« Previous 1 2 View All Next »
There’s a lot to love about online dating. You take the randomness out of trying to meet people, hoping that fate will guide you to THAT ONE SPOT you need to be AT THAT VERY SPECIFIC TIME in order to meet that special someone. If you have approach anxiety when it comes to meeting strangers in person, online dating gives you all the time you need to calm down and send that message. You can be as picky as you like, using various search functions and filters to ensure that you find that 5’9″ tall blonde Farsi speaking Zoroastrian of your dreams. You have total control over the impression you want to deliver, from that perfect photo to the charming and witty dating profile that captures and holds their attention.
Of course, there’s nothing quite so frustrating when you put all of that effort into your profile and start sending out all of those messages… and get thunderous silence in return.
In fact, that’s the reason why so many men1 quit online dating entirely; who wants to expend all of that emotional energy only to get kicked in the metaphorical nuts by that empty inbox every time you log in? Why the hell won’t people write back?
Well, to mangle an old saying: once is happenstance, twice is coincidence, three times means you’re doing something wrong. Sometimes you have to accept that you’re the only common denominator in all of those people you’re messaging. So it’s time to take a step back and take a hard look at what you may be doing that turns off your potential dates.
It’s A Zombie Profile
She’s hot. She’s single. She hasn’t responded to a single email you ever sent… because you’ve been emailing a digital corpse. One of the risks (for suitably inflated values of “risk”) that you’re going to come across in the world of online dating is the dating site account that’s dead yet still shuffling around: the zombie profile.
"Daaaaates."
It looks for all the world like a normal account, but the person who owns it hasn’t logged on in over three months… and probably never will. Sending messages, winks, pokes, flowers or other signs of interest is the digital equivalent to ringing the doorbell of an abandoned house. You’re just wasting your time.
Zombie profiles litter every dating service – especially ones that rely on paid subscriptions. They may have let their subscription lapse, but never went through the procedure of actually removing their account – something that many dating sites make as difficult as possible in order to artificially inflate their numbers. They may have set up the profile on a lark and forgot about it after moving on when some other social network caught their attention. They may have started dating somebody they met on that very site and just never got around to closing their account or editing their profile to indicate that they’re no longer on the market. Ultimately it doesn’t matter: they’re never going to respond to you, so you may as well quit worrying about ‘em.
How Do You Avoid This?
Start filtering for activity level in your searches. Most dating sites allow you to add “Active Within $TIME” to any search string. If the owner of the profile hasn’t logged in within two weeks, the odds are good that you’re looking at a zombie profile. Don’t bother hoping that they’ll notice the “You have a new message!” email and log back in to see who’s been trying to reach them; odds are high that any such emails are either ignored, sent to the spam folder or deleted without being read in the first place.
You may also want to watch out for active profiles by people who don’t actually spend the money to subscribe. Some dating sites will let you post your profile for free, but have to pay extra to actually send messages. These sorts of accounts will have unsubtle clues as to how to reach them elsewhere… and 9 times out of 10, they’re spammers anyway. Don’t waste your time.
You Were Lost In The Churn
Online dating is a seller’s market when it comes to women; they’re going to have a far higher response rate to their profiles then men – most of them unsolicited. Some women will get 10 to 20 new messages per day on dating sites; some may get that many in an hour, especially if there’s a suggestion that she’s looking for sex. When you’re constantly being deluged by strangers wanting to get to know you naked, you’re likely to start paying less and less attention to the actual content of the email. After all, why bother when 99% of them are troglodytes who think that “Yo bitch” is a proper way to start an email or make the immediate leap to “I can’t wate to eat ur puzzy” are appropriate ways to approach a woman you don’t know.
Hell, many of my female friends will delete emails – without reading them – based solely on the subject line because of the sheer volume of mail they receive.
Odds are good that your email got lost in the churn of every other guy out there who was trying to get her attention as well… and suffered the same fate as all the others, consigned to the digital garbage bin.
How Do You Avoid This?
You need to make a point of standing out from the crowd. This means no generic usernames – UTexas09 or Portland77 – or inappropriate ones – anything involving the word Love, Luv or implying that you are the A+ number one master of orgasms. This also means that you need to have an attention-getting subject line to your messages. The most common subject line that women receive is a variation on “Hello”: Hey, Hi, ‘sup, Yo, how YOU doin’, etc. The second most common? “You’re pretty”. The third most common usually involves sex. Avoid *all* of these.
If you want to keep her from automatically reaching for the delete button when your message hits her inbox, you need to grab her attention. A clever, attention-getting subject line – especially one that indicates you actually read her profile, is key. If she talks about sports, mention sports in the title. If you two have a mutual interest in books, put that in the subject!
Failing that, there’s always the Dadaist approach. I’ve always had good responses from “Pirates are inherently better than Ninjas” or “Zombies are superior to Vampires”. Almost never has anything to do with the message I send, but the WTF factor is often enough to at least get the email read… which is half of the battle right there.
- Women usually have the opposite problem: a veritable tsunami of sex-seeking dudes who flood her inbox [↩]
« Previous 1 2 View All Next »
Related posts:
Pages: 1 2
So, here's my biggest pet peeve with online dating (OkCupid specifically): you're looking through women's pages, when you stumble upon someone who's fairly cute, seems smart/funny, and likes the things you like. You get sort of excited, and you start thinking up a good first message. That's when you get to the bottom of her profile, to see some variation on this: "I'm just here to make friends, and if something else happens, then great."
I get that it's a free country and a free website, so they can use it however they please, but still, do they not realize that they're on a "dating" website? I can guarantee that 99.9% of all the men on the site are not looking for "friends," they are looking for dating/relationships/sex.
Yes, it's totally rude of people to be cute and desirable and utterly unavailable to you, isn't it?
First rule of online dating (or dating in general, really): you don't get to tell people how to use a dating site. In fact, that is something that a lot of women face on dating sites: being insulted for "using it wrong". If they want to use OKCupid – which is as much a social network as it is a dating site these days – to meet new friends, that's their choice. I know plenty of people who use it when they move to a new city in order to build a new social circle, especially when their initial options consists solely of their co-workers.
Besides: romance can bloom from platonic friendships.
Honestly, I can admit that my minor annoyance with this probably stems from people being attractive and unavailable. But I still don't understand why people would use a dating site for finding friends. Best case scenario, you end up hanging out with a bunch of dudes who all secretly want to date you (they aren't on a dating site because they're in loving, committed relationships, and unless you list yourself as bisexual, you aren't gonna be meeting a lot of women) (also, I'm seeing this from a straight guy's POV, so maybe there are a bunch of dudes on the site doing this, too?). I just can't imagine that that approach works.
Solution: someone needs to make a website designed specifically for making friends. I imagine that it would work similarly to a dating website, except nobody's looking to get laid (ideally).
I am now registering "FriendZone.com" in anticipation of this.
You're preparing to make millions. Congratulations.
Honestly? I've done that/said that before. Want some insight? It's a cop out. It's our way of beating off rejection (he didn't really reject me because I wasn't looking for a relationship) and not feeling like we're overly eager for a relationship. It's hard to turn down an opportunity for a friend vs. turning down a potential mate. It's also how we don't feel desperate.
Further, it's often a sign of a slight insecurity. It also plays into the whole feeling that you will find a great guy and though he may not be initially attracted to you, your personality may win him over in the long run.
That and it fends off the "hey baby, wanna have a fun night" emails.
So, she's basically trying to discourage guys with exactly your mentality.
Let's put it this way. Why the hell would I want anything to do with someone that is only interested in me as something to have sex with? Maybe you genuinely want a fulfilling romantic relationship… thing is, I don't know that and I've had enough guys sidle up to me to be bestest friends and then disappear off the face of the earth forever when they realize I'm not interested in sex that I really just don't have time for that bullshit. Maybe she's sick of it, too.
The other thing is, some people legitimately believe that you need to be friends first before anything more can come of it. Some people can make relationships work going straight from strangers to dating, but loads of people don't like to do it that way.
There's a really good reason why I'd be on one of those sites only looking for friends:
Anyone who wasn't a friend or friends with friends of mine (and therefore vetted to some extent) that I attempted to date has turned out to be a completely disrespectful creep towards me. I happen to be up front with the fact that I'm poly, but that doesn't mean I'm up for shagging anything with two legs who thinks I'm cute.
I want to date people who can talk to me as a human being. And seriously, far FAR too many men do not seem to get that. Friendship means you're respectful of my boundaries, and are interested in ME not just my girl bits. My time is limited, and so I need to limit who I deal with accordingly.
I've also said this on my profile. It's mostly because I don't want to bother dating someone who isn't interested enough in my personality and real inner self to want to be friends with me if we aren't going to fuck. There are so many people who just see and pretty face and a good body and stop there, and I don't want them to even bother messaging me. (They still do, of course.) By saying I want to be friends first, I'm trying to sort for the people who'll take the time to actually get to know me as a human being.
*a* pretty face.
I'm replying to UnderOrange and Tegan here as well, since you three seem to be saying the same thing.
It seems to me like you aren't really looking for friends, you're looking for a relationship of some sort, but you don't want to admit that on your profiles, because you think it will weed out the assholes (and, unless I'm mistaken, you all seem to have plenty of experience with assholes).
This strategy just doesn't work. It doesn't weed out assholes (as Paradox said herself) it weeds out everybody else. If you are actually interested in finding a cool guy (or girl) to have a relationship with, you won't find him (or her) by pretending that you only want friends (this is true in real life, as well as online dating). Just be honest about you're looking for, and it will make it easier for everyone.
I am sorry, but you are misunderstanding. Just because I am available doesn't mean I am looking for a relationship. The best relationships grew out of friendships. And I don't need to be Looking because I am complete unto myself.
Think of it as expanding your network rather than finding a partner. Who knows, even if there isn't chemistry if the interaction is at least fun then you have a new world of people to meet. But even as such, friends are a fantastic thing to have in themselves.
you're on a dating site, not a networking site – the whole thing is set up for people to meet and go on dates. You're throwing away all or most of the suitable and none of the assholes because something worked in the past.
you're doing it wrong, just like the backdoor friends gambit.
if you want to expand your network, do social things that you enjoy, meet people, and make friends. There isn't a shortcut here.
I'm on OKC looking for women to date. I already have friends, so if you pop up and say that you just want to be friends, you won't get anything from me. Meet me in a social group and see how things go.
@chris, I'm pretty sure that wouldn't actually be a huge loss for Tegan. You're apparently the kind of person that's willing to tell random strangers how they're allowed make friends.
No thanks.
Plus, I have a real hard time getting how an honest cry for "I just want friends" is anything at all like "Let me pretend to be your friend so you'll eventually have sex with me. They seem pretty different.
Max – exactly.
It forces you into the so-called backdoor gambit.
"By saying I want to be friends first, I’m trying to sort for the people who’ll take the time to actually get to know me as a human being."
Whether this is called "getting to know me as a human being" or "the backdoor gambit" is dependent on whether she finds you attractive. If she's attracted to you and you make a move, you were "getting to know her first", if she finds you unattractive it's all "he was just being friends with me to get in my pants".
Though this is also why I've thought the whole "backdoor gambit" idea was stupid – because getting to know a girl you're romantically or physically interested in first is not "being manipulative", it's called "getting to know them".
I realized what was happening from a different article on another site -
http://www.hookingupsmart.com/2012/06/26/relation…
"To the degree that a shit test is consciously manipulative it is immoral…Unconscious fitness testing is not immoral because there is no intent to deceive."
They believe that as long as what they're doing in unconscious, it's fine. If they acknowledged that they're doing what they're doing, then it's a problem. Then one day "it just happens" and suddenly they're dating.
The reason this is so frustrating is that you can't take this mentality as a guy – you're the one expected to make it "just happen", and if you're trying to figure things out it's even worse, as what they say they're doing is the exact opposite of what they're actually doing, because they're telling themselves that they're not doing what they're doing.
Well, it's a nice thought, but I'll be straight up, I closed my only dating account yeeeeears ago because a local creeper kept harassing me online and found me through it. I haven't had one since and I really don't miss it.
Your still thinking about this from the wrong point of view, though. If you don't think we're interesting enough people to be friends with, than we sure as hell don't want to date you. There's this constant problem where guys will bend over backwards, lie, and otherwise be a complete dickhead to get a girl to have sex with him. "Friends First" is a decent way to find out who you are before committing to anything we'll regret later.
In my OkC profile I ticked [x] bisexual, and I ticked that I'm looking for friends, activity partners and long-distance pen pals.
Notice the absence any kind of dating or SEXY TIMES.
Still I occassionally get messages from men (only ever men btw), with exactly that prospect. – Guess who doesn't get a reply from me?
“I’m just here to make friends, and if something else happens, then great.”
That doesn't mean the woman isn't interested in dating; it means that she's interested in meeting people on a friendly level, and seeing if something happens from there. She's trying to put less pressure and fewer expectations on the meetup, and also letting you know that she's not necessarily going to jump into bed with you right away.
If you aren't interested in investing the time to meet on a "friendly" date, then she's probably not for you. However, don't assume that the above statement means she's not interested in dating. She's just interested in taking her time.
That's fair.
Though, I wish there was a better way to convey "I would like to date, but I will not have sex with you right away." I can live with that, and most other guys can, too.
I'd like to see someone use that exact phrase or something very close.
"right away"
Because.
Obviously we have to commit to it eventually.
This is the problem. This is EXACTLY the problem.
@ UnderOrange
Seconded.
That's not what I meant and you know it.
You know also Max. Guys that make sex front and center for why they would be interested in meeting me, are also the ones that aren't invested in my pleasure if/when we DO have sex. There has to be mutual respect and chemistry. And a guy who is willing to go on a "friendly" date has a MUCH higher probability of being the type of guy who will treat me like an equal (ie not a prize or something to conquer)
What I'm hearing from your post is "I wish there was a better way to filter profiles" — but, there is! I think okc has a way to filter profiles by "looking for long-term dating" or something along those lines. Now if someone has that box checked in their profile and THEN says "oh by the way, I'm just here to make friends" at the bottom, that's when I start wishing okc had a (better?) moderator team.
You need to translate this from "woman." Looking for friends means NOT looking for a hookup or casual sex. If a woman wasn't open to a relationship developing, she wouldn't be there in the first place. Most women want to be friends with people they sleep with. It's the first step. Frankly, I'd consider the fact someone didn't get this simply part of the winnowing process.
I frequently put my orientation as "Gay" to weed out the guys who refuse to be my friend. That and the ones who think "Hey hawt 1 I'm hory 4 u" is a good eCome-on.
Frankly? If a guy can't be bothered to be my friend, I want nothing to do with him. At all. Ever.
yay mind games. you just filtered out almost all of the straight guys looking to date someone.
Yeah, lol, and I'm reminded of girls complaining that they clearly put something on their profile about quantifications, then guys just totally ignore it as if it doesn't exist.
This is why, right here. Because half of these qualifications are just made up stuff that you're supposed "to know" they don't really mean.
I don't know about you, but when I first joined okcupid it was primarily a quiz site that got linked to facebook all the time. They didn't really try to force a profile on you until years later. I didn't have much desire for online dating, but I enjoyed the quizzes (especially the DnD stats ones) . I had a zombie profile for about 6 years and then went back on to retake the quizzes to see how much I've changed since my college years. I reupdated the profile to my taken and looking for friends only, even posted a pic of my boy and I, but I still get messages all the time from suitors. A girl who puts down "friends only" is doing you a favor in being honest. Your disappointment or anger is entirely your fault in this situation.
"For fuck’s sake, ever browser out there automatically highlights misspelled words."
I think you meant *every* browser. :3
Ho ho, ha ha, it is to laugh.
OK,should have expected that one. Typos are a part of the service I offer.
Hence, the importance of proofreading. Because a browser won't catch words that are typos (like "ever" instead of "every") or "the Untied States."
Cat: resident Grammar Nazi.
Hey, I didn't start it…
Could not agree more with every single part of this article. (even the bit that talks about 'grammer'.)
I wanted to add that developing the chops for good online dating can for some people bleed over into greater sensitivity to / competence with IRL interactions and flirtations. Getting good at responding right in virtual space is essentially just getting good at responding.
I'm sure I have no idea what you're talking about.
But Kira, I have seen womens profiles with horrible grammar mistakes getting tons of male responses. Why is grammar so important to women only? Why are men so forgiving to women on so many aspects?
Stop following me! I made my first online dating profiles last night. Thismorning I was staring at my empty inbox, not totally sad being it has only been like 12 hours, but feeling a little bit of that comoditized rejection. And then you post this article. Perfect timing. You and LifeHacker seem to be following me sometimes. Whenever I run into a problem within like a day Lifehacker posts something about it. And now love life issues pop up and here you are. Thanks!
Not everything is about you! my opinion is get a damn life. go meet people in a club or bar or something, if you cannot talk to women then try until you learn how to.
Nice article. I too have become very frustrated at online dating. It caused me to stop, but I recently decided to give it another shot. I'll keep the things mentioned in the article in mind.
On a only slightly related note: My frustration with online dating caused me to try speed dating but that didn't go so well either. Would you comsider doing an article about speeddating? I would be very interested in your thoughts about it!
That OK Cupid Enemies tumblr page is PURE gold.
Another dating profile pet peeve: the insanely long and contradictory list of requirements for a potential mate. I understand to need to weed out anyone remotely like one of your many obnoxious exes, but my hunch is that you instead end up weeding out *everyone* except completely delusional people and folks who didn't bother to read your profile
One of the hardest lessons for me, that The Good Doctor will just have to keep pounding on (usually between the lines) until I accept it, is "people tend to give the gifts that they would've wanted to receive — don't do that!"
In other words, since seeing a "lonely and desperate girl looking for a long-term relationship" type profile would make *me* drop what I'm doing and write the best message I can, I should try to sound *more* desperate in my own profile to elicit the same response.. right?
In all seriousness, I'd much rather have a "lost puppy" than a "fun Friday night," so do I just have to keep reminding myself every few seconds that the rest of the world doesn't think that way?
Yes, kind of.
Also, you may want to consider why you find a girl being desperate a turn on, and not a red flag that this girl, who just admitted that, probably has some major baggage that you, being someone interested in becoming someone special (read: BIAS!!!), are probably not the best someone to help her work through.
Remember, there's "lonely", then there's "crazy" and "desperate" is the oh so fine line between them.
Yes.
The template thing is a great idea; one I implemented months ago, and I feel much better about online dating having done so. It's worth addressing the other extreme, too. It's great advice to avoid the copy-and-paste contact email, but it's also a good idea not to invest a lot of time and attention to each email. In my experience, thenumber of responses I get now and when I sent off a snowflake of a letter, unlike any other I've written are not substantially different, but it hurts less when they don't respond. I came up with a clever way to introduce myself in my own voice, and since my audience changes every time, I'm not going to get called on using the same intro, customized to the audience. It's like a stand-up comedian; I have mostly the same material for everybody because I've memorized it and can tell it well, but a small portion of new stuff for the venue so I'm not just repeating myself to everyone.
The spelling/grammar thing depends on the kind of person you're trying to attract. Uni students studying lterature or what have you or otherwise intelligent types I'd imagine would pay more attention to that than the message/s.
Few can get away with it. Buddy of mine has terrible spelling but is a wizard with women. Probably helps that he looks like Russel Brands Australian brother too
I think it's sad that women go out of their way to make it hard for guys to meet them on dating sites, which completely ruins the selection aspect for the guys.
I mean, the whole point of online dating sites is to use them as a tool to match your personal preferences against potential partners, but since guys will have to spend all their time and energy mass-contacting women they're not going to be able to really enjoy that aspect.
Your mistake is assuming that women have the obligation to make it easy on you, or even possible. You (generic you) are not owed a relationship, a date, or even a response from anyone else.
If a woman (or a man), for whatever reason decides to artificially limit the number of people she wishes to speak to, that's her decision. Dating is not a democracy; you don't get a vote in other people's standards or wishes.
I know. It's just that I find this behavior kind of demoralizing, and every time I read yet another article featuring New Exciting Ways In Which Women Like To Shut Guys Out I find myself wanting to shy away from interaction with women completely out of the sheer fact that it's too burdening and disheartening to constantly be weeded out and never be approached.
Like the whole dynamic is built around guys constantly having to take a systematic approach to something that should just be inherently natural and fun. It doesn't even help the times when women do approach you, because you've already completely ruined whatever good feelings you ever had about interacting with women due to having to approach 5-10 of them before you get one that's interested in talking to you.
There's no magic and no love, just a shitload of shields and radars. It makes love feel so fake.
Two things:
1) There's no such thing as "natural" when it comes to dating. If it were strictly "natural", we'd be waiting for women to go into estrus and then beating each other for the right to mate with them.
2) If you feel that you've ruined any good feelings about interacting with women because you've had to send out some emails that may not have gotten responses, then the problem is with *you*, not the system.
3) You're falling back into the pattern of "relationships as combat". Women aren't trying to make you jump through hoops for their amusement, they're screening out assholes.
Perhaps I've had different experiences with the fabled "women". There's really no such thing, though. Interactions with different women are interactions with different human beings. Each one has their own standards, likes, ways of socializing, sense of humor etc. You can learn all the subtle cues, how not to give off threat vibes etc etc but at the end of the day, learning how to get along with people. While people have common similarities, they're also all different and individual.
When I get to know someone as an individual, guy or girl, its not that different. I want to know about them as a person, find out what interests and activities we have in common and generally learn about things that interest them that I think I should know more about. I've found that being able to bond with someone on an individual level makes it pretty easy to later express a romantic or sexual interest openly AND either follow up or let it go if they're not also interested. Then even if we don't work out on that level, I've still made a friend.
I guess the main aspect is that if you find each individual person interesting, its easy to find things to talk about and to build a relationship on. If you don't, I'm not the right person to ask (not that you did).
"3) You’re falling back into the pattern of “relationships as combat”. Women aren’t trying to make you jump through hoops for their amusement, they’re screening out assholes."
And to screen out assholes they have to put barriers upon barriers that potentially screens out non assholes as well?
Really, gotta admit I agree with most of what Ancom said.
Heck, lately I've started wondering if all the work, time, effort and sacrifices needed to have a relationship with a girl are actually worth it in the end.
It’s more than just “sending out some e-mails.” You have to take a systematic approach to every aspect of interaction with women. You need to communicate on their wavelength, you need to make sure you aren’t setting off any subconscious warning signs, you need to spend years learning how to attract them, you need to constantly play the numbers game in order to get any success whatsoever, and all the while you’re openly and often directly being judged.
Yep. The magic of love from the guys’ side of things.
"3) You’re falling back into the pattern of “relationships as combat”. Women aren’t trying to make you jump through hoops for their amusement, they’re screening out assholes."
Ok – this really stood out to me as absolutely ridiculous.
Yes, they're not *all* *just* trying to make you jump through hoops for their amusement. But neither is it a healthy mentality to put them on a pedestal and pretend that it's completely about screening out assholes either.
The few guys I've known who had been successful with women – sometimes just a couple of women (then they got married) – sometimes they're closer to players – all say the same thing. There's no shortage of girls who just want you to jump through the hoops for their own amusement. But it's not *all* of them – it's like half of them (some of the girls only interact that way, some of them mess with some people but are interested in others, some of them don't even realize what they're doing to you unless you say something). And if you want to be successful (whether it's with dating just a few people, or the extreme of being a "player") you have to figure out ways to figure out who's interested and who's just playing with you.
I've also personally been close enough friends with women that *they* tell me about times they've just been messing with a guy, getting him to jump through their hoops for their own amusement, knowing full well it's never going to go anywhere (I've written the stories before, don't feel like writing it out again).
It's nothing but idealization to pretend that any time a woman does anything, it's always for the best of reasons – because women are just sweet little angels who would never do anyone wrong!
Woman are assholes – women are fantastic wonderful people – women are lazy – women are ambitious – women are giving – women are selfish and self-centered and jackasses while smiling and acting like nothing is wrong – women are all these things. They're just people – don't treat them worse, don't treat them better.
Feeling like you have to think that every woman who's making you jump through hoops is on some sort of noble quest is – innacurate, and makes you into a constant victim (he only beats me because he loves me!).
I'd love to see research on why women do these things. I do think that *one* of the *many* reasons is to screen out assholes, but it's hardly even close to the biggest motivation (some of the other ones that come to mind aren't necessarily positive or negative – pre-selection is one, the ability to figure out what she's "really" saying is another – most people want to date someone who understands them).
Ancom, you sound very bitter, and I would wager most women notice it even when you think you're hiding it. No one wants a romantic relationship, or even a serious friendship, with someone who has already decided she's being difficult for kicks, or that you believe trying to get to know her will be a miserable, uphill battle.
Also, small tips, guys. If she really doesn't respond, or she sets impossible standards on her profile, or she responds in a rude or dismissive manner, GOOD. You have to make the effort Dr. Nerdlove mentions above, but when you've done all you can and she's not interested, move on. You guys probably aren't looking for the same things anyway. If she's so delusional or doesn't know what she wants or doesn't want to date or whatever, then that's one rejection you know better than to take personally.
It's a bit like applying to jobs, isn't it? You paper the town with resumes, but when you sit down in the mahogany conference room and they tell you the position is 12 hours a day, an unpaid internship, starts at 5am, requires in-depth knowledge of NFL statistics and is at a call center, you're the fool if you sign on the dotted line.
Do everything you can to be an attractive, interesting prospect and then be willing to let go of women you find attractive who clearly don't reciprocate. Fixating makes you look really insecure, which is just as attractive in men as it is in women.
"or that you believe trying to get to know her will be a miserable, uphill battle."
Please tell me how to not take it for what it is. I'm all ears.
Step one: become the kind of guy women want to get to know.
I started dating my husband because I saw him do something truly kind and generous for a friend. There was no battle, no hoops, nothing. I said to myself, "This guy, whom I only vaguely know, seems like the kind of person I want in my life in the long term. Let me get to know him and see if he actually is." Turns out the answer was yes. Fifteen years in, I still think I'm the luckiest woman alive.
I don't mean to be flip or to suggest it's easy. My husband is a truly fine human being: kind, courageous, loyal, generous, gentle, patient, creative, and joyful. I don't think one can just turn around and become that person overnight – but every woman I know wishes she'd met him first. I was the one who approached him; the only hoop he had to jump through was convincing me that we should actually tie the knot.
I wish I knew what to say to make it easier for you. I'm sure you are just tired, frustrated, and sad. Unfortunately I think you are accidentally hurting yourself. If I were approached by someone who sounded the way you've sounded here, I would run like hell – and twice as fast if I thought they wanted a romantic relationship. I hope you can figure out a way to authentically be the kind of person women are lining up for. My husband did.
I agree. It is sad. It is very sad that women act like they are somehow more special than men and that they should be raised up on a pedestal. They expect men to conjure up extremely interesting messages just to get a reply. What is so wrong with just saying to someone, "hi. How is your day?". Is it really that difficult to reply, "going good. Yours?" Women have started to think that men need to be extremely interesting and witty just to get the time of day from them. I consider that snobbery personally. Additionally, they just treat guys like a person "looking for a job". Well, I am sorry, but I am not looking for a job. I am sorry if women get hit on by jerks, but that doesn't mean that every guy who says hello is a jerk. Women need to stop assuming bad things about random guys they don't know. Am I bitter? Not really. Just pointing out how many women behave from first hand experience. I mean come on. Just because a woman talks to a guy doesn't mean she has to date him.
Women inevitably have to have higher standards because if they mess up they get into big trouble. When some ask why a woman got into an abusive relationship the reply is inevitably he didn't start that way. In other words, he passed all tests then revealed his true colors – an expert con-man in relationships.
You are right dear, It is just like applying to jobs. But the fundamental question is why is it so only for men..Why not for women as well… after all women are no different than men. They desire men equally and they are no more selective/picky than men.
Or am I being presumptuous ?
EDIT: I SAY THEE NAY!
- Dr. NerdLove
Women don't respond simply because of reason #1, everything else is derived from it.
There's far more women than men on dating sites, thus women can and WILL be far more picky than "normal" and thus, all I can say is "good luck".
..
Because I'm not having too much luck lately.
No, seriously. Initially, I did get somewhat "offended" that I rarely got responses, but then I removed gender filter and baaam. There's indeed way more guys than girls in there.
At that point I just accepted that most of my messages either were lost in the massive influx of messages or simply scrapped in favor of a much better looking guy or w/e, and sorta gave up okcupid. Still check in once every two weeks or so and try sending a few messages, but….
meh.
Hi vin, this is actually a reply to what you said in reply to Ancom. For some reason my tablet won't let me reply up there, but you said, "And to screen out assholes they have to put barriers upon barriers that potentially screens out non assholes as well?"
And, well, yes. That's exactly it. Its the risk of potentially not meeting one guy who's acutally pretty cool, verses the risk of going out with someone who's abusive, or going to try to get me drunk and then rape me. So yes, women will chance screening out a few of the good guys along with the assholes. Sorry there are so many assholes out there who've ruined it for you.
You don't think EVERYONE wants to screen out assholes, regardless of gender or sexual orientation?
Yet, women are the only ones who are using this as an excuse to put their own comfort above others, rather than just dropping the guard and being willing to meet guys halfway. It's cowardly behavior.
And don't use rape as an excuse. If a guy is being offensive or predatory then by all means, get the hell out of the situation, but assuming that any guy is going to be a rapist just because of the 1 out of 6 statistic (which applies to rape in general and NOT just meeting strangers in a secure environment) you're just doing yourself and guys a disservice.
I know a couple of women who – contrary to most girls – are outgoing and willing to meet guys as much as guys are willing to meet them. They're not going to assume the worst of every guy just because some construction worker cat-called them on the way to work, nor are they going to be afraid to tell someone off, throw a slap or call the cops if someone does anything inappropriate to them.
They don't seem to be suffering from taking their share of social responsibility.
I wish all women were like them. =)
Note: by social responsibility I mean getting out of their way to meet people, not having to fend off predators.
Yo, that's not social responsibility, man. No one has to go out of their way to meet people if they don't want to. That goes for both sexes.
You seem to think the world of women is perfect (except for that rape thingy) and they are just being mean by not wanting you, but guess what? EVERYONE has to deal with rejection. Both men and women. That's why no one wants to recognize you "men issues" – because they're human issues. Really, given everything you've said in this site to this day, it still seems like you fail to view women as people who are also trying to connect with someone. You view them as obstacles, and that's sure gonna be frustrating for you. But blaming them for not doing their part is not the answer.
Now, please, tell me how I don't get you, or I'm misunderstanding the REAL issues, or something.
Oh shit, it's now my SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY to meet men? Dear god, I had no idea. Tell me, what about all the girls that get conveniently left out of this conversation? You know the ones, maybe they're not as pretty as you want, maybe they've got an overbite or aren't skinny enough or whatever reason they aren't the ones YOU want to date?
Cuz I love some of these girls, who constantly fight to find a guy and are always throwing themselves into the meat market. Do you honestly think they have it easy? Nope, instead they get ignored and insulted by the same assholes that think I'm a bitch because I don't want to waste my time on them.
Like, seriously dude. How many times do we have to say WE DON'T OWE YOU ANYTHING. If I want to be the most gorgeous hermit to ever live, fucking deal with it. In the immortal words of my favorite almost-god, "I do what I want."
If you want to be a hermit then go ahead, but the majority of women want to meet men. In those cases they better step it up and make an effort instead of putting themselves on a pedestal and shying away from any kind of situation where they'd have to open themselves to the possibility of getting rejected.
Women have the most cowardly tendency to rationalize their laziness. If it's not rape statistics (which don't at all apply in the way it's insinuated) it's the fact that they want to screen for assholes (as if that privilege is limited to women?) or it's just "their sexual nature."
Seriously, stop hiding behind excuses. I'd be much more willing to play the game in a respectful way if women were as well, but until that day comes and until women become more outgoing and assertive they're not going to get any respect.
You are living in a society that constantly tells women that they need to be shy and dimmure to be appealing. You know how you're all upset society tells you that you have to be the one to make the first move? Well, we're told we CAN'T be, because it's unfeminine and unappealing.
Like, you wanna fix that? Why don't you stop bitching about how women have it easy and actually look at how our current societal 'norms' hurt -everyone involved- because of unrealistic expectations from all directions. Why don't you check out 'cosmo' sometime and actually read the kind of horrifying advice women are steeped in to the point of internalizing it whether they want to or not.
Maybe raging against women is actually hurting your cause here, fella. Just sayin'.
Ask any great looking guy how many times he gets approached by women and he will have tales to tell you.
Women only pursue men who stand out….who are really high quality. They dont consider the overwhelming majority of men worthy of pursuit. The societal expectation on men is simply to break the ice if anything at all. It is not strong enough to control our instincts. When women are attracted to a guy…they show interest in him. If this doesnt happen to most men then it means most men are just not attractive enough and so need to supplicate to women, earn their favor or convince them that they are good enough…and thats exactly what most men do in dating and sexual realm.
Nothing wrong with any of that at all. I'm a libertarian. I'll be the last person to judge anyone.
"You are living in a society that constantly tells women that they need to be shy and dimmure to be appealing."
Since when?
"You know how you’re all upset society tells you that you have to be the one to make the first move? Well, we’re told we CAN’T be, because it’s unfeminine and unappealing."
Yet another BS excuse. The female friends I described get zero slut shaming. ZERO.
I've said it before and I'll say it again – who's going to get mad at you for being unconditionally nice to all the people around you? Who's going to blame you for… just talking to a guy?
Nobody's gonna know what the heck you're even talking about. For all they know you might already know him, or you might just be asking for the time?
There's no logical place in the scenario for the blaming to take place, so please explain to me exactly how the blame takes form.
"Why don’t you check out ‘cosmo’"
Maybe women need to stop reading garbage and stop following social codes like it's the bible? A big reason why so many women are so messed up and hard to deal with is because they put social conformation above all else.
Hello, I am surplus to requirements and have invited the good Doctor to bring down Mjolnir on my posting rights!
Such crap, imagine how many oppurtunities are missed because women are taught not to make the approach. Personally I think it would be a nice change, always being the one to make the approach can get quite tiring.
Ancon, it's not about bringing him home. Its about the initial meetup.
Ancom, men used to tell me I was scary to my face, and or run away from me in obvious fear, really often. Like on the order of one out of five contacts, which worked out to once a month or once every other month. And that doesn't account for the other instances where I couldn't definitively tell whether that was what the problem was.
I'm friendly, energetic and smart, super-positive and somewhat attentive. That was my only crime.
It goes without saying that I still had to deal with creepers, harassers, those who would try to use or objectify me, some verbal abuse, attempted rape, etc. Me, I wasn't really prepared to let that stop me, but I can see how a) it might stop others and/or b) they might be interested in putting up walls and/or screening to help control the situation.
If it's so much work for you, if you don't enjoy it, don't do it.
If it's something you want, it isn't work. If it's still work even though you want the payoff, take thee to a therapist who can help you examine your contradictions. It's entirely possible that the whole thing hangs together consistently; but it's also possible that you have some unexamined assumptions that are getting in your way, that a therapist can help you navigate.
And at the end of the day, I submit: Who cares whose fault it is? I would far rather care about who can fix it. For me, the answer was obvious: I was the one who could fix it.
So I did.
You got it backward, Ancom. Everyone wants to filter out assholes, but women are for some reason expected not to, and shamed for it when they admit to it. Men can do it all they like, for far more superficial reasons, without being called on it.
I think it's great that some women are more willing to meet new people than others, but you kind of demean their choice by insisting it's a bare minimum that they owe you? Some women have really been hurt in the past and just aren't comfortable making themselves available to every man who does the bare minimum of treating them like a human being. That's not cowardly, it's smart. Operating outside your comfort zone for other people is hard, and doing it for every random stranger whose eye you catch is a recipe for disaster.
Women are the only ones who can get hurt?
It IS cowardly to put all the work (and blame) on men.
"You don’t think EVERYONE wants to screen out assholes, regardless of gender or sexual orientation?"
You forget that women have to live with background noise in our head that constantly warns us that we have to be extra careful. That we're more likely to be physically assaulted if we meet up with the wrong guy.
If you meet up with the wrong guy? By the time you head home together you'll know the guy well enough to decide whether he's a creep or not.
What I'm talking about is the initial contact, which – unless the guy is seriously creepy – is all about attraction and nothing else.
Supply and demand, huh? I honestly wonder how much of the doctor's advice would still apply if the balance was 70:30 in the other direction. Sure, what he says would still be *true*, but would anyone really care? To take a random article of his, why learn how to not act like a creeper when you could just say "if she thinks I'm creepy, that's her problem, I'll move on — got 20 more messages in my inbox just this morning!"
[troll]I dub this "female privilege."[/troll]
Keep in mind though that, just as there are a number of guys whose advances get constantly rejected (or who won't even make the move in the first place because they feel it's a lost cause), there are plenty of women who *wish* they would get approached, while we're all busy going after the conventionally hot women – and when they do get approached, they *still* have to worry about creepers and morons and abusers just like more in-demand women do. The supply and demand thing works in both directions.
I don't think that's true, but I could be wrong. Would you mind linking to 3 OkCupid profiles of women who wish they could get approached, but are getting next to no attention because they're not conventionally hot?
I doubt you'll be able to do this, whereas finding 3 male profiles that meet these requirements is something you could do in your sleep. I'm pretty sure that proves you wrong.
Oh, and if these girls just haven't signed up for dating sites, they must not be that determined to get approached. If a guy asked for advice here on what to do, and hasn't tried OkCupid, that would be the first thing he's told to try.
You probably aren't going to see that on a dating site, no, given the gender disparity, but you sure as hell see it in real life.
Keep in mind that "not conventionally hot" can come along with "not following the traditional standards," so: no shaving anywhere, no plucking facial hair, doing nothing with their hair except a low ponytail, over-sized, unflattering clothes, no makeup… never mind things like having bad skin or a difficult hair texture or being overweight. (Girls can have the "you should accept me as I naturally am," same as guys.)
You really think a girl like that is getting approached regularly?
Do you think a girl who is never approached in real life is going to feel good about putting herself out there online to be judged? I'm not saying no one ever does, or excusing that behavior, but it is sort of understandable. And, even if a guy is too afraid to ask girls out, he can still deeply wish for a relationship, right? It's self-sabotaging, but both sides do it.
You forget that most of the attention these women are getting is "hey bb wanna hav a good time??
" or some variation of that, and I would say that doesn't really count.
Synko, the four women I know who meet this description have all pulled their profiles.
I'm a conventionally attractive woman in a medium sized city, and I get alot less messages than you would think. Yes I may wake up with 3 new messages, but usually none of them are genuine, either one liners or obviously copy-pasted messages. If a woman is on a site to date, she wants to meet GENUINE guys who want to get to know her and maybe that will lead to dating/sex/etc…. or not, depends on the chemistry when you meet in person. I also send out alot of messages to profiles who interest me, and don't get responses all the time, but I'm not butt-hurt about it. Guys… girls DO send out messages – if you aren't receiving them then it's probably that your desperation is coming through on your profile.
Name ONE guy that you know who has 20 messages in his inbox. I’d like to get his input.
As a man, you're born with a need to be intimate with the opposite sex, just like women.
Except in early childhood, girls start screening out guys because they only want to make out with the "cutest guy in class." Guys do this too to some extent, but they seem far more willing to hang out with any normal girl than just "that one hot person who has all the social proof."
And this continues for as long as the man will live, and thus begins his journey.
But hey, as a man, don't you dare feel bitter about this! That just means you have a shitty view of women and that you're just trying to validate yourself through sex with them, and that's not healthy. Go see a shrink!
Don't you dare think that men and women have a biological urge to be with the opposite sex, and don't you dare assume that you are entitled to anything! You're just a crazy, crazy man, and don't assume that women aren't entitled to choose who they want to be with!
If women don't want to hang out with you, that's YOUR fault for not being attractive enough.
Ok ok fine, so let's start learning how to be attractive. What do women want?
Oh you know, they just like a guy who wants to socialize with them and who seem to enjoy it.
Fine, so let's head out and do some socializing!
– "Hi there. *smile*"
– "Um… hello?"
– "How's it going?"
– "Uuuuuh… in what world honey??? I'm here to dance with my friends."
Wow, sure am enjoying it!
Let's try again…
Oh but wait, this time you leaned in too close.
Or you weren't exciting enough in your stories.
Or you didn't show confidence and take charge.
Or you turned towards her too quickly which indicated a sign of interest (low value behavior for a male).
Shot down again.
And again.
And again.
And again.
So you complain that women are being prude and bitchy.
But don't you DARE! That's on YOU for being Schrodinger's rapist/asshole/sexist! It's up to YOU to prove that you're not!
Don't you even dare expect women to do any work for you! That right is none of yours, mister! And if you don't like it, then leave it!
And hey, if you don't like to approach strangers and being shot down, that's just you having low confidence! Go see a shrink!
Oh man, I know where you're coming from, I used to think like that too. I'm going to go out on a limb and assume that you've tried the 'PUA' advice.
Here's the thing; all that technical stuff you mentioned – turned in too quick, showed low social value (eek I fucking hate that concept now), it's all bullshit. It's what the pickup community uses to get you to buy their products.
I got the fuck away from the pickup community after two things happened in my life- firstly, I came to the realisation that the PUA community was actually making me feel worse about myself. You see, if you really look at it, the PUA community likes to tell guys that they're not good enough ALL THE TIME. Sure, just learn this and this and become this and this and it'll all be great. Not working? No worries, we have a product for that! They constantly tell guys that they need to be 'better' but for what? They make you feel just bad enough about yourself so that you'll worship them and buy more of their crap.
The second thing I did was got treated for my OCD and depression and went on anti-depressants. Best thing I've ever done in my life; totally different story though. Funnily enough, once my meds were working and I actually felt like going out of the house and talking to people, I was glad to dump all that PUA screwup shit.
Look up the 'Barry Kirkey Radio Show' and listen to some of his early shows if you can find them, he does a great job at calling out the PUA community BS. Then get the hell away from that community, seriously. It just leaves you messed up.
Ha! The PUA community is like the cosmo for men!
Also, getting medical help when you need it is awesome. It can do wonders. And even if no medication is needed, I would still recommend therapy. It's been really great for me so far, and I feel much better about a lot of my expectations in life.
Indeed, people act like therapy is a sign of failure or something, and that only losers get therapy. If people can just get over the social stigma, therapy helps. A lot. You have to find the right therapist, though, and that and the time/money required to get started can be a hassle. But it's worth it.
Corsair, have you seen Men's Health? That's Cosmo.
I never said a word about PUA communities which – as Corsair said – are the male equivalent of cosmo.
That however doesn't mean that what I'm saying isn't true. Women *are* attracted to social proof, because social proof is the combined effect of having a number of attributes that women find attractive.
The problem is that "women", "social proof", and "attraction" are these giant aggregate concepts. None of them is one size fits all. A woman with an MBA is attracted to a different sort of social proof than one who's got a new gallery show opening this month than one works at a strip club.
Now again, this is just personal experience but if you get away from trying to make your marks on the check sheet and take an interest in what individuals (male or female) enjoy and are interested in, you'll find that you probably have something to talk about. If you don't, this individual was probably someone you wouldn't want to spend time with anyway.
@GentlemanJohnny
That's a very interesting thought. =)
I don't agree that an MBA is that different from say, a Lower Manhattan girl. The only difference is that they've chosen to dive into different cultures, but at heart they're both women and will most likely appreciate an attractive, witty and outgoing man.
You think an MBA would turn down a sexy, charismatic say… carpenter?
Yes, because every woman hates a charming handsome guy who's good with his hands.
By complaining, you're just showing that you're not willing to put in the work to make women enjoy hanging around with you!
Because you know, if you're not willing to put in the years of work to learn how to submit yourselves to the whims of female attraction, you just don't deserve their attention!
Dating women is hard work, and you're just not willing to put in the time!
Oh, but while you're at it, make sure you think it's natural and fun, because that's what girls want! A guy who thinks it's fun to talk to them.
Because if you don't, then it means you're just after sex, and that's wrong!
As I said above, this kind of stuff can be disheartening and make it seem like women just aren't worth the trouble.
And shaming guys for "not wanting to put in the work"?
Well man, that's just messed up.
This whole dating thing is a big catch-22 for guys, and being a guy sucks big time.
Amcom,
It's your attitude, not your gender. Seriously. Woman are human beings. Just like men, just like you. How is this a hard concept???
Please read what I just said again.
And again.
And again.
Until you get what we are actually going through.
"Until you get what we are actually going through."
What about what women are going through?
@Yuki
Don't get me wrong, I do sympathize with women's issues. I'm just not discussing that right now.
Amcon, what kind of women do you go after that gives you such a screwed view on them?
You think you have the right to tell every woman how to date and you seem to think you 'deserve' them. In what way, I'm not sure, but you sure as hell don't seem to appreciate a woman's opinion on this.
You think women don't ever put effort into dating? You think the perfect man just presents himself on her doorstep at some point and they live a fairy tale life? You think women are never shot down? Never rejected? Never have a hard time finding the right person? Never try?
You're not the only one who has a hard time and the sooner you realize this, the easier it will become to accept.
You've got it completely backwards on the 'girls are shallow' thing you are trying to explain in one of your earlier posts. Everyone goes after looks. Everyone goes after their own preference and there isn't just one perfect person for either gender so don't you claim anything like that. Personality plays a part and plays the final card, but it can't be denied that looks are important in this society. If you don't want someone who's shallow like that, you'll have to find a different way of dating and make sure you don't become the shallow one yourself.
No one's perfect. You don't want to know how many people have told me to 'Go see a shrink!' for random bs. You are so incredibly disrespectful.
you ever think that it might just be you? I'm not saying dating is easy for anyone, but I sure as hell know that if I found that attitude from anyone I'd write them off, even if they were the most attractive person I've ever seen with amazing skills and prospects and intelligence. I come onto, and get rejected by people quite a bit, it hurts, but c'est la vie, it just wasn't meant to happen, I don't blame a whole group of people for the problem, I just move on.
Maybe if you didn't blame women for your problems you might find more around, we don't all expect, or want, the same things. It's your job to learn what the person you like wants, just as it's my job to learn what the person I like wants. Gender really has nothing to do with any of this. Maybe you want to look at that whole "attract more flies with honey than vinegar deal"
You know, you're sounding a lot like me four-to-five years ago. Let's hope you see the error of your ways more quickly than I saw the error of mine.
1.
'girls start screening out guys because they only want to make out with the “cutest guy in class.” Guys do this too to some extent, but they seem far more willing to hang out with any normal girl than just “that one hot person who has all the social proof.”'
Statements about "[all] women" and "[all] men" are very bold claims to make. If you make such bold claims without showing evidence, then for all everyone knows, you're just talking bull. So go ahead and post your proof.
2.
'But hey, as a man, don’t you dare feel bitter about this!'
Really, a person (man or woman) should not feel bitter about anything. Sure, there's no law saying you can't feel bitter, but think about it for a second: what good does being bitter do for anyone? If you've got a problem with something, then there are only two courses of action that will benefit you in some way. Either a) take real action (venting/ranting/whining does not count) to change the thing you have a problem with so that you no longer have a problem with it, or b) accept the fact that the thing you have a problem with won't change, and live with it.
3.
'… and don’t you dare assume that you are entitled to anything!'
Just like statements about "all women" and "all men", claims of entitlement to anything (even outside the purview of sex/relationships) are bold claims that require evidence to be considered true. So, since you are talking about entitlement in the context of sex/relationships, can you prove to me that you are entitled to sex and/or a sexual relationship?
4.
'… and don’t assume that women aren’t entitled to choose who they want to be with!'
I will claim that women ARE entitled to choose who they want to be with and I shall prove it with this logical argument:
Suppose that women were not entitled to choose who they wanted to be with. Suppose also that it is right for men and women to be equal, with "be equal" meaning "given the same rights, responsibilities and entitlements". Therefore, men must also not be entitled to choose who they want to be with. However, under current legislation, outside of arranged marriages and similar deals, men technically are entitled to choose who they want to be with as opposed to having someone else choose for them. However, they are still not entitled to their choice being reciprocated. Therefore, going back to the premise of equality, women must also be entitled to choose who they want to be with. They too are not entitled to their choice being reciprocated.
5.
'Fine, so let’s head out and do some socializing! … Wow, sure am enjoying it!'
I have to admit, I'm not really sure what to say about this. Could you perhaps tell me what you DO enjoy? I mean, there's got to be something you enjoy, right? And surely there can't be anything wrong with talking to another person about this thing you enjoy, right? Unless it's something particularly … non-PG? … but I doubt that it is.
6.
'Oh but wait, … Or … Or …'
I don't know about you, but at least half of those would be immediate turn-offs for me. I (a man) would be at least a little creeped out by anyone getting too close to me, and I (a man) have no interest in any kind of relationship (sexual or otherwise) with a person who thinks he or she is unworthy of a relationship. And why should I? If you don't believe in yourself, then yourself must be truly awful and horrible, since if there was anything good about you, then you'd believe in yourself. I know it might not work like this inside your head, but it's the safest assumption everyone else can make.
As for the lack of exciting stories and turning towards someone too quickly, I'm pretty sure those don't apply globally and there are enough exceptions to make those not rules.
7.
'But don’t you DARE! That’s on YOU for being Schrodinger’s rapist/asshole/sexist! It’s up to YOU to prove that you’re not!'
If there is one thing I know about people (of both genders), it's that they can be selfish, traitorous, deceitful, manipulative assholes (towards both genders). Do you want to be used like time, money and effort being used for tasks that don't benefit you at all (and in some cases even hurt you) but instead allow another person to benefit without investing their own time, money and effort? If you answered 'no', then you'd better have some means of protecting yourself from that, and the safest way to protect yourself is to assume the worst of people until they prove otherwise. If you answered 'yes', then have fun being toyed with by other people as they gain from your loss.
8.
'Don’t you even dare expect women to do any work for you! That right is none of yours, mister! And if you don’t like it, then leave it!'
To be honest, I wouldn't assume that other people would do any work for me. Again, the safest assumption is "assume the worst until proven otherwise", and here, the worst is me having to put in all the work. If I am willing to put in all the work, and then I find that the person I am with is willing to put in some work as well, then hey, that's a bonus in my eyes.
9.
'And hey, if you don’t like to approach strangers and being shot down, that’s just you having low confidence! Go see a shrink!'
I have a question for you. If everybody chose not to approach, then how would any social interaction get done and how would any relationships of any kind be formed? Answer: it wouldn't and they wouldn't. Hopefully that question has made you realise that, in general, approaching is superior to not approaching.
10.
'By complaining, you’re just showing that you’re not willing to put in the work to make women enjoy hanging around with you!'
Well … are you willing to put in the work to make people enjoy hanging around with you? If not, then why should they be willing to put in the work for you? To put it harshly, "Why do you deserve it you lazy slob?"
11.
'Oh, but while you’re at it, make sure you think it’s natural and fun, because that’s what girls want! A guy who thinks it’s fun to talk to them.'
I'm just wondering, what would be your ideal conversation? If you could say anything you wanted without repercussion, and the other people in the conversation only said what you wanted them to say, how would it go?
12.
'Because if you don’t, then it means you’re just after sex, and that’s wrong!'
Again, "assume the worst until proven otherwise". So if you're not just after sex, then how do you prove that you're after whatever else it is you're after? And if you are just after sex, then you'd better make sure that the other person is a) also only just after sex, and b) willing to have it with you. With strangers, b) is always false unless you're paying for it, and even then payment doesn't always make it true.
13.
'As I said above, this kind of stuff can be disheartening and make it seem like women just aren’t worth the trouble.'
One of the many godawful truths is that we all have to do shit we don't like doing. If you believe that the end result of the hard work you put in is not worth the hard work, then you have to accept that you will not get the end result in question. If you believe that women are too much work, then you will have to accept that you will not have a woman. After all, you don't get something for nothing.
So, I ask one final question: are you OK with that?
You're a moron…
If anyone wants to take a gander at my OKCupid profile, feel free. I've kind of given up on online dating. The main thing being that so much of my messages just get ignored, no matter how much time and effort I put into writing them.
I put up a profile and log on now and then to show I'm not a zombie, and I updated it now and then to keep it current, and every now and then, like once every four months or so, I get messaged by someone. At which point I will happily invest time and attention, read their profile and reply.
Right now I'm focusing on other things. I still need to get better pictures on my profile and update some of my answers to the 'questions' part of the site, and I haven't gotten around to doing that since it's not important to me right now. (My next priority is to get some better clothing before I worry about getting better pictures. =P)
But the content of my profile is about how I want it. So again, anyone that wants to review it, feel free. I don't think I'm messing up on any of the Doc's advice, but I'm curious about what an objective opinion might notice.
So out of curiosity, any hints on how to find it?
Was hoping people could figure out that (Thortok2000) was my username but you can look at my reply to Corsair for a direct link. ^_^
I don't have an OKCupid profile nor any experience in online dating, but if my opinion as a woman is worth something, I could try giving it to you (if you want it, of course).
Where can I find your profile?
Not sure if the Doc will let me do a direct link, which is why I was subtle. View any profile and then replace the username in the URL with 'Thortok2000' to find me.
But if a direct link is allowed, then here: http://www.okcupid.com/profile/thortok2000
Hey! Is it okay if I just answer here? Your profile is nice in general and seems very honest, which is good!
Just a few things that I would recommend changes to:
- Too many emoticons? I used to always use them as well, but now I find they kinda take the edge off of what you're actually saying, which in turns make you seem less confident. Just my impression on it, though.
- Cuddling. Maybe it's a pet peeve of mine, but when men put a lot of emphasis on how they like cuddling it gives me a weird feeling. It is completely personal, so don't take this too seriously, but I don't imagine myself cuddling with strange men and the thought makes me feel weird. Also, a lot of guys seem to think that saying "I love cuddling" is a nice way of saying they're not just interested in sex, which may very well be true in a lot of cases, but in most I find it's not. And so I get this bad impression. Sorry, this does not seem the case in your profile, but I just thought you'd know…
- A bit needy? Not much and also not a big problem since some women love that, but it's just that saying "You maybe" in the things you can't live without sounds like a bit of… pressure?
Overall I think it's good, it says a lot about you, and you sound confident and interesting! Get those new clothes and photos, get out there and good luck!
I can tone down the emoticons, but the reason I use them a lot is, because, well, I use them a lot. =P See? I figure having it up front is a way of 'showing the real me' in a friendly and flirty way. But if it's something to tone down, I can definitely do that.
I love to cuddle. Almost more than sex actually. So again that's a case of just being myself. I could probably be less repetitive about it though. Then again, if it's along the lines of talking about all the sexual things you'd like to do with a woman, as in, that kind of honesty is not appropriate to have on your profile, then I can remove it completely. What about giving massages, would that qualify too?
The 'you maybe' thing was supposed to be a joke and flirty and because I couldn't think of a sixth thing, heh. I guess I could think of a better sixth thing. My flirting skills need work. =(
I'll consider what you've said but I'd like to get more than just one opinion before I start making changes, hope you don't mind. ^_^ But if that's all that's wrong with my profile I guess I did a good job! =D
Way too many emoticons. Which books do you check out? Which movies do you like to see?
One problem with a lot of guys' profiles is that they tend to write "I like books and movies." That's nice but which ones please. I know it would be long but name something, anything.
You mention being modest a lot. Only once is enough.
I would leave out things like "'Nuff said" and whatnot. Put cuddling in the list with "Things I could never" since it's true for you.
Honestly, thought, the emoticons have got to go. The sheer number alone would keep me from replying.
More pictures.
Thanks for the feedback!
For books/movies, I update my profile every so often with one or two that I've been enjoying recently as examples, but I could make a longer list I guess.
You have absolutely NO CLUE what this is like from a male perspective.
Let me ask you. How many men have you approached in your life?
Please give me a total number, and don't even think about lying.
"Let me ask you. How many men have you approached in your life?"
Five.
I was rejected three times.
One turned out to be a dick. The other is now an ex and a friend, because it just didn't mutually work out. Rejection hurts, and no one likes putting themselves out there when it makes them vulnerable, and it feels like a personal attack on you to not be judged "good enough". But just waiting for the right person to drop into your lap and make out with you like a scene out of romance movie.
And expecting all women to be the same would be like me expecting all guys to be the same. Clearly, this is not true.
@Yuki
Cool. Get back to me when you've had to approach 10 women, every night, every weekend, for the entirety of your sexually active life.
Cool. Get back to me when you’ve had to approach 10 women, every night, every weekend, for the entirety of your sexually active life.
Remarkably, people have been getting laid for thousands of years without having to approach ten women every night twice a week since hitting puberty.
Considering humanity has descended from 80% of women and and 40%. Then pair-bonding is not exactly an automatic process.
. . . and 40% of men then . . . X(
Ten women a night? Seriously?
Have you considered the issue might not be women, but you? If you've had NO success, then perhaps you should be asking yourself "What am I doing wrong?" instead of angsting over "I approached ten women every night, none of them will go out with me, they're all a bunch of shallow bitches, this can't possibly be my fault, it's so unjust, they're just setting up traps and waiting for me to fail…"
@Nerdlove Yuki
It was just a figure of speech to emphasize that men have to do a shitload of approaching in order to get results and that we have to struggle with it throughout our entire lives, while women don't have to do a thing.
I don't think I've done more than maybe 200-300 approaches, but my point still stands. It's a LOT of work.
"I don’t think I’ve done more than maybe 200-300 approaches, but my point still stands. It’s a LOT of work."
It doesn't have to BE a lot of work. I'm a fairly average cute girl with nerdy interests, and I'm not that difficult to talk to unless you make it hard on yourself. If you just start talking to me, introduce yourself with a reason, and just act relaxed and as though you're enjoying yourself, I'm going to have fun talking to you. I'm not going to sit there thinking, "Who is this creep and why is he talking to me," I'm going to be thinking, "Whoa, he likes x and y too? I wonder if he's into z!" and if we're in a place where finding dates is par for the course, I'm going to be receptive to indications that he's interested.
The ONLY thing that would make me back off is if you start doing or saying stuff that makes me supremely uncomfortable.
We're just not that hard to talk to. Please, just grab yourself a glass and say, "Sorry ladies, I couldn't help overhearing– you saw Prometheus?"
What if your just not very conversational. I mean yes at times I can be, but most of the time I am quiet and enjoy listening to the humor of other peoples experiences. Also without really knowing someone it can be very difficult to keep the conversation going, sure I can approach and jump in on how they saw Prometheus (pretty good movie just for the record) but once the topic is no longer Prometheus I may no longer have an opinion to weigh in just from not knowing the person/people. I don't get offended easily but a lot of people do, so without knowing the person I have to sometimes stop myself and think about how that might offend someone, which is my favorite part about this day and age (complete sarcasm).
It shouldn't be hard not to offend people. I go through life and talk to people all the time and I manage not to offend them. First key to not offending people you don't know: don't be negative, don't talk smack about groups of people, don't generalize groups of people.
As for keeping a conversation going: Ask them questions, give them followup where you share something related, answer questions they ask you.
You ask about Prometheus. The Prometheus topic is now winding down. Assuming that nothing specific comes up in the conversation itself where are places to go next?
-Ask them about the other Alien movies…what was their favorite? There was a theory that each of the Alien films was in a different genre (Horror, Action, Indie)…what do you think about that?
-Ask them, "What are your other favorite sci-fi/fantasy films?"
-Ask them, "Do you read sci-fi books?"
It you want to pull it away from sci-fi because you sense that topic is feeling too narrow, then you can go: "What are your favorite films in general?"
As for not being conversational–relationships should be reciprocal. And for someone to want to get into a relationship with you, they need to know something about you. So ask people questions to get to know them…but also share some things about themselves so they can get to know you. That is all a conversation is. Getting to know each other. You may enjoy listening to other people's experiences, but if you never share in return, you are being a taker not a giver. Which…for that to work out, you probably have to date someone with a crazy ego who doesn't care much about what is going on with you…which I don't recommend, because that is unhealthy.
Give and take!
@Yuki
I'm not saying I've been shot down 200 times. Only that we have to subject ourselves to the embarrassment and humiliation of having to do this shit.
The humiliation and embarrassment is only in your head. I've been doing this longer than you and I can tell you from personal experience: you can either let yourself be embarrassed every time things don't go the way you hope or you can chalk it up to another learning experience, laugh it off and move on.
You've made a lot of generalizations based off PUA material. It takes thousands of approaches to get good at doing cold approach where you don't know anybody and they don't know you.
Yeah, that can be tough, and no fucking wonder. You're trying to convince a total stranger to start a sexual relationship with you right then and there. Most people meet their significant others via warm approach – meeting them through their social circles rather than approaching strangers.
The problem of course, is that you've taken PUA material to heart and make the (common in the community) assumption that people never got laid before they learned this stuff, that everybody processes all of these logistics and have to overcome these random social hurdles in order to get a whiff of sex. It ain't true, it never has been. Those AFC (average frustrated chumps) have been getting laid just fine before the name Ross Jeffries ever was uttered on the Internet, nevermind Neil Strauss or Mystery.
It sucks that you've had a hard time navigating the social scene that is dating; 99% of the people who read this blog have similar issues with getting dates. The guy who writes it had similar issues. However, you're conflating your personal experiences with with the world at large and dismissing anyone else's experiences as invalid or irrelevant.
You've already complained about being dissatisfied with your life because you felt that you were missing out on intriguing women because you can't seem to maintain interest in a conversation. I'm not surprised, frankly. PUA material can get you laid – most of it is just psychological manipulation and social pressure techniques that come from high-pressure sales tactics – but it can't teach you how to interact with women like a normal human being, especially when you're constantly trying to measure everything by social value and compliance tests.
Until you get over this idea that there's a cabal that decided all women will deny men unless we leap through hurdles, you're going to continue having those issues.
Oh, and didn't you say that you were leaving the comments section? I can certainly help you with that if you need it…
WHY is it an embarrassment? Is her rejection a personal attack on you?
@Nerdlove
"but it can’t teach you how to interact with women like a normal human being"
Um. Isn't this how everybody starts out before realizing that women actually don't want men to just treat them like human beings, but rather for men to treat them in a way that triggers all the factors that will make them interested in you?
Seriously, I had a lot more respect for women when I was a normal 20 year old guy with my own interests and – what I think you guys would call – a healthy and normal outlook on life. I thought that as long as I treat women like I'd want to be treated myself, things'll work themselves out (and no, not in a fake "nice guy" way).
But guess what? These women wouldn't give me the time of day, as they would rather get chatted up and boned by guys who exuded alpha behavior. I was even more social and outgoing towards women back then than I am today, and I am getting laid way more now.
Go figure man!
You're making it sound that as long as a guy is nice, normal and takes care of himself, he'll be fine with women. But the thing is, woman will compeltely desexualize him unless he starts adopting the attitudes you're claiming is the root of my inability to interact with women in a normal and healthy way. The only reason why I cannot interact with women in – what you call – a healthy way, is because having done so in the past have proven time and time again that it just doens't work!
Oh, and yeah, I am leaving, don't worry. I just wanted to finish up these threads and then I'm gone.
And you have absolutely NO CLUE what it's like from a female perspective.
I haven't personally ever been into dating. I haven't approached anyone but I haven't been approached ever either. I was defending those that were actively searching for someone and I know people well enough to tell they're not lazy women waiting for the man to approach them.
My personal experience doesn't prove anything for either side, but the fact that you so fiercely dismiss every single one of my argument is, again, still freaking rude.
I'm not fine with either.
You can't legitimately get something for nothing. You gotta choose between getting something for something (which may end up being nothing for something if you're unlucky), or getting nothing for nothing. No ifs, no ands, no buts, no option c, no all of the above.
Unless you're willing to do … illegal stuff. In which case you're on your own son.
It's not "something for something" though. What it really is is very little payback for a very big investment.
We're all born with the ability to communicate with each other, and yet, interacting with- and picking up women is seen as a skill. Now how messed up is that, huh? That something that could've been so natural and beutiful must instead be turned to a cold, systematic and strategic approach simply because women refuse to let go of the social dynamic that is letting them run wild with their own sexual compass and force us guys to literally treat them like video games that must be beaten.
Now you're probably thinking, "but that's what's wrong with you in the first place! Just listen to what everyone have been telling you here! Women just want someone to interact with them like human beings! Nothing else!"
But guess what? THAT'S NOT WHAT THEY WANT.
What they want is someone who can navigate the minefield that is called female sexual attraction while making her THINK you're just having a normal conversation, and making her THINK that she's special, when really she isn't.
I have a group of close friends who are incredibly good at pickup (me excluded). Before they decided to start doing PU however, they were just your normal, average joes. Nice, social, funny and outgoing, but women just didn't find them attracive.
Now, after having studied materials of other PUAs however, they now get laid by about every third woman they interact with, regardless of whether it's someone they meet in a bar or a grocery store.
Every.
Third.
Woman.
And yes, I've seen this in action.
Every single girl on here keeps saying they just want to be treated like human beings, but the fact is that they treat us guys like total shit unless we learn how to work them like a freaking system.
If I could choose, I'd WANT to treat them like human beings, but there's no chance in hell they'd sleep with me if I did.
Oh the irony!
"My penis forces me to be an asshole!"
… Girls, come and look, this is natural selection in action.
Well at least you posted some proof.
Unfortunately, you've extrapolated your sample of "a group of close friends" and women in the area to all men and all women. And when you do that, you're inviting people to post their own evidence to counter your claim. And if your response is to dismiss their evidence because it doesn't line up with yours, or to claim that they're an exception, then they're gonna do the same right back at ya. Luckily for you, I am not going to be one of those people because I cannot cite examples off the top of my head.
Plus, your statement 'We’re all born with the ability to communicate with each other' is not entirely correct. While basic communication might be an inherent ability, good communication (not just with potential partners of sexual relationships, although it is certainly required for that) is, surprisingly, not inherent and not natural. It is a skill that must be learned. As evidence, I cite the fact that there are classes about communication that are taught in schools and other educational institutes, and countless guides on job interviews, which require good communication. The guys who do those things would be out of a job if good communication was as natural as you claim it to be.
"While basic communication might be an inherent ability, good communication (not just with potential partners of sexual relationships, although it is certainly required for that) is, surprisingly, not inherent and not natural."
So you're insinuating that the only reason why men are constantly having to struggle with women is because they are inferior when it comes to communication?
Because I'd go as far as to say that men and women tend to communicate DIFFERENTLY rather than women being better at communicating.
In fact, I find that men are MUCH more clear and spot-on in communication than women are.
So again, why must men "learn" how to communicate with women? Why must it be treated as a "skill" that men must conquer?
Because they already do possess natural communication skills, as do women, and they should be considered equal.
Robert: You're cool. Love your answer. Just responding here 'cause I can't respond directly to Ancom. Sorry!
Now:
WOW, Ancom, thank you for telling me what I actually secretly want! You must have a very extensive knowledge of ALL WOMEN IN THE WORLD to be able to make such claims…
Makes me wonder how is it that with such amazing power in your hands all you do is complain in some blog about how women are such bitches. THEM CRAZY BITCHES, amirite?
But, really, I do believe you should find some psychological counseling to help you deal with your expectations of women and human relationships in general. It's done wonders for me.
@Corsair
No amount of therapy can change the unfairness of social interaction with women. You either subject to their unreasonable demands, or you become celibate. No matter how you look at it you're f**cked.
'So you’re insinuating that the only reason why men are constantly having to struggle with women is because they are inferior when it comes to communication?'
Where did you get the impression I was talking exclusively about men? My points apply equally to both sexes, which is why I use gender-neutral words like people and person.
And, once again, you are using "all men" and "all women" statements. You do realise that, if even one exception exists, even if you're not aware that the exception exists, then that means those statements are false. Protip: try "all men that I know of" and "all women that I know of". It's much harder to disprove those. But implying that exceptions to your statements do not exist at all anywhere? Not a claim that can be reliably made by anyone.
Oh, and a minor nitpick. You don't 'conquer' skills. You learn them.
…
But really, here's the main point of my response. Even if, at the end of the day, you are actually right, this entire argument is, in the grand scheme of things, utterly pointless.
You have to remember that right now, the rest of the world is using a system that says you're not right, and changes to such a system will have to be gradual if they are to work on a global scale, since sudden changes will provoke mass knee-jerk reactions ranging from vehement opposition to just plain ragequitting. Odds are, you won't see the result you hope for in your lifetime, even if it is the best result for all.
So, like I said earlier, if you want any actual rewards in the here and now, your only option is to suck it up, and if you're not willing to do that, then your only option is to quit.
Do you wish pure logical argument and supporting evidence based on sound principles was all it took to convince the entire world to adopt such changes as the ones you seem to be proposing? Me too, but sadly, it just ain't. That's the trouble with humans.
This will be my last comment in this thread.
@Ancom
Okay, then, I'll ask again: If you don't plan to change your way of thinking or your attitudes at all, WHY ARE YOU HERE IN THIS BLOG?
@Robert and Corsair
Well, I came here because I was intrigued by the debates regarding dating, privilege, entitlement etc.
However, I'm making my exit, because as you are both pointing out, there's no way to change the unfairness of this social dynamic.
As I said in a comment to my earlier advice article, I'm going to give up on a real female companionship altogehter and resort to only one night stands. I think women are quite terrible to interact with, and I don't think I'm ever going to find something in the personality of a woman that I'm going to be able to admire and cherish, mostly because of the inherent selfishness in their very reasoning in regards to romance.
Good talking to you guys though, and thanks for taking the time!
"No amount of therapy can change the unfairness of social interaction with women."
I have no idea why you think we're being unfair.
Most of us have a simple goal: Find a nice guy (not a "doormat", not a "nice guy TM", someone who's actually decent), discover compatibility, and pursue relationship.
Yep, but your way of "finding them" includes not doing shit to actually get them. Let's just compare your total of 5 approaches to my oh… I guess 250 approaches?
Don't you freaking get that by not going out of your way to meet men, we are forced to chase you, and this means that you get all the power to screen us out while we can only hope to catch an opportunity to be with someone we cannot even AFFORD to screen out since we are already competing with tons of other guys?
This is why you are unfair. We don't get to choose like you do, and so we can never truly hope to find a great partner and get together with them. We can only hope that the person we get together with is great.
"Yep, but your way of “finding them” includes not doing shit to actually get them. Let’s just compare your total of 5 approaches to my oh… I guess 250 approaches?"
I actually did, in fact, have to do shit to get them. I don't just walk up to them, flip my hair, and say, "How you doin', boys?" I had to engage them in interesting conversation, and it took a bit of effort to make it obvious that I was interested– they were a bit oblivious to it at first.
"Don’t you freaking get that by not going out of your way to meet men, we are forced to chase you"
I've only ever been asked out twice in my life. I'm still young and in school and focusing on academics, I don't have a lot of time to get out and meet guys. But if I did, if I had more opportunities, I would definitely be approaching more.
"and this means that you get all the power to screen us out while we can only hope to catch an opportunity to be with someone we cannot even AFFORD to screen out since we are already competing with tons of other guys?"
I see your point, but it feels like you screen yourself out before you've even begun. We actually DON'T get to luxuriously screen guys out. On my end of things, it feels like guys pick us out and then make the approach, and as though I'm breaking tradition by NOT waiting around. From our vantage, guys have the power of picking, and we're just supposed to respond. This dissonance runs both ways– you feel we're too picky, we feel we're not allowed to approach.
"This is why you are unfair. We don’t get to choose like you do, and so we can never truly hope to find a great partner and get together with them. We can only hope that the person we get together with is great."
Yes, you can. Before you leave the house intending to pick up women, look in the mirror, smile at yourself, and leave the house feeling happy and confident. Just feel at ease. Feel– I dunno, feel powerful, feel like you're in your element, feel like you rule the world. And when you go there, engage people like you think you're awesome, and think they're your kind of awesome. That kind of positive I-Own-Myself attitude will get you far. If you look confident, if you look comfortable, you're going to radiate that to the people around you.
"I think women are quite terrible to interact with, and I don’t think I’m ever going to find something in the personality of a woman that I’m going to be able to admire and cherish, mostly because of the inherent selfishness in their very reasoning in regards to romance."
Wow. With that attitude, it's kind of a self-fulfilling prophecy, isn't it?
@Yuki
Well, read my response to nerdlove about having developed to where I am today. You're shaming me for not being exactly like I was 8 or so years ago, when I wasn't getting any action from women at all.
As a guy you have two choices:
A) You can either choose to be yourself, rarely get any action and wait for your future wife to come aloong. She of course, will have fulfilled all her sexual desires with other men, and you'll be the "mature" guy she's learned will make the best mate. This of course doesn't mean you can't have a good relationship, but she'll have lived out all the dreams you never had access to.
or
B) You can become a systematic approach machine and break every aspect of attracting women in order to get respect and appreciation from them (something they won't give you otherwise).
I'm not fine with doing either, so of course I'm jaded. I used to belong to A (what you want me to be), and now I belong to B (which I really resent having to do). Either way you look at it it's a lose-lose situation, which is why I've decided to just give up on hoping to find good, fair interaction with women.
correction: break DOWN every aspect.
I'll say this– everything he posted here is exactly right.
I never responded to the majority of PMs sent to me, because they generally consisted of thinly-veiled attempts by the delusional dunderheads of the world to hook up and have wild, rabid rabbit sex. No, "Hey, I see you read Marvel comics! I'm a fan of Wolverine, who's your pick?"
Just, "Hey babe hit me up" or "show me ur tits plz".
Which one do you think is going to get a response? Because the first one is your best bet to getting a reply, perhaps even a playful one where we can debate and bring the conversation out further and get a better feel for each other.
And what about the minority? What were those messages like?
I can't speak for Yuki, but the messages I responded to back in the day fit with her example of a good opening line (the Marvel comics observation/question). Things like "I see you like X band–I think they're awesome. Which is your favorite album of theirs? And you're a writer! I've dabbled a little but haven't gotten serious with it. What genre do you write in?"
It's a pretty simple formula that I think works well no matter what the woman's profile says (though only, in the long term, if you're being honest about being interested in the things you bring up):
1) Note something the woman said about herself.
2) Share something about yourself in relation to that fact.
3) Ask her a question about the topic that will tell you more about her thoughts/feelings on it.
And in an initial message you probably want to keep each part brief, so it doesn't sound like a lecture or interrogation. If she responds with a thorough answer, you can always get more in depth then.
I never talk about sex or looks. I always talk about myself, whats going on with my life, and ask questions related to the girls' profiles. I never get responses. I am attractive and get many views, but nobody ever responds. I have no problems talking to girls in person or going to a bar or something and meeting a girl, but I never remain interested in the girls I meet. That is why I use online dating. I hear all of these girls saying that a guy needs to actually show interest in the same things as her, but I do that all the time and never get responses. And like I said I am attractive too, so I find it kind of odd.
Ancom, I'm very confused by two things:
First: Why are you even here?? This is, so far, a blog to help men become better at dating and having relationships with women. Now, you don't seem to want that. You don't want to change, you ignored all the great advice that's been given to you by the doctor and the commenters, and you refuse to reevaluate your assumptions of reality. You seem to want the rest of the world become better at dating you, and that's not gonna happen, so, really, why don't you just make a blog to teach women to approach the men they're interested in? (also, you totally ignore the many women here who are also trying to get better at dating)
Second: Why do you want to date these women you describe????? YOU DON'T LIKE THEM! You actually DISlike them. Maybe you are super sexually attracted to them, but if you want anything more than a ONS (or maybe even just that), you gotta like talking to them. Part of liking a person is that having conversations with them is fun. In the dating context, it can be intimidating and nerve-wracking, but overall you should have a good time with someone you like. If you are trying to impress and please a person you not only dislike, but also don't respect, of course it's gonna be awful. It's probably pretty awful for her too! So, my advice to you is: seek women you like, with whom it's easy and fun to talk, and you can be yourself. Yes, you will be going on a lot less dates, and maybe having a lot less sex, but it probably won't feel like such a chore, such a horrible thing that makes you want to quit women forever.
And lastly, you gotta grow up and understand that yes, women will reject you for a number of reasons. The reasons don't matter at all! They have right to reject you just for kicks, and so have you (feel free to reject those women you hate talking to so much). I have asked guys out and been rejected a number of times. Whose fault was it? NO ONE'S! It happens, people have their reasons, and it does no good to dwell on them, unless it's something you want to change for yourself, to become a better person.
Now, saying that women are "lazy, cowardly and don't deserve your respect", well, that sounds like asshole to me. And after reading it, I wouldn't blame a woman for not wanting to go out with you, nor shouldn't you.
This.
This is why I mentioned antisocial personality disorder in a previous comment, Ancom. The attitudes Corsair is talking about. You really might wanna speak with a professional about it.
He seems disinclined to answer legitimate questions…
I'm beginning to think he's just trolling because, really, makes no sense at all!
I'm not trolling. These comment sections just aren't good for in-depth debates. You can only really answer a handful of questions.
Sorry if I missed something important. =(
"So, my advice to you is: seek women you like, with whom it’s easy and fun to talk, and you can be yourself."
How cute. You – as a woman – assume that it's merely a matter of choice.
No my friend. It's a matter of stumbling over yourself to get the attention of someone that's already being competed for by hordes of people. There's no chance for screening as a man – just an opportunity to be with someone who may or may not be interested in you.
Don't you freaking get it? WE DON'T GET TO CHOOSE. It's just an numbers game for us. We can't be picky!
And we definitely can't focus all of our attention on one person that we've decided is awesome and somehow expect her to return that interest, because she already has 30 other suitors lined up, while you have 0 yourself.
Since you fail to understand the problem, may I suggest that you read Norah Vincent's Self-Made Man, where a lesbian woman literally goes undercover as a man. It's a good book and may help you realize the perspective of a man as described by a woman.
From the web:
"She dated women and describes how inferior she felt.[8]"
"Vincent asserts that, since the experiment, she has never been more glad to be female.[9]"
"I saw my own sex from the other side, and I disliked women irrationally for a while because of it. I disliked their superiority, their accusatory smiles, their entitlement to choose or dash me with a fingertip, an execution so lazy, so effortless, it made the defeats and even the successes unbearably humiliating"
Seriously. Go pick it up, and then return here to continue the discussion.
Well, all I can say is that you totally sound like a crazy person! Like a troll! Like nothing I've seen in my life!
Honestly, I will no longer engage you because you simply make no sense. But I'm curious: all those times I was rejected, what were they? Where are my 30 suitors? Last time someone asked me on a date was more than a year ago. I asked a guy last month and was rejected after a few dates. And I'm not talking millionaire super hot men here. Just your regular next door, living with his parents, chubby nerd guy. My friends also seem to have the same problem. Maybe you can enlighten me about why would these guys throw away such a chance, if not because they were somehow not interested in me?
Really, go see a therapist, dude. You sound like you REALLY DESPERATELY NEED IT!
Well, I gave you the most clear-cut proof you could possibly get of what it's like to be a man and what my whole point revolves around. I explained *exactly* to you what's wrong about the social dynamic and even backed it up with a good book, but instead you choose to address a contextually irrelevant hyperbole.
@Ancom
"So again, why must men “learn” how to communicate with women? Why must it be treated as a “skill” that men must conquer?"
Because you're going about this completely the wrong way. You make it sound like you're diving into a shark-infested cove for lobsters, at night, and need WMDs to get out alive.
You guys are learning how to communicate with women because when you try, you don't act like yourself, or at least don't show the best side of yourself that will make a woman look at you and think, "Wow, he's cool!" Instead, you completely go brain-dead– it's almost like stage fright for you lot. And you end up setting off a lot of red flags for women when you don't have your act together.
Look– if you saw a guy at the comic store and asked what he was reading, he'd probably answer, and you'd strike up a conversation, maybe exchange links to where you get your online comics. You're approaching him as a buddy, someone potentially interesting to hang out with.
If you took that same approach with women, there would be no problem. She'd be reading Batman, and you'd ask her which volume, and go from there. But no, instead, you either talk yourself out of approaching at all, or try to figure out some other really clever, witty way to get her attention that ends up making you appear to be trying too hard– which, you are. You just don't take the easiest route of, "Hey, what are you reading?"
Hence, teaching you what you should already know.
@Yuki
You think it's just casual conversation because that's how you're perceiving it on your end. Since *he* is picking *you* up, there's no expectation from your side. You'll just act like yourself and not even consider what he's feeling!
But from his perspective, a whole lot more is going on.
For example, if a guy was to chat you up and then ask for your number to continue the conversation later, you'd feel creeped out. Why? Because you didn't really feel *it*. And *it* is what makes you feel comfortable with a guy – comfortable enough to actually want to give him your number.
So in order for a guy to trigger this with you, he must make you actually feel happy talking to him. This can be done with some basic methods like smiling, radiating confidence, having good posture etc. but also by planting witty jokes in the conversation, maybe teasing you or generally just goofing around.
He can say a number of things to make you more interested in him, but he must also know how to segue into these things in a manner that comes off as natural rather than contrived.
And I'm not referring to cheesy pickup tricks or any PUA bullshit here. Just the fact that you can't just talk to a woman. You need to actually have a strategy!
Because trust me, "just talking to you" is one of the first things we'll try before we start looking for things that actually does work!
@Ancom
Or he could actually just be interested in what she's reading. He might use that conversation to see if there's a connection while she's doing the same thing. And after they both get past the checkout line he might ask to continue the conversation over coffee.
The world is not strictly divided into clueless guys and guys who understand the science of seducing women. There's a large swath in between who want to put their best selves forward. That has an effect on relationships of all sorts, not just romantic ones. Those are the folks Doc seems to be trying to reach. If your goal is sex, you are doing fine by your own admission already. If your desire is to find someone that you actually have a connection with, treating it as warfare is a bad place to start.
Say it doesn't work all you want. I've found that the wit and politeness to make friends and the courage to be honest about my interests is all it takes. It does mean that you're not pursuing relationships with strangers, though. By the time you get to that phase, they're people you actually know.
@Yuki – You read Batman? How's the 52 reboot going? I've been holding out for the TPB editions before getting into any of the titles.
@Yuki – You read Batman? How’s the 52 reboot going? I’ve been holding out for the TPB editions before getting into any of the titles.
Nope! I know people who do, though. I really prefer Marvel comics! I never really got into DC comics. You're more likely to find me reading Spiderman than Batman, though I do occasionally pick Batman up or watch episodes…
I think the new Spiderman is awful, though. The art quality has really sunk through the floor.
But I don't know a blessed thing about most DC comics.
Ancom's probably long gone by now but look up there! A normal conversation without any hoop jumping. That said, I mostly avoid "cape" comics unless they're bringing something really new and different to the table. The first half of SHIELD was pretty incredible, though.
The Johnathan Hickman "secret history" one? It wasn't bad but it kinda dragged on to me. There's really only so many "secret council controls the world" stories I can take
I know the genre's basically tapped out, Doc. I just liked seeing it done with DaVinci and Gallileo instead of the inevitable Tesla (who's also in there), Edison or modern cape characters. The Secret History (I think that was the title, translated from a French comic) does it better but its so sprawling its basically a small comics line in its own right.
I stick mostly to one-off TPB's. I used to follow Deus Ex and Walking Dead but they started to wear on me. Now DMZ's really the only one I keep up with as the trades come out.
On a side note, do you think venom and kingpin should be in a Spider-Man movie as the main villains? I always felt you needed a movie about venom, I think that would be Awesome!
That's not even remotely true. And if that's what you think, I honestly think you need a hug and a good one-day-only gender transplant, because I can't even begin to convey to you what's going on in the woman's end when a guy approaches and she instantly wants to make sure she keeps his attention because he's got her hooked, but she doesn't know how.
"For example, if a guy was to chat you up and then ask for your number to continue the conversation later, you’d feel creeped out. Why? Because you didn’t really feel *it*. And *it* is what makes you feel comfortable with a guy – comfortable enough to actually want to give him your number."
No, I wouldn't. Unless he was being CREEPY, or somehow threatening, I'd probably give him my email, skype, facebook– any number of things that I use to stay in contact with people I've met. I'd write my email out on a slip of paper (or his hand, as a flirt).
"You need to actually have a strategy!"
No, you don't.
The first guy to ask me out did it on an impulse. He just came right up to me, swallowed hard, and gave me the cheesiest pickup line I'd ever heard in my life. It opened the conversation with laughter, but then we actually got to talking. There were awkward silences, or moments where either of us went, "Wha?" But guess what? He got a date with me.
Most women don't expect men to be perfect. I certainly don't. You're not sitting in front of a panel of judges scoring you out of ten.
"Look– if you saw a guy at the comic store and asked what he was reading, he’d probably answer, and you’d strike up a conversation, maybe exchange links to where you get your online comics. . You’re approaching him as a buddy, someone potentially interesting to hang out with.
If you took that same approach with women, there would be no problem. She’d be reading Batman, and you’d ask her which volume, and go from there."
Not that simple, nowhere near it. I've tried this kind of thing, 10 times out of 10 the results were something like
She answers it and return to doing whatever the hell she was doing. Then, I have to try once again try to get her attention,maybe another question. She answers and return to whatever the hell she was doing. Repeat till I give up. This doesn't really happen with other guys. I've actually got some nice friends doing exactly that, but I can tell you many female friends (not even talking about dates) I got: Zero.
The whole time when talking with an unknown girl, I have to be the one actively trying to continue the conversation or it ends right there.
This also applied to the few times I got replies in okCupid – Never ONCE I've felt that the girl was actually also trying to keep the conversation. On okCupid, if I ever feel that I am always being the one having come up with new subjects or questions, I simply stop replying. I don't want to be the only one actually putting some effort on the conversation, and if the girl isn't really trying to help with the flow, then she probably isn't enjoying talking with me anyways, and if she is, she will eventually try to get in touch again.
It really feels that we (men) are expected to always pull something to say out of god knows where and lead the conversation. In fact, it really feels like the whole dating game is stacked up against men from the get go.
We have to be the ones approaching the girls. We are the ones being constantly judged about everything. We are the ones getting "screened out" because there are rapists out there or something. It really feels that all the worst parts and hard work related to dating rests entirely upon the guy's shoulder, and while I do agree that this whole social mentality is also bad to women, it's just much more stacked against us.
Just thinking about all the "ordeal" related to meet, befriend, approach and date makes me give up before even starting. How each step has thousands of ways to go completely wrong and lead from simple rejection to downright humiliation.
I get ridiculously nervous even about saying "hi" to a girl, because it does feels that if that initial "hi" is bad in her eyes, it's already going to kill any chances I might have with her.
So, no, coming from a (shy) guy's perspective, it's nowhere near as simple as just getting close and start up a conversation.
Now, sure my views about that are definitely biased and strongly related to the fact that I'm completely unsuccessful when it comes to dating and, never actually dated a girl and am losing interest towards it anyway.
I still don't think this is gender exclusive. I got the same thing when trying to approach men.
In general: If I come up to someone I'm incredibly attracted to, my brain becomes pretty much moosh, and my communication skills drop by a third.
"It really feels that we (men) are expected to always pull something to say out of god knows where and lead the conversation."
This. I'll be talking to someone on OkCupid, and the conversation will just hit a bump, and I'm the one expected to overcome that, even if she's more interested in me than I am in her. I'm working on my conversation skills, and I can do pretty okay when the other person is trying. When they're not trying, I feel like it's an inquisition, question after question after question.
I can tell when it's a two-way conversation when the other person asks questions too. A) Answer a question, B) toss in another statement that wasn't part of the answer, C) ask a question. Other person does the same. Repeat, back and forth. When someone breaks the pattern and doesn't do any or all of those three steps, either they're worse at conversation than I am, or they're not interested/distracted.
I know exactly what you're saying. In my experience, women who are interested *do* make some effort to continue the conversation. Those who don't either don't really care about you one way or the other, or are getting so many new messages every day that they can barely keep up (and therefore, don't care about you in particular one way or the other).
I mean, think back in your own life: did you ever have times when someone (probably another guy) was trying to talk to you when you'd rather not be bothered? Maybe in a bus or airplane or something like that? Many people who'd rather not talk right now, but don't want to be rude, will try limiting themselves to one-word answers, hoping that the other person gets the message.
I think the women here will agree that conversation is a two-way street. If they're making no effort, then they're not interested. The better question is, "why are so few women interested?" and that I don't know.
I'd believe the 'not interested' bit more if it didn't happen even to women who message me first.
In response to my OKCupid profile, here's some messages I've gotten. This is the first message ever sent, and I'm expected to come up with some kind of reply all on my own.
"Your profile is great! But you are so far away.
I play videogames though!" I ask her what she plays, she mentions Diablo 3, I ask her what her favorite class is, she says Monk, I say I'm not big on monk, what abilities does she use, why does she like it etc? Haven't heard from her since.
"I was just reading you profile and thought I should stop and send you a message. I have to confess I'm a bit of a gamer. Battlefield is my weakness."
Best conversation so far, she's curious about me and asking lots of questions and I'm asking questions back. ^_^
"well hello sir(: " Um, okay? This is the one I'm least interested in but I'm talking to be nice. She has a crazy ex husband though. o.o Her responses are consistently short and uninteresting and her profile is a complete blank, because she's using the entire site from her phone. =/
"Hello! I found your profile to be pretty interesting so I thought I would say hello. If you'd be interested in chatting with me, I'd love to hear back from you! Hope you have a great day!"
This conversation's going good… But I feel like I have to keep pushing for it to continue, like we'll talk one day and she'll forget to message me the next. I'm pegging this one as 'distracted' and 'busy'. Still frustrating though. =(
"She answers it and return to doing whatever the hell she was doing. Then, I have to try once again try to get her attention,maybe another question. She answers and return to whatever the hell she was doing. Repeat till I give up. This doesn’t really happen with other guys. I’ve actually got some nice friends doing exactly that, but I can tell you many female friends (not even talking about dates) I got: Zero."
OK, so what steps can you take to improve your conversational ability? I have no doubt that the situation for you is as you describe. My example isn't hypothetical either. Unlike the good Doctor, though, I'm not sure I could walk someone else through how to get from here to there. That's why he has the blog and I just comment.
@james and Igor (a little farther down) – as a rule of thumb, I think the burden of continuing a conversation does fall to the person who initiated it.
@Everyone
I feel pretty bad about getting caught up in all of these multi-thread discussions and spamming down the site, so I'm gonna leave these discussions (and this site) now. I think my ideas are better debated in a more structured format, like say a forum.
Also, as heated as these debates may have been, my intention was never to hurt anyone. I know I got some strong reactions from certain commenters, and I just want to apologize for making you feel that way! Please remember that my opinions are not indicative of anything but what one person thinks.
Take care, and much love! =)
Are you kidding me? Now you want to come off as a rational human being? I've read the comments and attempted to understand your point of view from your letter to DNL, and now I read the comments on this post. Disgusting, bitter, and heartless, that's how you appear. I saw poster after poster try to be kind, rational, and give you advice and/or data. You have an extremist mindset. "Everyone else is wrong. I am the only one who is right. I will close my mind to any other data." That's bad science if nothing else. At least you finally admitted that you are a out and proud PUA and what you really are after is sex, not relationships. No sane woman would want to be in a relationship with a man who treats her like an object, to be broken down psychologically until she spread her legs. We are people with interests, personalities, hopes, and dreams.
As to nice guys don't get the girls. Well, bullshit…nice guys might wait a little longer but nice guys get quality in the end. You know why? Cause nice girls get hurt by jerks like you and LEARN SOMETHING. So in some ways, you do us a favor by treating us badly. Then we learn the hard way to STAY THE FUCK AWAY from emotionless losers (again, like you).
I was and am a nice girl, conventionally pretty, active, etc. I got my heart broken…I learned…and I met the most wonderful man in the world, the love of my life. Guess what, he's shy nerd and I'm the only girl he's ever approached for her number. (Batting 1000). He put in the "work" by treating me well, loving me, and by being good man. Did he have a ton of experience before me? No, but he found quality and you better believe he's getting more sex than you are.
What would you rather have in the end? Consistent sex with a WOMAN you treat well or sporadic sex with OBJECTS you treat like crap? But you have been doing option B and well, it's making you really suck as a person. Honestly, I wonder what would happen to your attitude if you tried living life without sex for a short time. I wonder if you were interacting with women without MUST FIND SEX foremost on your mind, if you would start becoming a human again instead of a PUA asshole. But you will discount this comment like all others so I really don't know why I bothered, except that I think that everyone on this site has tried to be polite (especially the women) and you have been a troll. What's the common denominator in all of your failures at a true connection with a female? YOU! Now, try to LEARN instead of burying your head in the stand. (Was that a direct enough "approach" for you?)
Tbh you come off as more cold than Ancom does. In an online debate it's tempting to use stronger language than you would in real life. He did that and came back to apologize. Seems reasonable to me, the mark of someone who is concerned about the impact his words have.
He's definitely not a PUA fan, though. If you re-read his comments, he refers to PUA as the male equivalent of cosmo (and he clearly hates cosmo) so he can't be a fan of it. He only brought it up to express how deeply frustrated he was that PUA works, and I share that frustration. I mean, the Doc has spent many pages explaining why "nice guy syndrome" is bad, starting with the fact that Nice Guys see women as objects to be attained and not people. All well and good, but PUAs do that to an even greater extent, and it still works!
Ancom talked about his friends (not himself) who use PUA effectively, and he's angry at an unjust, insane world that allows such horrible things to thrive. "Angry because of injustice" is what I call a normal, healthy human reaction.
How big is his sample size, to know that PUA tactics 'work'? Is there self-selection bias (I think that's what it's called, anyone correct me if I'm wrong)? A sample size of 'a few of his friends' is just anecdotal. Maybe they're going after girls for which PUA tactics do lead to sex. Maybe they're mostly young, nightclub hookups. Maybe his friends are lying about their success. Maybe it's just a numbers game. Show us the scientific studies that say PUA methods work. Where's the control group?
Doesn't the often-repeated "I've approached hundreds / thousands of women with little success" or "You need to approach X hundred or thousand times" tell you something? That maybe it's only a few in a hundred or a few in a thousand women for which these tactics supposedly 'work'? What's the real ratio of 'gurus' to students in the PUA scene? How many guys enter the scene, silently fail at it, then leave? How do we know it's even the tactics themselves that do anything? Maybe Ancom's friends just never approached women before getting into PUA. What exactly does it mean when he says something along the lines of "women wouldn't give them the time of day before they became PUAs"? What specific evidence and incidents back this up? Again, where is the non-anecdotal, non-vaguely-specified evidence?
Ancom said he wasn't a PUA fan, yet the language – phrases and terms of reference he used said otherwise and read like typical PUA rhetoric. I feel sorry for him, I'm not by any means trying to insult him. I know what it's like to be on the inside of that reality distortion field. The PUA 'community' shouldn't be called a community, for the people at the top (think your Styles, your David DeAngelos, your Tyler Durdens) it's about the fame and hero-worship. They're exaggerations, they're not genuine and if you probe below the surface in the 'community' you see a different picture, where they aren't getting the action they say they are. There are nice people in the community for sure – don't get me wrong there. There's even the core of some good ideas, but they're shells of good ideas that have been twisted and warped. You really only have to look at the shaky psychology of the founders of the community, their strange and often creepy angles on things (Ross Jeffries anyone? Style anyone?) to see the whole thing as suspect.
The saddest thing about this is that Ancom is sad and bitter at something that doesn't exist. It's lies he's been told and a very thin slice of reality that's misrepresented as the whole for the benefit of a few who profit from others' unhappiness and insecurities.
@Synko,
Read my comments from the Doc’s previous post where he answered Ancom’s letter. I tried, I really did. But what he is doing here is manipulative. Read ALL the comments by Ancom both to me and to other female responders. I may be brutal, but nice doesn’t work with this guy.
"What would you rather have in the end? Consistent sex with a WOMAN you treat well or sporadic sex with OBJECTS you treat like crap? But you have been doing option B and well, it's making you really suck as a person. Honestly, I wonder what would happen to your attitude if you tried living life without sex for a short time. I wonder if you were interacting with women without MUST FIND SEX foremost on your mind, if you would start becoming a human again instead of a PUA asshole. But you will discount this comment like all others so I really don't know why I bothered, except that I think that everyone on this site has tried to be polite (especially the women) and you have been a troll. What's the common denominator in all of your failures at a true connection with a female? YOU! Now, try to LEARN instead of burying your head in the stand. (Was that a direct enough "approach" for you?)."
No hatin' here?.
"Women don't owe you a date" and "if you're always failing, the problem must be with YOU" both seem to be the common refrain here, both from the Doc and those who agree with him. Those phrases are actually a pretty standard part of feminist rhetoric, and you'll hear them in other pro-feminist type blogs and youtube channels if you poke around the interwebz.
What I find amusing is how quickly that rhetoric changes when it's the women who are getting the short end of the stick. Nerdy guy can't find a date? "Women don't owe you anything, try being less of a loser next time." Woman can't find a job? "It's discrimination and ought to be illegal! Employers should be forced to hire more women!"
Turns out it's pretty common for both sides to become bitter and outraged when they get screwed by the "everyone for themselves" / "no one owes you anything" mentality. Nerdy guys don't have a monopoly on bitterness; if you doubt this, just ask a feminist about Male Privilege.
Sometimes I think "Women don't owe you a date" is just shorthand for "I don't know what the hell is wrong with you but you're not being open to discussion about it and goddamn that's frustrating."
I do agree though, it is a frustrating phrase and more a way of dismissing a person. Whether that's warranted or not is a different story though and that's me interpreting it from a standpoint of "of course I know women don't OWE me a date, that's not what I'm getting at". YMMV.
I hate to tell you this, but there's a world of difference between dating and jobs. You're trying to compare attempts to correct for generations of systematic discrimination on the basis of race and gender with exploring the potential of starting a romantic relationship. This isn't just comparing apples and oranges, this is comparing apples and Tonka trucks.
But the fundamental question is still the same: does another person owe you something, or are you solely accountable for your own failures?
Of course there was lots of systematic discrimination, no one is questioning that. But I claim it's beside the point: even the discrimination itself was legitimate if you start with the mindset that "no one owes me anything." For example, if I'm a restaurant owner, I don't owe the black man a meal, or a job. Both of those things are private contracts, after all. I think forcing someone to contract against their will is just as bad as forcing someone to go on a date against their will, and that's why it isn't apples and oranges.
Your position, as I understand it, is that a woman would be right to say "I don't owe you a date, but you do owe me a job" to a hypothetical employer/suitor, under certain circumstances. If I got that right, then I'm stunned by the entitlement and hypocrisy.
Again, you're comparing fruit and cars. If you're a restaurant owner, you're providing a service: meals in exchange for money. Dating is not a service.
(Spare me any talk of prostitution; different issue, entirely).
The two do simply do not correlate, no matter how hard you try to push it.
“I don’t owe you a date, but you do owe me a job”
Trying to think of a conversation in which this sentence could happen outside of a casting couch attempt. And failing.
Women not owing men dates is pretty different from being rejected from a job, but okay. Men don't owe women time, attention or dates as well.
The problem with your example is one problem is about discrimination on the basis of gender, and the other is usually about basic social interactions.
Let's say I'm an employer. I have no obligation to hire you. I don't owe you a job, a date, or anything else, right?
It's easy to take the utilitarian position when you're already in power. It's easy to say "men don't owe women dates, either" if you're a woman and your OkCupid mailbox is always filled. Just as it's easy to say "nobody owes me a job any more than I owe them one" when you're already the CEO.
The context doesn't matter. Either your philosophy is "every person for themselves, let the strongest win" in which case I don't owe you a date (if I were a woman), or a job (if I were the CEO). Or you say "human decency ought to play a role," in which case the CEO shouldn't reject you for bullshit reasons (like your gender or skin color), and girls shouldn't reject you for bullshit reasons (like you're too nerdy).
The only reason to take the utilitarian position on dates (I owe you nothing and you owe me nothing), and a compassionate position on jobs (I might owe you something, under certain circumstances) is if you personally happen to win at dating and lose at job-hunting.
Oh, also, both a date and a job are basic social interactions. A "trade" is one of the most basic human social interactions. A job is a kind of trade (money for labor). Your position seems to be that you should allow discrimination in some kinds of social interactions (those where women have power, and the discrimination helps women) and ban it in other kinds (where women typically have less power, and the discrimination hurts them).
No, my position is that gender and race can produce huge inequalities in life- far more than being nerdy. (They can, of course overlap.) Historical factors also play a role. Women's civil rights show the extent of such discrimination, as well as establishing precedents. In certain cases, an employer is required to hire both women and minorities, correcting power imbalances to some extent. (This isn't a case of the strongest candidate- if all the upper level employees are all white men, you're probably doing it wrong.)
My point is that this is a bad comparison because even if (Some) men feel dominated by women in the dating world in a patriarchal society, the balance of power is still with them in virtually every other aspect of life. Having someone date you is not a legal right, and should not be equalized. Also, you're severely overgeneralizing by saying that all women have the power in social interactions. Women might get more messages on OK Cupid, but that doesn't follow that they always have the upper hand in social situations.
If you read this site at all, it's not about women being in power, but it's definitely about being equals. Women are socially conditioned and constantly told not to speak up. Saying no to a suspicious person or situation isn't a power play. This site is mainly about learning to navigate social situations that can be difficult for anybody. I would probably say that based on your comments about power, you seem to view dating as a game with a 'winner' and a 'loser' with one person holding all the cards. It's not. As someone pointed out astutely earlier, if someone makes you jump through hopes, that can be a sign for you not to waste time: which is actually a good thing.
I would also like to open this conversation past the whole -"He, Man!" "She, Woman!" unending polarization that seems to come up in this website. What about geeky gay couples? It still takes work to make an online profile attractive to another person, regardless of sex. Has anyone had any experience with this that they'd like to share?
Apparently you dropped out of the loop 30+ years if you half the crap you're saying.
Women being equated to CEOs is ludicrous on the face of it. The men/women ratio out there is roughly 1-1, so if you always find yourself competing against 30 other guys for the women you're going after, you might want to rethink your choice of target. Plenty of women would be delighted to have the attention of even one guy (provided you're not a creep/asshole/etc).
Just found this blog- wow, it's awesome! Dr. NerdLove, I salute you.
I was active on OkC for two 2-3 month periods in two years, and I got… somewhere around 800 messages. About 400 were explicitly sexual, 200 were incredibly poorly written, and another 150 were ones outside my parameters of personal preference. I responded to the guys who went out of their way to show 1) they actually had something in common with me and 2) they were NICE. These are inextricably entwined. If I obviously had nothing in common with a guy, it was obvious he was only interested in sex. Just like Dr. NL's "Don't Be a Creeper" article, guys who go out of their way to be non-threatening are showing respect that women appreciate. You can't possibly go wrong with "Hi, my name is John. I read on your profile that you like Indian food. I really like Indian food too; my favorite is lamb vindaloo. What's your favorite?". No mention of sex, her physical appearance, or even going out to dinner. Just being nice.
I messaged my boyfriend unsolicited, and we had our first anniversary a little while ago. We didn't meet in person for two months; now we live together. Take it slow and be nice, dudes. Hope it works out for each you.
Hello Kate,
This is just a general question, but from a woman's perspective, what can I do when I don't get any responses when I send out nice messages, and try to comment on a girls profile. I have tried everything the girls say on this board, as in I have never sent a poorly written messages, or a sexually driven one. Hundreds actually. And I can't get any responses, and I don't believe i try to message girls way out of my league. Any feedback would be sincerely appreciated, as I must be doing something wrong. Thank you.
I'd add one other thing: read what she says about her preferences/dealbreakers and believe her. I have more than one female, childfree friend with horror stories about experiences on dating sites. If she says in her profile that she doesn't have and doesn't want kids, and/or doesn't want to date anyone with kids or who wants them, BELIEVE HER. Don't assume that you/your children are an exception.
And for love of Deity, do NOT send her abusive messages about how unnatural she is, or that you hope she gets raped, or that she's obviously frigid and/or a slut, etc., etc. Just move on to the next profile.
Last but not least, do not lie to her that of course you don't want kids, on the theory that she will change her mind or that you will change it for her. Seriously, pay attention to what she says are dealbreakers for her, and abide by them.
@ Ansom
I disagree vehemently with about seventy per cent of what you have written, here, but in the interest of fairness, I read a very interesting article a few years back about a social psychology experiment in the world of speed dating. What they discovered was that women became very particular and 'choosy' like you seem to have observed — but only when they were remaining stationary and the men were circulating among them. When it was the WOMEN moving from table to table and the men were remaining stationary, the playing field was more equal — which is to say that, given the same opportunity, men did NOT become equally 'choosy'.
In practical terms, what this means is that the social environment has everything to do with how particular a woman is going to be. If you meet her at a nightclub where she and her other cute friends are getting a lot of attention, she is likely to be a good deal more demanding than if you meet her at Swing Night at university and there is a dearth of fine gentlemen to dance with.
But while this would indeed imply a DEGREE of social conditioning, it is nowhere near enough to justify despairing of womanly relations, in their entirety. And that conditioning is more damaging to women than to men. Imagine being taught by society that they are precisely this sort of person who uses her sexuality/seductiveness for personal gratification. We are taught that this sexuality/seductiveness is an inherent trait, for women (which I assure you is nonsense); we are taught that women who use it are both highly desirable and thoroughly despicable and worthless; we are also taught that we are not trustworthy. And this isn't always in an 'evil succubus' light, either — think of the two times Princess Jasmine 'seduces' people in Disney's Aladdin. Once when she doesn't trust or respect Aladdin and the other when she is dissembling against the films super villain, Jafar. Hardly a respectable model of sexuality, but we are told (from On High) that she is a 'strong modern woman' because she wants to marry someone for love and doesn't want to be a pampered princess. (Aaaaand guess what she does when she really wants something? Pull rank.)
But we are not Disney characters, even when some of us DO make similar mistakes.
Real women — the ones subjected to this sort of thing on a continual basis — fight those negative assumptions ALL THE TIME, to avoid internalizing them. You are mistaking the defensiveness of these women for a position of privilege. But righteous indignation isn't always SELF-righteous. In this case, there is a whole slough of material that women have to deal with, in the scope of their own lives, and seeing the stuff that they put in the garbage (AGAIN) last week spewed back at them from YOUR mouth is extremely disheartening.
There are definite improvements that need to be made on both sides of the cissexual gender divide. But in complaining about the systemic problems in broad generalizations, you are actually SUPPORTING and ENFORCING and REITERATING them, which is deeply damaging in the process of putting them to rest. You are not criticizing their fixable (if sizable) problem. You are labeling them with it.
That's because the men were seated when the women were circulating and the women couldn't tell their height. Women care A LOT about height. When men approach them, they can tell the man's height. Now true when he is seated. I'm short, but get smiled at all the time when I'm sitting at a bar. Less when I'm standing. For women. it's 50% about height/
These explanations of women are always interesting to me; even when I was single and looking for sex (as opposed to now being married and poly), I didn't get a whole lot of messages. I sent out a whole lot, and fairly often didn't get an answer (which is way better than the "I'm just replying because I think it's polite but I don't actually want to chat" message).
Our experience is not always all that different from straight mens', especially if we are Invisible Women (such as varying combinations or degrees of fat/ugly/not performing femininity properly/etc). All that to say that the "gatekeeper" view of women is annoying as hell. *Everyone* gatekeeps their genitalia!
Hah you've outlined the issues from a woman's point of view very nicely, indeed! I've signed up for OKC twice, and pulled my profile after a day or so each time after receiving literally hundreds of responses, most rude, some terribly graphically rude, and then many angry at me when I do not respond in what they consider to be a timely fashion. I've given up.
We men are reminded of all the privileges we have in various aspects of life, simply by virtue of being male. I dont deny some of those privileges (although I disagree with their causes)
But there is one aspect of life where women have a significant privilege over men. and that is the dating and sexual marketplace. This privilege manifests in numerous ways and.describing them would require a separate blog
It is interesting to see how women get offended when they are reminded of this privilege. Telling women that its easier to attract men sexually and that the average looking girl can get sex and dates easier than the average looking guy really makes them uncomfortable and defensive.
"It is interesting to see how women get offended when they are reminded of this privilege. Telling women that its easier to attract men sexually and that the average looking girl can get sex and dates easier than the average looking guy really makes them uncomfortable and defensive. "
They probably get uncomfortable and defensive because it's the truth. Women don't have to work hard to get dates, nor do they have to put up with the massive frustration and rejection that men do. If women had to experience 1/10th of the rejection that men do, they'd crumble, and then they'd go crying to big daddy government to fix the problem for them. Women insist on 'equality' and 'liberation', but when they realize what real equality means, they run and hide from what they say they want – and then call men out for being 'sexist'.
Issues…
Women are a lot more shallow than men. Men are very forgiving to women on their looks, status, earning ability, body type etc. I havent seen the least attractive of women having any problem getting a regular supply of men to date and have sex with.
Dont get me wrong, there is nothing wrong with being shallow…they are just being women. Women are selective creatures and find very few men sexually desirable. Thats how they are born. Every woman, no matter who she is, feels she is special and feels she deserves high quality men. Its a difference b/w how men and women think. There is no point being bitter about it. I guess men just need to suck it up.
There is a reason why prostitution exists.
Wow, you are thick. Really, really thick and a Jerk. I'm hesitant to call someone a troll, but I think you fit the bill. Congratulations.
The question in comment has been deleted.
love this post. thank you doctor you are the doctor of love for me.
Just to provide an example:
I'm a woman on OKCupid. I've been on there for twenty days and currently have messages from 25 different people in my inbox.
8 of them were well above my age range (one of them was SIXTY!).
4 had VASTLY different ideas from me of what women are "supposed" to do (these were the "stay in the kitchen" types).
2 had horrifyingly awful grammar.
2 of them deleted their accounts mid-conversation (I assume they met other people).
1 was only curious as to why I don't want kids.
1 was only interested in NSA sex.
So out of the 25 messages, only 7 were reasonably interesting or compatible people.
6 carried on decent conversations that just sort of fizzled out after a while. I was actually planning on meeting up with the final one, but he got rather nasty when I told him he was going too far too fast and politely asked him to tone it down. I never messaged him back.
And to add upon what DNL was saying about attention-getting, most of these men had generic or inappropriate usernames (one of them had "juggalo" as part of his name. ARE YOU KIDDING ME?), and almost all the rest had nothing more to say than, "Hi, what's up?"
Hi Lizzie, hope it works out for you eventually.
. Kind of like a quick high followed by a hangover, not pleasant anymore.
I'm at the stage where a relationship (i.e. companionship) is much more desirable than casual sex. Although fun, it's gone the next morning, or a few hours later
Your results are quite common, in fact I'm surprised you didn't receive even more messages than you did.
My results have been similar to yours, with the exception of older women not contacting me, what a shame!
It's so easy to jump online and setup a profile, the hard part is deciphering what someone's intentions are, what lies or embellishments of the truth are throughout their profile. It's much more difficult to tell a lie in person, than online, so I believe people tend to build themselves up for their own gratification.
It can and has worked for people, but you'd better have the patience of job to deal with all the incompatible misfits you'll come across.
Hopefully you have other ways of meeting people. Most people aren't taking online dating serious. It's a quick outlet for potential sex for many and the rest simply don't have much to offer a partner. I firmly believe that's what's going on.
So, if you have your act together (i.e. job,family/friends, interests etc.), reasonably attractive or better, there's no reason to use online dating. Unless you simply have no other options. Good luck.
so you got 7 that were good replies. At least you have options. Do you prefer that to zero?
Laugh out loud everytime I read these "i got so many in my inbox, but only 5-6 were rreally good messages, woe is me"
Why do username's matter? that seems very, very petty and useless.
usernames. oops.
Presumably for similar reasons to why you choose the username you choose.
Depends on your username. I doubt many women respond to iluvhugeknockerz234 or rapeisfunny12. You pick your username, so if it seems to convey something, chances are that's what the user wanted to convey.
Do you think SFLastCallGrrrl, bubblygigglez, red-lite-spcial or PhillyFanAmanda don't tell people anything with their login names? Note, these are all examples in the first page or two of OKCupid matches, so its not a rare thing.
Generic names are generally fine, but there are a lot of choices that tell you something about a person. BigDick69 probably isn't the most tactful fellow in the world. The best case scenario for JuggaloFan is that he has awful taste in music. And while there are women out there who'd have a lot in common with someone who picked an Ayn Rand based username, I'd opt to pass on a first date that would probably just turn into a political argument.
Forget it.
(1) Unrealistic Competition: most of these women wouldn't receive 1/4 of the attention they would get in the real world. This is due to sheer competition. It's so easy for a woman, or man for that matter to have multiple conversations going on at the same time. This leads to mundane conversations that seem to go nowhere. Or, you do end up chatting for awhile (i.e. a week) with a woman, or man and they all but disappear. This could be due to something potentially better coming along, or they're really not into online dating.
(2)Liars: we've all come across them before, but watch out online. You'll see everything from lying about age,weight,height,marital status,employment and so on. Or, my personal favourite: using photos of their former glory days, i.e. 10-15 year old photos. I'm not talking about small white lies, but glaring intentional oversights.
(3)Dysfunctional: welcome to the internet where you're going to run into a disproportionate number of undateables due to all manner of reasons. The mentally unstable to serial daters to stalkers. It's a harsh reality for someone going in with best of intentions.
Maybe you've had better luck, yet I'm of the belief that it's much easier out in the real world, where people can't hide behind a well constructed, yet ridiculously unrealistic profile description.
I will say, that I have met a couple nice women from online quite awhile ago. So it can work. Yet the effort far exceeds your patience of sifting through the weirdos, or those just killing time.
Keep in mind, many women develop an overinflated sense of self-worth. I hate to pick numbers, yet for the sake of discussion, a woman coming in at a reasonable 7 – 7.5 / 10 in the real world, becomes a 9 – 10/10 online. This is because of all the emails or attention she's received online. It's just not indicative of reality, yet these women just don't seem to get it. In fact, I've seen arguably a 6 / 10 profile demanding a very good looking guy, or don't bother contacting her. Really? What very good looking guy is going to want to contact her, aside from sex (pump/dump) that is.
There's no verbal,non-verbal cues, just a sea of pumped up profiles that you have to decode in order to determine whether or not to send the first message.
End rant: good luck. It's weird out there.
Well, sadly all online dating, paid and free, these days are scams, waste of time, and could possibly worsen mens selfworth.
Actually, don't.
It's not really rocket science if you scan the web to research the issue. Even better, try online dating out yourself.
Unless you really have a look of a model, facially.
Worsen mens self-worth? It cannot be ANY lower! Women INSIST that men make the first move , OR ELSE, you must be punished. The expectations ALL lead to the cheapening of men, and women most certainly do not want to change that. Good luck!
Ok, so this is something that I would like to share with many of you trying to get into the online dating world . Well a little bit about me, I'm 24 years old, hispanic, slender, athletic look and have tried the whole online thing. So I can totally say that not everyone who joins is ugly, psycho, or fat. I think my situation has been different, since I graduated a year ago and really was having a difficult time meeting new people in another state etc. Ive had positive and negative experiences being online since your obviously going to encounter nerdy, desperate, lonely, and sex-induced men. I was prepared for that. But what ultimately made me accept online dating as an actual lifestyle was just how hard it is to meet people at a noisy bar- which isn't particularly the place to meet someone anyways. Its also harder to meet people in your age group since the real world is a mixture of kids, young adults, adults, and older people. Also, online dating for me wasn't because I was tired of being alone. It was more of another option to meet people.
I would message you, but chances are you wouldn't reply, even if i wrote the most well-thought out message that said nothing about meeting up to have sex, had proper grammar, etc.
This is without a doubt the best article I've read about online dating EVER. Very funny, and so, so true! So much better than the hundreds of useless articles out there.
The only bit I would disagree with is about using a template approach for a first message. I've found that templates are far too inflexible to be effective. Once you tailor one section to a particular person, that then means the subsequent sections are out of whack, and by the time you have edited everything enough to get a good message, you might as well have just started from scratch. Plus, as you have explained, you could send the most charming and amazing message in the world to a lot of people, but if they're not into you, it's unlikely you'll get a message back, and there's just nothing you can do about it.
My preferred approach is to use a simple, innocent one-line joke, made as relevant as possible to the individual, with perhaps a sentence or two to accompany it. "What do you call a sheep with no legs? A cloud." This takes less than 2 minutes per person, and has worked very well for me so far.
Provided this cut-and-paste message is funny, engaging, polite, complimentary, and most importantly original, I've found people aren't going to be too put off by it. Think about it – is someone really going to be so cruel and unreasonable as to completely write you off as a person because you haven't tailored every sentence of your first message to their profile? If the answer is yes, do you actually really want to date that person? Furthermore, if someone you really really like hasn't responded, you can always then follow up with a more heartfelt message further down the line – something that has actually also worked well for me.
You can make a good impression on hundreds of people within minutes, weed out all the ones who are just never going to be into you, and then have the pleasure of getting to know the good ones who are willing to give you a chance. It makes the whole experience a lot more fun!
I have seen worst profiles than these, which led me to think that these are just prank profiles mostly. I mean who's stupid enough to appear weird to everybody and except people to talk to them. That just aint right.
Zombie profile? What the hell!
Great article! Thanks for the advice. I can see there are some areas I need to work on. I’ve been getting great responses from my profile from women but the problem is in the follow-up. I’ve gotten little response after I response to their inquiries. Pursuant to your advice, I’ll make the adjustments.
Women are picky because they date according to what they feel entitled to. Look at all the profiles where women say stuff like "Only Prince Charming need apply." Then you look at the profile and there's nothing special about the girl. She's not Snow White. She's not even particularly pretty. She could be overweight, unemployed, unmotivated, but it doesn't matter to women: they all seem to expect a fairy tale ending. That mentality prevents them from dating anyone they consider beneath them, which turns out to be 99% of men out there.
I've read profiles where on paper we're a perfect match: same tv shows, same authors, same foods, both of us have cats but love dogs, both city-dwellers, similar ages, same area, so you I say hello, am very careful not to say anything stupid, compliment her taste, ask something witty, and get ignored. And the only reason I can think of is A) although I'm tall and thin I'm not Prince Charming, and B) Under income my profile says between $30,000 and $40,000 and that's just not enough. And this is while hers might say $18,000 or less or unemployed. Women nitpick the hell out of everything and it makes men bitter. So we see women as using us as a stepping stone to get where they want to be financially in life so we start to see love as a financial transaction. Once you see love like that you wind up trolling the swinger's sites, because if women wont respect a great guy who can offer them everything they need then we're just going to look for women who have the money they need but not the excitement.
The irony is it makes women think men that do that are pigs. Really? So we should just stay home, celibate and die alone because our bank accounts aren't big enough for you to love us? Which fairy tale was that in?
a)Why are you even sending out messages to profiles that scream 'meh' or 'entitlement' to you?
b)You can't cold-read their reasons, but if you assume they ignore you because of trivial things(which peeps are perfectly entitled to: whatever makes 'em happy) than that foreveralone bitterness becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Ok so I have a profile. I'm a bit fascinated by men's and women's profiles and do a fair bit of stalking around OKC to see what makes people tick. So I'll tell you about my observations.
First of all, I am married, and I state outright that I'm there for friends and quizzes. And true to my word, I rarely respond to messages. It's not a game, or "code" for anything.
I've talked to a few people, male and female, in a friendly manner and the conversation just sort of petered out naturally. None of them went in any sort of romantic or sexual direction on either part and that was great. I'm sure I've made some lurking doofuses angry about how "unfair" it is that I'm on there, daring to be married. I even got one message berating me for being married and cheating on my husband (um, no, he knows and also has a profile. We're 97% matched!). I promptly blocked him.
But I've thought, what if I were single? What would make me not respond to a message? And I'll tell you why *I* don't or wouldn't respond, beyond the obvious only-sex message, highly negative message, or the badly spelled message. Here it is:
-You blatantly ignore/go against something I've said. Currently, I have guys composing long, eager messages about how they "know I'm married" but they just want to "make a friend" and maybe meet for coffee sometime and then say quasi-romantic things about how we're compatible and can I give him a chance? Or maybe they too are married but claim they just want a pen-pal because "my wife and I are in a sexless marriage". No. Just, no. There have been cool straight men whose FRIENDLY (read: JUST FRIENDS) messages I have responded to. This? This is not it. Besides, what this tells me is, if you steamroll over my desire not to be romantically pursued due to me being married, what ELSE are you going to steamroll over? It also tells me you think I am an easily-duped idiot.
-You send me a giant message, all about yourself. This happens a LOT with nerdy types. Dude. Your first message to me is three fat, wall-of-text paragraphs all about you. No questions to me. If I were single, this would tell me you like to hear yourself talk and talk about yourself excessively. Talking a bit about yourself is fine, but this long-ass missive is not, especially on the FIRST message.
-another nerdy guy thing: don't tell me I'm wrong for liking something. It doesn't matter how many ";)"s you put in your vaguely aggressive, argumentative message about why my interests suck. It isn't cute.
-overly flowery/romantic/sensual prose that seems canned. Like that PUA tactic of supposedly getting her juices flowing by getting her to imagine sensual tastes and touches. EW. If your profile is like this, too, double ew. If you're a romantic, flowery guy, fine, but you obviously didn't really grok MY profile because it says plain as day on my personality that I'm "less romantic". When you do this, it shows me not only that you failed to get me, but that you say these things to me because you think "women" all love this stuff.
-our match percentages SUCK. Seriously. I've gotten some pretty okay messages from guys, but if I were single I still wouldn't go for it. No matter how nice you seem, 54% match is a weak number. I'm not interested in "opposites attract".
-you are religious, old-fashioned, or into Ayn Rand. You could be the cutest, most articulate charmer ever, and this would torpedo any chance. Believe me, I'd make you just as unhappy as you'd make me.
-you answered some questions in a gross way. Not interested in anyone who thinks "girl on girl is hot but guy on guy is wrong" or that people with low IQs shouldn't breed or that reverse racism is a thing.
So, dudes on here complaining that they don't get responses? It could be any one of these things, or anything DNL mentioned. It's not just about looks or money, and women are not just playing dumbass games because they are evil.
Here is my experience. I am on five dating sites and have dated 9 women in six weeks. I have a date this Friday night with woman #10 and most likely another date Saturday night with woman #11. A few more are waiting their turn (seriously). I am 58, salt and pepper hair, 5’10″ with a few extra pounds… in other words, I’m no hunk. I have dated woman from ages 43 to 60 including one celebrity who was absolutely gorgeous (her dad was a football defensive coordinator at a famous university and her ex was the son of a Heisman Trophy winner). She dated me because I pursued her and asked her out. I dated another woman, aged 43, 5’2″ and barely weighed 100 pounds. Again, very beautiful and I pursued her and asked her out. Another one looked just like an older version of Barbie, tall, slender with long blonde hair. Of course none of them were compatible with me but I’ve had some good times and sweet kisses (good memories for an old man like me lol). As for as the dating sites are concerned, Christian Mingle is a complete waste of time and money… dated three women who were either wacko, psycho or dramatized. Dated two women from OK Cupid … they were ok but nothing outstanding. I dated several women from Match… classier and prettier women but also more stuck up. Currently talking to a couple of women on Our Time but no dates yet. Date Hookup is also a waste of time. Despite what people have said, I've actually had the best luck on POF… had several quality dates with a couple more lined up and more waiting. So my favorite two sites are POF and Match.