|
We are extremely close to shutting down this thread for the same reasons the PUA thread was shut down. While some of the time this thread contains actual discussion with people asking help and people giving nice advice, it often gets derailed by rubbish that should not be here. The moderation team will be trying to steer this thread in a different direction from now on.
Posts of the following nature are banned:
1) ANYTHING regarding PUA. If your post contains the words 'alpha' or 'beta' or anything of that sort please don't hit post.
2) Stupid brags. You can tell us about your nice success stories with someone, but posts such as 'lol 50 Tinder matches' are a no-no.
3) Any misogynistic bullshit, including discussion about rape culture.
4) One night stands and random sex. These are basically brags that invariably devolve into gender role discussions and misogynistic comments.
Last chance, guys. This thread is for dating advice and sharing dating stories. While gender roles, sociocultural norms, and our biological imperative to reproduce are all tangentially related, these subjects are not the main purpose of the thread. Please AVOID these discussions. If you want to discuss them at length, go to PMs or start a blog. If you disagree with someone's ideologies, state that you disagree with them and why they won't work from a dating standpoint and move on. We will not tolerate any lengthy derailments that aren't directly about dating. |
United Kingdom36156 Posts
On March 19 2014 00:06 Calanthe wrote:Show nested quote +On March 18 2014 23:20 Monsen wrote:On March 18 2014 23:00 Calanthe wrote:On March 18 2014 16:48 aTnClouD wrote:On March 18 2014 08:46 Calanthe wrote:Stop right there! You weren't wrong and you weren't stupid. It's super awesome that you had enough respect for the girls to basically say "Hey, I don't wanna do this with you if you wouldn't do it sober." That implies that you're interested in consent, and being interested in consent is totally fucking awesome and deserves massive respect. Personally, I am all about some enthusiastic consent! If a girl invites you to her place that IS enthusiastic consent. It is as much as it can get. Also being drunk doesn't make you want to do things you wouldn't normally want to do. It gives you freedom from inhibition, which is often an excuse for girls to justify the fact they are sexual creatures as much as men even though they have to constantly hide it due to social stigma. An invitation to her place is not enthusiastic consent for any kind of sexytime. All she's told you there is that she wants you to be in her house. That doesn't imply anything else. It can signify interest, but it doesn't give consent. Enthusiastic consent is more along the lines of, "Hey, do you want to come over and fool around?" then "Hey, would you like to have sex? I'd like to have sex. Fooling around has been fun." It's ongoing, active consent. It's saying "Yes! I absolutely want to do this thing with you! And I want you to have no doubts or questions about whether or not I want to do this thing!" You have no idea what you're talking about. Maybe 1 in a hundred women will be direct like that. Maybe. For the rest it's "do you want a cup of coffee, do you want to come upstairs" etc. If you're going to wait for a girl to jump around you with a huge "fuck me" sign, good luck getting laid. edit: Also women tend to think they're already being obvious when they hand out such "invitations" and can actually be offended if you turn them down because you take it literally. I am very sorry that you're experiencing unhelpful social mores in your country when it comes to this. I have every idea what I'm talking about. I made a decision a long time ago to be very clear in my communication toward men regarding sex in order to avoid any "gray rape" scenarios. In making that decision, I also determined that I'm not interested in dudes who can't or won't be forward and honest when talking about sex. To me, being unable or unwilling to discuss sex is indicative of having poor communication skills or not being very in touch with their sexual selves, which are both characteristics I find highly undesirable. I'm not interested in guessing games and I'm not interested in head games. Men can make that decision too - "I don't want to sleep with or have a relationship with a woman who is not forthcoming about her interests and desires." I suppose it's more rare than the usual bullshit, but 1 in 100 still leaves you with a fuckload of women.
Nothing you've said has been particularly persuasive to the point that men should ditch 99/100 women though :/
|
On March 19 2014 00:06 Calanthe wrote:Show nested quote +On March 18 2014 23:20 Monsen wrote:On March 18 2014 23:00 Calanthe wrote:On March 18 2014 16:48 aTnClouD wrote:On March 18 2014 08:46 Calanthe wrote:Stop right there! You weren't wrong and you weren't stupid. It's super awesome that you had enough respect for the girls to basically say "Hey, I don't wanna do this with you if you wouldn't do it sober." That implies that you're interested in consent, and being interested in consent is totally fucking awesome and deserves massive respect. Personally, I am all about some enthusiastic consent! If a girl invites you to her place that IS enthusiastic consent. It is as much as it can get. Also being drunk doesn't make you want to do things you wouldn't normally want to do. It gives you freedom from inhibition, which is often an excuse for girls to justify the fact they are sexual creatures as much as men even though they have to constantly hide it due to social stigma. An invitation to her place is not enthusiastic consent for any kind of sexytime. All she's told you there is that she wants you to be in her house. That doesn't imply anything else. It can signify interest, but it doesn't give consent. Enthusiastic consent is more along the lines of, "Hey, do you want to come over and fool around?" then "Hey, would you like to have sex? I'd like to have sex. Fooling around has been fun." It's ongoing, active consent. It's saying "Yes! I absolutely want to do this thing with you! And I want you to have no doubts or questions about whether or not I want to do this thing!" You have no idea what you're talking about. Maybe 1 in a hundred women will be direct like that. Maybe. For the rest it's "do you want a cup of coffee, do you want to come upstairs" etc. If you're going to wait for a girl to jump around you with a huge "fuck me" sign, good luck getting laid. edit: Also women tend to think they're already being obvious when they hand out such "invitations" and can actually be offended if you turn them down because you take it literally. I am very sorry that you're experiencing unhelpful social mores in your country when it comes to this. I have every idea what I'm talking about. I made a decision a long time ago to be very clear in my communication toward men regarding sex in order to avoid any "gray rape" scenarios. In making that decision, I also determined that I'm not interested in dudes who can't or won't be forward and honest when talking about sex. To me, being unable or unwilling to discuss sex is indicative of having poor communication skills or not being very in touch with their sexual selves, which are both characteristics I find highly undesirable. I'm not interested in guessing games and I'm not interested in head games. Men can make that decision too - "I don't want to sleep with or have a relationship with a woman who is not forthcoming about her interests and desires." I suppose it's more rare than the usual bullshit, but 1 in 100 still leaves you with a fuckload of women.
What he is speaking of is not unique to Germany; it's nice that you've personally decided to be open with your sexual desires in terms of communicating them but that doesn't mean much when discussing the standard case, a case in which some degree of what might be called "modesty" is at play in how women and men interact when looking to find a partner. I can tell you from personal experience that if a man were to write off all women who were not forthcoming with their sexual desires, particularly in the Midwestern and Southern United States, he'd be missing out on a lot of high quality women who, for one reason or another, cling to outdated stereotypes in terms of how a woman ought to express her sexual desire. You are effectively throwing all of these people under the bus in suggesting that men simply not even deal with them, and to be frank, it is highly counterproductive in a thread full to the brim with guys who might very well never meet a woman as open as you are.
|
On March 19 2014 00:02 Ghostcom wrote:
Schrödingers rapist is most likely the most moronic thing on this page - which is impressive considering Shauni posted here. The best part is how you try and defend it which equates to: "I can't tell by looking at a person (man or woman) whether or not that person is a serial killer" - whilst the statement is true it is also completely valueless and straight up harmful if anyone is idiotic enough to allow such a notion to dictate any part of their life.
Here are some values:
Generous estimate of how many people are killed per year in the US by serial killers: 2,000 (source)
Conservative estimate of how many women are raped in the US each year: 190,000 (source)
You are effectively throwing all of these people under the bus in suggesting that men simply not even deal with them, and to be frank, it is highly counterproductive in a thread full to the brim with guys who might very well never meet a woman as open as you are.
Ah, I wasn't exactly suggesting that dudes rule out entire swathes of women this way. You're absolutely right, but everyone still has the option to decide on dealbreakers for a possible relationship. That's all I was suggesting.
|
United States41984 Posts
Why can't we just accept the invitation for a cup of coffee and simultaneously be aware of the potential subtext while not assuming that the person has already consented to sex. Then we can respond to further cues such as her removing her clothes or her making you a coffee to reassess the situation.
|
On March 19 2014 00:19 Calanthe wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2014 00:02 Ghostcom wrote:
Schrödingers rapist is most likely the most moronic thing on this page - which is impressive considering Shauni posted here. The best part is how you try and defend it which equates to: "I can't tell by looking at a person (man or woman) whether or not that person is a serial killer" - whilst the statement is true it is also completely valueless and straight up harmful if anyone is idiotic enough to allow such a notion to dictate any part of their life. Here are some values: Generous estimate of how many people are killed per year in the US by serial killers: 2,000 ( source) Conservative estimate of how many women are raped in the US each year: 190,000 ( source)
Changes absolutely nothing about the principle and you know it.
|
On March 19 2014 00:02 Ghostcom wrote:
Schrödingers rapist is most likely the most moronic thing on this page - which is impressive considering Shauni posted here. The best part is how you try and defend it which equates to: "I can't tell by looking at a person (man or woman) whether or not that person is a serial killer" - whilst the statement is true it is also completely valueless and straight up harmful if anyone is idiotic enough to allow such a notion to dictate any part of their life.
The slightly awkward thing is that it mixes common sense and completely true, but also completely irrelevant, things in one big pot and presents it as some form of "rape culture".
When I only know a woman online and we're about to meet for the first time, I'll suggest meeting at a super public place. And then I'll maybe suggest going for a coffee in broad daylight with lots of people around. If we go along well for some time, that's when I'll consider going alone with her somewhere.
When it's the middle of the night in a dark alley and there's a woman going somewhere a couple of meters in front of me, I'm not going to talk to her unless it's something really, really important and most likely not sexual.
When a woman I just met gives me a response that says "I'm not really sure about this" and I'm convinced I can convince her that she really should see it as something positive / negative then I'll also consider trying to convince her completely fine.
Why would I do all those things? Because I can replace "woman" with "man" every single time. You don't meet strangers in non-crowded places. You don't smell like shit when approaching a stranger. You take "no" for a no, you take "yes" for a yes and you take the shit in between for the shit in between. All of these are complete and utter common sense. I don't want to get raped, killed or murdered by a person I have zero personal connection with either. Making it about "men vs women" and some form of "rape culture" is complete and utter bullshit when it should be about "common sense".
Not even finishing with:
Shouldn’t this go without saying? Of course it should. Sadly, that’s not the world I live in. You may be beginning to realize that it’s not the world you live in, either.
...makes this any better since people making this about men vs women make it a lot, lot worse.
|
On March 19 2014 00:19 Calanthe wrote:Show nested quote +On March 19 2014 00:02 Ghostcom wrote:
Schrödingers rapist is most likely the most moronic thing on this page - which is impressive considering Shauni posted here. The best part is how you try and defend it which equates to: "I can't tell by looking at a person (man or woman) whether or not that person is a serial killer" - whilst the statement is true it is also completely valueless and straight up harmful if anyone is idiotic enough to allow such a notion to dictate any part of their life. Here are some values: Generous estimate of how many people are killed per year in the US by serial killers: 2,000 ( source) Conservative estimate of how many women are raped in the US each year: 190,000 ( source)
If I offer you to play a game where you have a 1:100 chance to randomly get raped without any real benefit in the other 99 cases, you'd be retarded to play it.
If I offer you to play a game where you have a 1:1000 chance to randomly get killed without any real benefit in the other 999 cases, you'd also be retarded to play it. A bit less, sure, but retarded nonetheless.
I'm a guy with years of martial arts experience. Would I walk through a dark alley in a scarier area of a town by myself or go to a strangers house without having any personal connection? No, because I'm not stupid. Any and all points that blog brings up for man vs woman are equally true when it comes to man vs man or woman vs woman. That's why it makes zero sense to try and single out any one of these.
|
On March 19 2014 00:20 KwarK wrote:
Why can't we just accept the invitation for a cup of coffee and simultaneously be aware of the potential subtext while not assuming that the person has already consented to sex. Then we can respond to further cues such as her removing her clothes or her making you a coffee to reassess the situation.
Well because that would be mature, and there is no place for maturity when you make sweeping generalizations on how to always get your dick wet without much care for anything else.
|
seems kinda weird to me to be teaching people not to get raped when there are people that literally think raping is hard wired into men's anatomy that need to be educated. personal safety is great and all but I don't think its the answer. I think the gender thing happens because of the later population, and the overwhelming discrepancy in which gender is the victim. We've been generously reminded that rape culture does exist just on the last page.
|
On March 19 2014 00:42 ComaDose wrote:
seems kinda weird to me to be teaching people not to get raped when there are people that literally think raping is hard wired into men's anatomy that need to be educated. personal safety is great and all but I don't think its the answer. I think the gender thing happens because of the later population, and the overwhelming discrepancy in which gender is the victim. We've been generously reminded that rape culture does exist just on the last page.
How is it a "rape culture" when the response of the peer group his statements were directed at was to kick him out for 30 days? I'm not disputing that people with highly screwed views are out there, I'm disputing that you need to preach how scary it is to interact with men as a woman because we're living in a society where rape is part of its culture.
|
I don't think we need to do that. I think we need to talk to men about it so they stop saying things like "she was asking for it".
|
On March 19 2014 00:20 KwarK wrote:
Why can't we just accept the invitation for a cup of coffee and simultaneously be aware of the potential subtext while not assuming that the person has already consented to sex. Then we can respond to further cues such as her removing her clothes or her making you a coffee to reassess the situation.
who the fuck drinks coffee at 2 am? no thanks I'm going home to sleep
|
It is not uncommon, particularly in Europe and South America, to finish off dinner or an evening of drinking with an espresso or a coffee.
|
On March 19 2014 01:30 farvacola wrote:
It is not uncommon, particularly in Europe and South America, to finish off dinner or an evening of drinking with an espresso or a coffee.
I know Spanish people eat very late, but not at 2 am come on
|
Rape is not socially acceptable even in Kenya and has never been in any human culture ever, I wonder how some people can believe there's anything close to a rape culture in a western country.
|
On March 19 2014 01:59 aTnClouD wrote:
Rape is not socially acceptable even in Kenya and has never been in any human culture ever, I wonder how some people can believe there's anything close to a rape culture in a western country.
I don't know about Kenya, but I have it on good authority that it is very much a part of culture in Lesotho (not in a good way, obviously, but it exists).
But your "dude, you're a loser you should have fucked her" attitude supports the idea that the culture of "get dick wet, care less about other things" very much exists in western culture.
|
Once you realize that a quite a lot of human behavior is designed to uncover or detect deceit or badness in other people. About 1% of men are sociopaths. Jeffery Miller, a Darwinian psychologist at the university of Albuquerque, argues that "quite a lot of female behavior is deigned to spot a sociopath because they make terrible partners." How do women detect these sociopaths? Famous Oxford grad Rory Sutherland explains that "the reason girls show up late for for dates is precisely because a sociopath would not be able to hide his annoyance while a regular guy would act with empathy." Thus, women are programmed by evolution to be slightly annoying to the male species. Which makes quite a lot of sense when you think about it.
|
That's pseudo-Freudian essentialist bullshit and I take pity on anyone who thinks that people can so easily be predicted.
|
Because being late to dates is so polite and social. Makes sense...
|
On March 19 2014 02:24 farvacola wrote:
That's pseudo-Freudian essentialist bullshit and I take pity on anyone who thinks that people can so easily be predicted.
actually its Heuristics
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
