No", the smart ones (or I should say the ones that think are smart) will reply with "It didn't explicitly say it's an 'exclusive or' question".

The not so smart ones will probably reply with something like, "I like his eyes, but not his hair. So I kind of like him, and I kind of don't".

Most guys will probably check the YES box if she is pretty enough.

It's a good suggestion. But when dumb and dumber are answering the question, it's too hard for them.
 x_file
Joined: 6/25/2006
Msg: 927 (view)
 
Why women want guys to come to THEM
Posted: 8/17/2009 3:19:39 PM

Yes. This actually bothers me a great deal, although I seem to be pretty alone in this, among women at least. Although I don't see too many men keen on the idea, either. I just don't see how we can ask for true equality if we're not willing to step up to the plate in this matter.


I know. A lot of single women don't get it. Mothers who sent their sons to war are on board with the idea for this simple reason: If women are subject to conscription it effects them directly, therefore they are more likely to be more careful about who they give their vote to.



We haven't even touched on the subject of conscription for women in the military since they have the right to vote and therefore send men to die. That topic won't come up for another decade.


Then date a man if you feel it's unfair!



How about this... I will date whoever I want, and I will continue to point out what I think is unfair while you on the other hand continue to make dumb remarks for my entertainment.



Silent appreciation...why do you stare? I may or may not have interest, that's a different thing.


It interested your eyes, and your attention, at the very least.

I know when I stare, it's mostly because I like what I see. And "like" often implies want. But that's me.



I don't have to buy shoes when I see them, so I don't get your point.




Oh, you get the point... it shows from your answer.
 x_file
Joined: 6/25/2006
Msg: 890 (view)
 
Why women want guys to come to THEM
Posted: 8/16/2009 2:34:47 PM

Though women can and do make the first move, it is true that most expect men to come to them most of the time.

The reason for this is simple.

It is because they DO.

*dusts off hands*

That's it.


Another dumb post.

If you are going to explain a phenomenon such as why women expect men to come to them, "It is because they DO" doesn't do it. We already know they do. You are not adding anything to anyone's understanding. The question is why?

Why does 2+2=4 cannot be explained with "Because it does". If you wrote that on a math exam, you will get laughed at. Likewise, "It is because they DO" doesn't explain anything.
 x_file
Joined: 6/25/2006
Msg: 22 (view)
 
Post-break-up - destructive thought processes
Posted: 8/16/2009 8:59:56 AM


Post-break-up - destructive thought processes




It's seem a common theme:

http://forums.plentyoffish.com/datingPosts12955151.aspx

http://forums.plentyoffish.com/datingPosts12954780.aspx

http://forums.plentyoffish.com/datingPosts12867901.aspx

I'm never dating anyone who has been in a serious relationship. There is just too much baggage.
 x_file
Joined: 6/25/2006
Msg: 872 (view)
 
Why women want guys to come to THEM
Posted: 8/15/2009 10:55:31 PM

AW, come on x-file( you can be so snarky...lol)..you kind of proved my point...I wasn't saying men should change( though a lot of what you just said has apparently changed now, hasn't it?


I'm basically reflecting back the attitude some women put forth - and a lot of the time it happens to be "snarky". Of course, I add my own flavor of "snarky" to my replies.

None of the points I brought up have changed much. All I can say for certain is that "talks are in process" as it should be obvious from this 36+ page thread.

We haven't even touched on the subject of conscription for women in the military since they have the right to vote and therefore send men to die. That topic won't come up for another decade.



Why does anyone of either gender have to change because others say they should?


One day one of Buddha's disciples asked, "Lord, whom shall I believe? One man telleth me this and another that, and both seem sure they are right." The Lord Buddha replied: "My son, believe not that which any man saith, not even I, unless it appeals to your common sense. And even then do not believe it, but treat it as a reasonable hypothesis until such time as you can prove it for yourself."

Replace the word "believe" with "change" and that's my view on when you should change.

I'm going to criticize what I feel should be criticized. You should change, out of your own will, not because I want you to, or I say so, but because my criticism makes sense to you, and you can "prove it for yourself".

If you read my posts on this thread, most of them just point out the hypocrisy I see - which is another reason for the "snarky" attitude. When a woman says that she wants guys to come to her, that I have no problem with. I want a billion dollars, but so what, right? It's just something I want.

However, when a woman's desires, wants, or views are automatically turned into a standard, or worse, a law, which affects everyone else, that standard or law is now in public domain, and therefore subject to scrutiny, and you can be certain I will have my say.

When a woman says she wants guys to come to her, if you read between the lines that follow, a lot of the times she not only wants guys to come to her, but she also expects them to do what she wants, and thinks that's how dating should be.



Who made anyone the arbiter of what is right, and what is wrong? Isn't it an individual decision?


It is an individual's decision. But I'm not the one claiming guys should be the one's asking girls out - not that you are making such a claim. It's just that a lot of women seem to hold that expectation, an seem think that should be the standard. Who made them the arbiter? Shouldn't you ask them that question just like asked me?



My point is, there is no specific thing everyone does in a dating mindset. Where they go, what they wear, etc cannot be attributed to that mindset unless you are someone they either want to date or are already dating.


I'm not sure how that's relevant. Once again, the mentality of a person going out to get a date is generally either to impress (be noticed) or be impressed (to notice). Everyone, as you pointed out, goes their own way about doing the impressing, but the attitude remains constant.



Going out to meet people or be around people with no expectations beyond that? Ok. Dating specifically? Sure, some do this - but should they?


It's not for me to decide. I can only offer my advice, though I'm not feeling too charitable tonight.



Great bit - and makes sense when you have an audience to entertain.


That bit of comedy is not just to entertain an audience. If you didn't get the point he was making thru his comedy, then you don't see my point either.



Look, enjoy the show if you see body parts, why not? Hey I see a guy I think is hot I stare - most women realize men are going to look. Why men feel they have to walk over, say something or call out to you or otherwise stop you from what you're doing is beyond me.


Beyond you? Why do you stare? More specifically what does "staring" indicate?

Men feel they have to walk over and say something more or less for the same reason women feel they have to buy a pair of shoes they like.

Besides, how is a guy supposed to know if you are dating or not if he doesn't talk to you and you don't generally initiate?


That's very nice, but if there are no men in that bar, I'm not going there.


Someone is honest.



Women in the military are no different then men in the military. They vote, they join at there own free will. No one is standing over them forcing them to die. My, my-- all over whom should greet whom on a first date? I don't think so. I would say the is purely to get a reaction on your part.


You need to look-up the word conscription. I will save you the search:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conscription

Notice the "involuntary" part... which is kind of the opposite of "free will". I'm certain you don't know what you are talking about. Either that or you can't read.
 x_file
Joined: 6/25/2006
Msg: 854 (view)
 
Why women want guys to come to THEM
Posted: 8/15/2009 2:02:21 PM


When are most people NOT in normal mode?


When dating, as I specified.



Explain why you think going out is to be noticed or to notice...my point is that going out is the point - to go out for a lot of people. Beyond that you MAY notice someone or somoene may notice you - but it's not always the point of making plans in the first place.


I make a distinction between going out, and "going out to get a date". The mentality of a person going out to get a date is generally either to impress (be noticed) or be impressed (to notice). If we agree that people generally put their best foot forward, in dating, and generally otherwise, it follows they are trying to impress.



For single guys dating mode is anytime they are not asleep, but I digress.


That's prejudice, and mostly false. I think you mean "sex mode", not dating. And even if you meant that, that too is prejudice, and mostly false.



Is that because men assume that if you're dressed in such a way you're inviting people to approach?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2OBPaenkxdg
 x_file
Joined: 6/25/2006
Msg: 849 (view)
 
Why women want guys to come to THEM
Posted: 8/15/2009 12:28:14 PM

Well either you're paying attention to the minority of women in the place, or you're hanging out in the wrong place.


I'm definitely hanging out in the wrong places, but I wonder what makes them the wrong places - the people or the land?

Besides, from Ibiza, to Toronto, to Montreal to Miami, and Berlin, the behavior is all the same. That's makes for a lot of "wrong places" to be just coincidence.



It should be...a lot of men do the same thing. While SOME people go out just to be noticed...I don't agree that the majority do.


When dating is on the mind, most people go out to get noticed - after all that's the point of going out - to notice, or be noticed.



They still seem to be there looking for women anywayh, and seem to approach women in these places more than anywhere else.


But do they approach women there more because women are more approachable (that is women want to be approach at such places more than anywhere else or go there precisely because men approach them more) or do men do so because of some irrational judgment on their part? I have been to enough clubs to know it's usually the former. Besides, it's the "slutty looking" ones that usually get approached.
 x_file
Joined: 6/25/2006
Msg: 846 (view)
 
Why women want guys to come to THEM
Posted: 8/15/2009 10:54:03 AM

Because a lot of men tend to go out with the purpose of looking for women they can't accept that most women don't do this which might be a direct block to what they're doing, and they tend to project that everyone's doing what they are. I'm here looking for women, therefore women must be here looking for men (me).




While a woman will stop and pay attention to someone she likes in a social situation usually...they aren't necessarily in a place to meet someone. Many times they ARE there for the music, their friends, the atmosphere, the food, whatever.




That's interesting on several levels. But, I know the difference between when she is out for the music, friends, or the atmosphere and when she is out "looking" or more specifically, "to be looked at".

All one needs to do is compare the girls who are at the club with their boyfriends, to girls who are not. Compare how they act, how they dress, how long they took to get dressed and ready, and their normal behavior to that when in clubs or bars.

I didn't know women love music, food, the atmosphere or their friends so much that they make their ass and tits extra visible, wear see through dress and panties, or make-out with complete strangers.



We realize men are everywhere, so it's not really a big deal to go to a place specifically to view men (like animals at the zoo). By the time we get to a bar or club, we've already seen men many times that day.


As if that's not true for men.



Just because we will notice a hot guy while doing something else doesn't mean we came out looking for people to notice.


Of course not. That wouldn't be congruent with the observations of many men. It's better to come out and have people notice you.



What often frustrates me on the forums is that there are many men who are always saying that women should change their more biological or instinctual behaviors with the times, but, I really don't see a lot of men willing to the same.


Alright, I will change. I will change from asking women out, to not asking them out. I will change from paying on the first date, to not paying at all, and expect the woman to entirely pick-up the bill.

I will change so that next time there is a disaster, it's "men and children" first, then women. Or better yet, I will stay home and work, and look after those tedious, nerve wrecking and extremely difficult tasks such as house keeping, and cooking, or child rearing, and you go protect the country.
 x_file
Joined: 6/25/2006
Msg: 842 (view)
 
Why women want guys to come to THEM
Posted: 8/15/2009 9:54:04 AM

In sharp contrast, in the novel “women rotate, men sit” arrangement, women were just as aggressive and, as a result, less selective, as men were in their mate choice; they checked as many “yeses” for men as men did for women, and they experienced as much sexual attraction and romantic chemistry for the men as men did for women.


In one sense, this result is normal - just normal.

I say normal because I have had women, complete strangers, come up to me and whisper in my ear "I so want you", kiss me, then write their phone number on a napkin, put in my jean's pocket, and then walk away.

I have had girls come up to me and start grinding with me while just walking around a club.

While walking to a club I recall one girl came up to my buddy, hugged him, and wanted to have sex with him on the street. Later he said he didn't know her, and that this happens to him often.

I have seen countless examples of girls making out with guys and at the end of the 2 hour makeout session, neither knew each other's name.

In another sense the behaviour is normal in that it's just what the average guy does - he generally goes after what he wants rather than having the thing/person he wants come to him.

However, the majority of women want guys to come to them. I'm not sure if that's the right thing to even say. Perhaps it's more appropriate to just point out that many women don't approach guys. Whether they want guys to come to them, or want guys at all, should be considered seperately.

It's worth pointing out that at SDEs the participants know why each one is there. It's not likely for a man to go up to a woman, who is dating, but because she is at a club, she can say, "I'm here for the DJs" or "I'm here for the music", or "I'm just here with my friends for fun" knowing all to well that's just an excuse. At SDEs the participants cards are somewhat visible which eliminates certain wishy-washy behaviours.

Also, the result means little unless after the SDE the women who expressed interest approached the the guys they were interested in. As far as I know at SDEs you are supposed "select" a date and then follow up. But who does the follow up?
 x_file
Joined: 6/25/2006
Msg: 11 (view)
 
Should I call my ex-gf one year after break-up? Shes single and I love her, but..?
Posted: 8/11/2009 9:30:32 PM

She left me a year ago for some other guy, whom I knew was not gonna work out for her because he just wanted to have fun. Because of that bast*ard I lost the love of of my life.


I'm not sure he is a bast*ard. He didn't steal her from you. She left you. This kind of answers your question...



Should I call my ex-gf one year after break-up? Shes single and I love her, but..?


I don't think you should. If she left you, she can call you. If you call her you will almost surely look desperate.



I really wanna talk to her but if I call her she would think I am trying to make fun of her/trying to take advantage of her.


Yep, there is that too. But also she might take advantage of you. You will be the rebound guy until some other "bast*ard" comes along.



If i say I am sorry to hear that you guys broke up, wouldnt she think that I am being an ***?


If you do say that you are a "***", whatever that is, because you are not sorry! You called the guy a "bast*ard"!

You are probably better off with, "I'm glad you are no longer with that bast*ard. I hope you find someone worthy of you. I wish you best of luck."
 x_file
Joined: 6/25/2006
Msg: 21 (view)
 
FINDING OUT SECRETS
Posted: 8/11/2009 6:02:25 AM

I was mad that he didn't let me in on it, and he was mad and accused me of spying although it was by total accident that I figured out his password.


Who are you kidding? You had to "try" a password in order to "accidentally" figure it out. Which means, you wanted to log into his account to begin with. If you didn't want to spy on him, you wouldn't have "guessed" any passwords.



I pretty much told her to back off.


Marking your territory? And you had the audacity to use his account without his permission? It's one thing to figure out his account password, and another to make full use of his account.



I don't think he was cheating on me but I don't know where to take it from here.


Lovely! You don't know where this is going, which means it's going nowhere, and you told a potential mate of his to get lost.



Do you think he should take his profile off?


No! I don't think he should do anything. If you don't like what he is doing, find another man.



Do you think I should push the issue?


You already did. But why not do another round of "pushing"... I'm certain he will soon leave anyway.
 x_file
Joined: 6/25/2006
Msg: 22 (view)
 
Is it right to ask a girl to put their life on hold for you?
Posted: 8/10/2009 10:42:25 AM


Is it right to ask a girl to put their life on hold for you?


It's not a matter of right or wrong. And even if it was, and one determined that it is right for her to wait for you, it doesn't mean she will or you can make her to.

For most of us, eating healthy food, and exercising is the right thing to do. Yet, many of us choose not to. Just because something is right, it doesn't mean I will do it, though I should.

If she loves you enough, she will wait even if you don't ask her.

The question you need to be asking yourself is whether she loves you.
 x_file
Joined: 6/25/2006
Msg: 746 (view)
 
Why women want guys to come to THEM
Posted: 8/9/2009 10:11:14 AM

Well.. I can't argue that we (as women) having been approached more often and therefore; we should know by example.


By example? Come on now... you have first hand practical experience of the entire protocol. "By example" is when someone shows you once, and when YOU have no partake in the example - when you are a spectator.



We are not experienced at the part where a guy says yea or nay to our approach .


You are right. But the same can be said about a man who asks out a girl for the first time ever. Yet such a man usually pickups the "skill" quickly - 5 minutes quickly. I'll give you 10, or may be 2.5 - depending on whether you think you are smarter than the average man.



You generalize the sexes in this statemet.


Yes, and? Just because it's a generalization doesn't make it automatically false - I guess that's news to you. To prove something false, you need to do more than just point out it is a generalization - you need to provide sound logical arguments - not your forte.



Not all women and not all men are the same. SOME women are better a communicating than men.


Since when are you judging objectively? Every woman thinks her self a master of language and relationships, regardless of whether she actually is. I'm yet to hear a woman admit that some particular man is better at language or understands relationships better than she does.



SOME women are more socially experienced, SOME women "love to talk" the whole gender isn't made from a template.


Fair enough. I will just set "SOME" to equal to "99.999999999%". We are agreed!
 x_file
Joined: 6/25/2006
Msg: 43 (view)
 
verbal abuse
Posted: 8/7/2009 11:00:35 PM


Do I have a right to be upset about this?


If I say, "No", you won't be upset? I can't believe you have to ask for permission to be upset. And I can't believe that other people are actually grating you such permission as if it is their the grant.

Dump her. Call her and officially end it.

I don't know about you, but I generally have no tolerance for bullshit. From what you wrote, it sounds like you are in for some major bullshit.
 x_file
Joined: 6/25/2006
Msg: 721 (view)
 
Why women want guys to come to THEM
Posted: 8/7/2009 10:21:40 AM

Lets face it; men have had way more experience and practice at intiating ~ We can't expect a gal to get the hang of it over night (or over one weekend either ;0))




Slaves, in time of slavery had more experience and practice at being slaves, therefore a slave should have continued on being a slave. Hence, abolishing slavery was a mistake. The logic isn't much different than yours.

One can argue that a gal can get the hang of it over night, if she hasn't already. After all, the average "gal" is approached a lot more than the average "pal", therefore she has a very good idea of the proper protocol.

One can even argue that since women, as they claim, are more socially experienced than men, better at communicating and language, and love to talk, it's they who should initiate.



Why are you so dead set to prove that it's wrong for other women to initiate with men?


I doubt you will ever get an informative, honest and genuine answer.
 x_file
Joined: 6/25/2006
Msg: 4 (view)
 
I get too nervous to go on dates so I always cancel
Posted: 8/6/2009 10:48:37 PM


Is it normal to get really nervous?


Certain level of anxiety is perhaps reasonable. Being really nervous is not normal.



How can I control it?


Don't. Go out on a date, and just say to the person, "I get really nervous".

If you want to ease into the whole dating thing, go out with friends of friends.



I sometimes just think I'm so nervous because hes not the right one and I'm wasting my time.


You need to gain some wisdom so you can judge a person's character with some certainty. That way you will know if he is the one or not.
 x_file
Joined: 6/25/2006
Msg: 30 (view)
 
Ever heard of the Gold Analogy?
Posted: 8/6/2009 10:42:44 PM


Be careful what you wish for as you "weed" out the people on here who have too much "Drama" and you are looking for a partner who has never had to face a problem.


There are many people who have faced many problems, but handled them without the drama.

Generally drama is the result of people NOT being able to handle problems.
 x_file
Joined: 6/25/2006
Msg: 9 (view)
 
A question to confound and interest...
Posted: 8/4/2009 7:57:15 PM

If meaning has meaning, what does it mean?


Is the word water, water? It should be obvious that a word, and the thing it points to are not the same. No one has ever quenched their thirst with the word "water".

For that reason words are only symbols. The meaning of words comes from with in a person. That is, people hold meanings, not words. This too should be obvious as two people often have a different meaning for the same word.

"Meaning" and "consciousness" are ultimately linked. Since our consciousness leaves out more than it takes in, we run into a problem... sometimes what we miss or don't "take in" can be very important. To make sure certain things are "taken in" we make them "noteworthy", that is, we stress their importance. When a person contrasts or compares the importance of two such things, you get "meaning".

One can think of "meaning" as a "reality ranking system".
 x_file
Joined: 6/25/2006
Msg: 603 (view)
 
Why women want guys to come to THEM
Posted: 8/4/2009 6:42:27 PM

There is a PERFECT example of why I would not go to a guy. To me it doesn't matter where you are if you have this attitude then you do. Puffff so much easier to just turn my back when a man like this approaches me, let alone approach him.


A lot of women go to bars for the same purpose as many guys. This attitude isn't unique to guys. After all TWO went and screwed - a man and a woman.
 x_file
Joined: 6/25/2006
Msg: 577 (view)
 
Why women want guys to come to THEM
Posted: 8/4/2009 10:26:59 AM

There probably are, off the top of my head I don't know any. And if they are comfortable with it,and it turns out well for them, I say more power to them.But since you are not my age, gender, probably not the same socioeconomic and educational background, and don't live where I live, I don't think you can dictate MY reality.


What? If you do not wish to elaborate objectively, and wish to makes things personal, I won't reply at all. Accusing me of dictating your reality because I asked few questions, which were not initially addressed to you and to which you voluntarily responded, is ridiculous.



Again, that is her choice, for whatever reason.


Obviously. But this is just as informative, as "Somewhere" or "Some amount".


If you interpret "her not asking you out" as a loss, you fall deeper into the frame that she's the prize.


Yes, I agree. Perhaps I should elaborate what I meant.

Every person can play their act so to speak. They can lie, they can be honest, they can pretend to be the prize, they can pretend to be humble, etc..

Just because someone lies, for example, it does mean I will believe their lie.

The same goes for a woman who makes herself to be the prize. Just because she believes she is the prize, or tries to convey that image to the world, it doesn't mean I will believe it.

That's why I asked,

What makes her sure that a man will see her as a prize rather than say, a manipulator?

In my opinion, a person who tries to make them self the prize, is usually NOT the prize. Such a person is often doing what most salesmen do - inflate the value of goods they are selling - which is manipulation of the true value of the goods.



I've yet to hear one where they met in a bar, went home and screwed...and then wound up happy together.


Met in a bar and went home to screw WAS the whole purpose. Who the f*ck goes to a bar looking for happily ever after? Bars are for getting drunk, and getting laid.
 x_file
Joined: 6/25/2006
Msg: 536 (view)
 
Why women want guys to come to THEM
Posted: 8/3/2009 2:22:26 PM

Again, because the age group I'm in, the culture of my area of residence, and the type of man I'm attracted to, IT'S NOT THAT SIMPLE.


I understand. I can't say the same about you.

I'm certain women in your age group do ask men out. The thing that I'm getting at is that there is a fundamental difference in attitude that does not seem to be the result of age, culture, or a geographical area.



LMAO, do women have anything other than a mood point in debates?????????
I realize it's a typo and you meant "moot" but *gasp* oh my!




Now that you mentioned it, I think it's both, a mood point and a moot point - and probably the result of a moot mood.



My point was people make choices and decisions, shoes are pretty much stuck where they end up. So areo infants, and animals too so forget the animate thing but you see my point. You don't have to convince a shoe to get into your car.


I got your point. Though I don't think it contributes much to the answer.

Again, I'm more interested in this case scenario: He approaches, she is interested, but she doesn't ask. Or better yet, she is interested, but she neither approaches nor asks.



Because it makes it easier for the woman to frame herself as the prize in the interaction.


That's an interesting take. But why do that? What's the point? What makes her sure that a man will see her as a prize rather than say, a manipulator?
 x_file
Joined: 6/25/2006
Msg: 525 (view)
 
Why women want guys to come to THEM
Posted: 8/3/2009 10:35:20 AM

If I approach and do all the groundwork, being asked out is his part of the deal.


Thanks for attempting but this answer hardly even touches upon the question.

If you approach, and he is interested, he should ask - I can understand that.

I'm more interested in this case scenario: He approaches, she is interested, but she doesn't ask. Or better yet, she is interested, but she neither approaches nor asks.



Shoes, clothes, etc are inanimate. Some men seem to think everything is a formula.


Mood point. Women are animate things. Woman-woman interactions follow the same pattern. Even women-men interactions follow the same pattern, expect in the dating arena - which is why I find the exception odd and interesting. Shopping for shoes was just an example.



I disagree...for me it's about whether or not he's is interested enough to make a move.


It's responses like these that often make me wonder if some women are cold blooded creatures without feelings.

What about YOUR interest in him?

You want a man to act on his interest/attraction, but you choose not the act on your interest/attraction towards him?



If meeting me is important enough to him, then he will put aside his shyness and/or ego and approach me.


And why can't you do the same?



Women who claim it is unnatural for a women to initiate only do so to rationalize their ineptitude in comparison to other women, and should stay away from Montreal. You'd starve for attention. Toronto lags behind New York, and even moreso Montreal. But nonetheless, women do still initiate. I've encounter it all the time.



I lived in Toronto for a while - now in the GTA. I also have family in Montreal. Your observation is spot on!

In TO, even in places such as clubs and bars, most women just sit and wait for a guy to come over and talk to them. Their posture of total boredom and dissatisfaction with men is priceless.
 x_file
Joined: 6/25/2006
Msg: 507 (view)
 
Why women want guys to come to THEM
Posted: 8/2/2009 11:40:13 PM

In my world, being true to myself would be to show interest and encourage him to ask me out.


No argument. That's my observation too - most women do that. My question is why? Why encourage the guy to ask you out rather than simply asking him out?

I know that when a woman is interested in something, like shoes, she goes shopping. She doesn't wait for the shoes to show up on her door step, she goes and gets them. She doesn't encourage the shoes to jump in her shopping bag either, but gets them. This attitude is constant nearly in everything else she does, except when it comes to men.

That's why I find this particular instance of this behavior odd, extremely odd.

I know you already gave an answer, and if do not wish to elaborate further, that's fine.



Threats? Talk about a Freudian slip?


Simply a spelling mistake, and not the only one, and it's certainly not first time I've spelled that word that way. But lets go the Freudian slip as it sounds more dangerous.
 x_file
Joined: 6/25/2006
Msg: 491 (view)
 
Why women want guys to come to THEM
Posted: 8/2/2009 8:37:04 PM

^^^^^^^^^^^^^It's not that we "can't" we just choose not to.


Even a perfect 10, who has guys chasing her every minute of everyday, generally has a problem asking out the guy she likes. She might stalk him for weeks, as I witnessed on many occasions, but not ask him out.



This would be MY take on the above quote. Many of us who were growing up at the tail end of "nice girls don't call boys...nice girls wait for the boy to do the asking" and the transition to "equal rights=equal responsibility".


I can generally tell when a person acts on their nature or their social conditioning. Drunk people's actions, for example, are rarely the result of social conditioning, but often the result of deeper unexpressed desires.



What we are trying to do NOW is to be proactive in conveying interest in a guy, without going so far as to flat out asking HIM out, in case he's still trying to climb out of the old "those 'forward girls' are no better than they should be" shibboleth,or some other 1950s dating rules.


Few things.

When a person has an interest in someone, or something, they don't try to show it - they don't have to, it simply shows.

To quote Mark Twain: Any emotion, if it is sincere, is involuntary.

"Trying" is almost always voluntary.

Also I don't buy the idea that a woman doesn't ask a guy out because he might be still trying to climb out of the old "those 'forward girls' are no better than they should be".

To automatically assume a guy might have 1950's mentally in 2009, especially if the guy happens to be under 30, is, well, stupid, retarded, prejudice, sexist, biased, and even racist.

Additionally, of all the possible justifications as to why some women don't ask guys out, the one you have offered is the least believable. If you replied with "Because he might be a serial killer", I might have believed you.

Second last, it doesn't make any sense to say that women don't ask guys out because he might be still trying to climb out of the old "those 'forward girls' are no better than they should be". Judging from these threats, you personally, rarely care about other people's opinion of you. Why the exception for dating? So what if he is still indeed trying to climb something or other?

And lastly, so what if some looser thinks you are easy (or something else) because you asked him out? Why do you care about his opinion? And more importantly, why do you care to adjust your behavior to suite such a person?



Yes, we're sitting on the fence,whatever. So sue us,already, for being caught in the middle.


I think that is just an excuse and playing the victim's card. There comes a point where it's not just "upbringing" or a "generational thing", but rather human nature.

In my experience, for some reason people have the need to give a believable reason, or an excuse to cover up a self serving behavior. The classical example being, "I love you", rather than, "I want to do you".



You guys claim all the time that you are never quite sure anymore whether it's OK to hold a door open for a woman...you don't know whether you be thanked-or blasted-for your gesture. Well, we women are in about the same situation when it comes to asking for a date.


I can relate to that. But what is the most common response to this? Is it not, "Do what you feel at that moment without worrying how she will interpret the gesture"? In other words, be true to yourself and your feelings. Is "Be yourself" just a bunch of crap then? Cause that is the most common response, from men and women!

Well then, if a woman is interested in a man, and I'm assuming that's genuinely possible, should she not be true to herself and ask him out?

A little consistency will be nice and a welcomed change.
 x_file
Joined: 6/25/2006
Msg: 471 (view)
 
Why women want guys to come to THEM
Posted: 8/2/2009 5:08:02 PM


So I think a woman's chance of success is much higher than a guy's chance of success in asking a woman out. There are plenty of guys who would be tickled pink if a woman approached them and asked them out. If she asked them out and offered to pay (according to the well-known "rule") it might be right up there in the guy's mind with winning the lottery ticket. What a gold medal that would be for her! She got this relationship off the ground. If it weren't for her, there would BE no relationship. She would have walked away thinking about what it would have been like if he had asked her out. She gave up control of the situation to him. Shame on her!


Brilliant.

In my experience, very large percentage of women stop at the verbal stage. She will do everything in her power to hint she wants you, except ask you out - she simply can't seem to say the words. Yet, nearly every woman claims she is a good communicator.
 x_file
Joined: 6/25/2006
Msg: 25 (view)
 
if u don't love me why not leave me why stay and hurt me
Posted: 8/2/2009 8:02:49 AM

I have been in relationships that always seem to start off perfectly in the begining and then seem to go bad in the end.


This sentence pretty much sums up the theme for large number of posts on these forms - "Everything was great, BUT then..."



I try to leave but the partner wants me back and wins me back, calling constantly, leaving flowery messages, promising to change. telling me they love me and want me back.


The solution is fairly simple. Have the courage to stick to your decision. If you leave, don't come back.



When I go back things are great at first but then that vicious cycle restarts.


How many times does it have to happen before you learn?



I go back because I care, because I have love and feelings and i want to be in a relationship.


That's not a good reason to go back. You should seriously consider the alternative to going back, namely, finding someone new who does not exhibit the habits, or personality of the men you previously dated.



But when I get the willpower to go, I get begged to come back but why, why call me back if there is no love on your part or if there is, the neccesarry changes wont be made why stay in the relationship with a person if u cant and wont do right, why hurt the one who has love for u?


Some men and women have an abusive nature and don't' even know it. I think you might be attracted to such men, and possibly be addicted to drama - the two often go together.

The question you ought ask yourself is not why they hurt you, but why do you stay and allow them to!
 x_file
Joined: 6/25/2006
Msg: 65 (view)
 
Calculation
Posted: 8/1/2009 10:47:20 PM
You have 99 levels, and you need 65535 points.

So, 65535/99 = 661.97 points per level. Round that off to 661.

Your formula: P= L * 661. (Where P is the points, and L the current level) If you are at level 99, your points will be: P= 99*661 which is 65439)

If you need a somewhat more exponential increase in points, do this:

P= 65535 - (661 * (99 - L))

That gives you:

Level 1 = 65535 - (661* (99-1)) = 757 points.
Level 2 = 65535 - (661* (99-2)) = 1418 points
Level 3 = 65535 - (661* (99-3))= 2079 points
.
.
.
Level 99 = 65535 - (661* (99-99))= 65535 points.




I actually decided to go with 32 levels this time, instead of 99.


Okay, I think you can also use this:

P= 65535 - (2047 * (32 - L))

Or even this:

P= 2 ^ (L/2) - remember to round to the nearest integer.
 x_file
Joined: 6/25/2006
Msg: 33 (view)
 
what does it mean when your ex calls while she just moved into an apt with some dude
Posted: 8/1/2009 8:33:33 PM


Ok Tell me why a ex girlfriend would call you up after she just very recently moved into an apartment with her new boyfriend , just a month or so after meeting this idiot and after she sent you a picture of her sucking his****


I can't figure out if **** equals "neck" or "foot".





Her statement was she cares about how i am doing


I hope you are not that gullible.
 x_file
Joined: 6/25/2006
Msg: 28 (view)
 
It was my fault, but I want him back.
Posted: 8/1/2009 8:22:36 PM


...I stupidly made a pass at him and my boyfriend walked in...


You made a pass at your ex... which is another way of saying you were going to cheat on your boyfriend. Your boyfriend caught you, and then rather than dumping you, he acted and is still acting like a wussy.



Anything I can do to show him I love him?


You should have asked your self that question before you attempted to cheat on him.



I thought maybe a romantic meal, then a dvd and popcorn?


Oh,there is nothing like a meal, dvd and popcorn to say "I'm sorry that I was about to cheat on you".

Let him do one of your hot girlfriends. If you really want to make it up to him, do threesome... scrap that, an orgy is probably better - but hire a professional hooker, may be two.
 x_file
Joined: 6/25/2006
Msg: 457 (view)
 
Why women want guys to come to THEM
Posted: 8/1/2009 7:28:37 PM


X.File..... You're insisting that your way is the RIGHT way and opposing views are the WRONG way…. is that how YOU were raised?


I'm not insisting, I hardly care that much. It's a simple observation.



You see it as "bad behavior", I see it as choice.


To me, it's bad behavior, and if a choice, a bad choice.
 
Show ALL Forums