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.
Daxz, I'm going to give you one serious post, because you're otherwise derailing and spreading bullshit.
It's a supremacy movement, not an egalitarian one.
False. Formal feminism has been around for at least the 19th, 20th, and 21st centuries, where both men and women have been fighting for women's voting rights, equal pay, and other general rights (traditionally mostly for women) throughout the entire world. Over the past 130+ years, countries like the US, UK, New Zealand, Switzerland, and some Arab countries have made immense progress in the goal of treating women like first-class citizens (or at least better off than before), as opposed to horrendously worse off than men. Many countries still have a long way to go, which is why feminism is still important, even today. While there are many sources describing the history of feminism, the Wiki has a pretty decent compilation of this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminism#Nineteenth_and_early_twentieth_centuries
How has feminism "empowered" men?
Glad you asked. While it's traditionally been aimed towards assisting women- as they're not the ones with such easy default privileges- modern feminism has been especially keen to helping men overcome inappropriate gender roles that they're forced into. "Although feminist advocacy is and has been mainly focused on women's rights, some feminists, including bell hooks, argue for the inclusion of men's liberation within its aims because men are also harmed by traditional gender roles.[3]" ~ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminism#History
One of the things feminism has done for men is that it applied enough political pressure to remove the legal exclusion that men cannot be "raped". As in, there was a "Rape is Rape" campaign launched by feminist groups, such as Feminist Majority Foundation and "Ms." magazine, that pressured the FBI to acknowledge that men can also be forced into sex, as opposed to only having female victims. Men hadn't been recorded or considered to have ever been "raped" for years before feminists helped promote that fairness.
Craig v. Boren was a case where it became recognized that women were treated easier in terms of drinking laws; the result of that case forced both sexes to be assessed equally and fairly in terms of drinking ages and related issues.
The National Organization for Women has been at the forefront of making sure that it's not only new mothers who have the option to receive paid time off work to raise babies. New fathers deserve it too, and feminists have been pushing to make sure such a thing is recognized.
Feminism has been the driving force to allow women to serve in the military. First, that's important for women because if a woman can shoulder the physical and psychological burden of war and training, then they shouldn't be banned simply for having a vagina. Second, that's important for men because it eases the burden and need to have as many men serve, if it's open to a larger pool of recruits. Quite frankly, I don't want to be drafted.
The Prison Rape Elimination Act, spearheaded by feminist Lovisa Stannow, was drafted to acknowledge and work on prison conditions where hundreds of thousands of male inmates had been sexually abused.
Thanks to feminism, the definition of a hate crime now includes sex-specific crimes (both to women and to men).
It's helped shatter sex/ gender/ orientation stereotypes, such as how men need to be macho and alpha and the breadwinner and can't be gay or androgynous.
And the list goes on and on and on. You seem to think that only the new-age extreme feminists (a very, very tiny minority who wish to kick down men to make women feel better) are real feminists, whereas you ignore people like Susan B. Anthony, Gloria Steinem, Barbara Walters, Maya Angelou, and many other important historical women (and especially nowadays, men too!).
Take objectification for example, which states that when a man is attracted to a womans body, he is dehumanizing her in his mind. Feminist will typically talk about objectification like it is some sort of proved psychological mechanism with tons of evidence to support it. It isn't.
Both men and women objectify each other. However, men tend to take far more inappropriate and dehumanizing action, such as catcalling, smacking a girl's butt, calling her inappropriate names, abusing someone, and raping someone. That all happens to men as well, but it also happens to women. And feminists have been fighting to protect everyone.
The implication is that you should not be attracted to a womans body, but her personality. You should be ashamed of being attracted to that hot girl, and should not express this attraction.
That's not the implication. The implication is that you shouldn't only care about a person's body but also care about their mind and personality. That goes for all people, regardless of sex. You shouldn't disrespect or dislike any person just because you think they're ugly. You should care about substance, not about superficiality.
That's why we need feminism.
Please take your rants elsewhere though; this thread is for dating.
On June 08 2016 20:35 LemOn wrote: Really DPB? This is a dating thread guys come on with the pseudo philosophy and history lessons, I'd you to know better
That's why I said I was giving him only one post He can always take it to PM (or to a different thread) from this point on.
False. Formal feminism has been around for at least the 19th, 20th, and 21st centuries, where both men and women have been fighting for women's voting rights, equal pay, and other general rights (traditionally mostly for women) throughout the entire world. Over the past 130+ years, countries like the US, UK, New Zealand, Switzerland, and some Arab countries have made immense progress in the goal of treating women like first-class citizens (or at least better off than before), as opposed to horrendously worse off than men. Many countries still have a long way to go, which is why feminism is still important, even today. While there are many sources describing the history of feminism, the Wiki has a pretty decent compilation of this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminism#Nineteenth_and_early_twentieth_centuries
I noticed you conveniently ignored my questions. Why? Why did you not answer them? If feminism is an egalitarian movement, why do they not support egalitarian child custody laws?
Regarding the right to vote, it was never the case that all men could vote and no women could. You also seem to think that if it wasn't for feminism, women would be mens slaves today. Do you know what a rainmaker is?
Glad you asked. While it's traditionally been aimed towards assisting women- as they're not the ones with such easy default privileges- modern feminism has been especially keen to helping men overcome inappropriate gender roles that they're forced into. "Although feminist advocacy is and has been mainly focused on women's rights, some feminists, including bell hooks, argue for the inclusion of men's liberation within its aims because men are also harmed by traditional gender roles.[3]" ~ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminism#History
"inappropriate gender roles that they're forced into"? What you're advocating here is the doctrine of the Tabula Rasa, formalized as the sociological theory of social constructionism, which holds that all human behavior is learned, and that we can "hack" this behavior by controlling culture.
What science is there that supports this claim? None. Zero. Silch. This is just more ideological conjecture and speculation. Men and women aren't forced into unnatural gender roles. It's really easy to disprove this. If constructionism was true, then we would expect to see a huge variation in gender roles across different cultures. We don't.
It is feminism that seeks to impose unnatural behavior onto men and women.
One of the things feminism has done for men is that it applied enough political pressure to remove the legal exclusion that men cannot be "raped". As in, there was a "Rape is Rape" campaign launched by feminist groups, such as Feminist Majority Foundation and "Ms." magazine, that pressured the FBI to acknowledge that men can also be forced into sex, as opposed to only having female victims. Men hadn't been recorded or considered to have ever been "raped" for years before feminists helped promote that fairness.
Source please.
Craig v. Boren was a case where it became recognized that women were treated easier in terms of drinking laws; the result of that case forced both sexes to be assessed equally and fairly in terms of drinking ages and related issues.
What does this have to do with feminism? Was it feminsts who pushed for this? Source?
The National Organization for Women has been at the forefront of making sure that it's not only new mothers who have the option to receive paid time off work to raise babies. New fathers deserve it too, and feminists have been pushing to make sure such a thing is recognized.
This was to get women back into work. This wasn't a favor to men, it was to get women into work by getting men to stay home.
Feminism has been the driving force to allow women to serve in the military. First, that's important for women because if a woman can shoulder the physical and psychological burden of war and training, then they shouldn't be banned simply for having a vagina. Second, that's important for men because it eases the burden and need to have as many men serve, if it's open to a larger pool of recruits. Quite frankly, I don't want to be drafted.
Again, this is about promoting women, not helping men. Feminist may want to let women serve, but they do not want women to be drafted. Equality?
The Prison Rape Elimination Act, spearheaded by feminist Lovisa Stannow, was drafted to acknowledge and work on prison conditions where hundreds of thousands of male inmates had been sexually abused.
Spearheaded? There were lots of organizations pushing that, and it affects both men and women.
Thanks to feminism, the definition of a hate crime now includes sex-specific crimes (both to women and to men).
So what? They've expanded the definition of what constitutes a hate crime? What does that accomplish?
It's helped shatter sex/ gender/ orientation stereotypes, such as how men need to be macho and alpha and the breadwinner and can't be gay or androgynous.
And this is the problem. If you're telling men that they don't have to be masculine, you're not doing them any favors. Men should strive to be masculine.
And the list goes on and on and on. You seem to think that only the new-age extreme feminists (a very, very tiny minority who wish to kick down men to make women feel better) are real feminists, whereas you ignore people like Susan B. Anthony, Gloria Steinem, Barbara Walters, Maya Angelou, and many other important historical women (and especially nowadays, men too!).
This is a no true scotsman fallacy. How influential are these women compared to say, Anita Sarkeesian ( who recently sat in front of the UN asking them to censor her critics ), Julie Bindel, Jessica Valenti, Rebecca Watson, and the AAUW? Where are the non-crazy feminists which have as much influence as these?
I'm not ignoring Steinhem. What has she done for men? How is she any different from the feminists I listed?
Consider the fact that the Canadian government indicted Gregory Allen Elliot for doing basically what I'm doing now, disagreeing with feminsts online. Is the Canadian government part of this extremist minority?
Take objectification for example, which states that when a man is attracted to a womans body, he is dehumanizing her in his mind. Feminist will typically talk about objectification like it is some sort of proved psychological mechanism with tons of evidence to support it. It isn't.
Both men and women objectify each other. However, men tend to take far more inappropriate and dehumanizing action, such as catcalling, smacking a girl's butt, calling her inappropriate names, abusing someone, and raping someone. That all happens to men as well, but it also happens to women. And feminists have been fighting to protect everyone.
You're avoiding the argument. Objectification menas that if I see a women in a bikini in an advert, I dehumanize her in my mind. I'm objectifying her. This is simply not true, and there is zero evidence to support it.
The implication is that you should not be attracted to a womans body, but her personality. You should be ashamed of being attracted to that hot girl, and should not express this attraction.
That's not the implication. The implication is that you shouldn't only care about a person's body but also care about their mind and personality. That goes for all people, regardless of sex. You shouldn't disrespect or dislike any person just because you think they're ugly. You should care about substance, not about superficiality.
That's why we need feminism.
We need feminism like we need another hole in the head.
"You should care about substance, not about superficiality. " Why are you substituting attraction with care? They are not the same thing. If I see a hot girl I haven't talked to yet, and feel attracted to her, meaning I feel a desire to fuck her, I am objectifying her. I am doing something wrong and evil.
Tell me, do you chose what attracts you? Neither do I, and men should not be shamed for wanting to fuck someone they do not know. It's perfectly natural for a man to want to fuck a girl merely because she is hot.
Daxz, this isn't the right thread to post your anti-feminist rants. Other threads, such as the US Politics thread, might be more relevant (there are occasionally discussions on feminism and sexism there). Please post elsewhere, unless you want to talk about actual dating experiences and/ or advice.
On topic: Volband, just keep in mind that waiters/ bartenders regularly flirt or converse with their customers to gain tips, as it's their job/ how they get paid. That's not to say you shouldn't pursue or date a server, but just be mindful if it looks like they're mixing business with pleasure.
Abandon feminism is the best dating advice there is. Be unapologetically masculine. Don't apologize for your desires. Don't listen to feminists talking about "harassment", objectification or rape culture. Be strong, do not submit, and watch them panties drop.
On June 08 2016 21:51 Daxz wrote: Abandon feminism is the best dating advice there is. Be unapologetically masculine. Don't apologize for your desires. Don't listen to feminists talking about "harassment", objectification or rape culture. Be strong, do not submit, and watch them panties drop.
Through the lens of dating, finally...
Be masculine if you want, but it's more important to be yourself, and confident with yourself, regardless of where on the spectrum of cultural masculinity you technically fall.
Be emotionally strong, regardless of whether or not you're physically strong, but don't be afraid to open up, communicate, and share your feelings with individuals who you're comfortable with. A reasonable level of transparency can help both parties learn more about each other and become better friends and more intimate partners.
And of course, respect the girls (or guys) you're pursuing. You don't have to have formal conversations about harassment, objectification, and rape culture, but those are realities that many women face. Being aware, understanding, sensitive, and empathetic allow you to be both an appealing partner and just a good person overall.
On June 08 2016 21:51 Daxz wrote: Abandon feminism is the best dating advice there is. Be unapologetically masculine. Don't apologize for your desires. Don't listen to feminists talking about "harassment", objectification or rape culture. Be strong, do not submit, and watch them panties drop.
Through the lens of dating, finally...
Be masculine if you want, but it's more important to be yourself, and confident with yourself, regardless of where on the spectrum of cultural masculinity you technically fall.
"Cultural" masculinity? Masculine is masculine, regardless of culture. Masculinity is dominant, strong, assertive and confident.
Be emotionally strong, regardless of whether or not you're physically strong, but don't be afraid to open up, communicate, and share your feelings with individuals who you're comfortable with. A reasonable level of transparency can help both parties learn more about each other and become better friends and more intimate partners.
Just terrible advice. Open up and share your feelings? Yeah, that's not exactly a trait men who get laid a lot have.
And of course, respect the girls (or guys) you're pursuing. You don't have to have formal conversations about harassment, objectification, and rape culture, but those are realities that many women face. Being aware, understanding, sensitive, and empathetic allow you to be both an appealing partner and just a good person overall.
No, those are not realities at all. They are myths. Sure a lot of women experience being hit on by men they consider unattractive, but this is not "harassment", and I have zero sympathy for women who complain about "unwanted sexual attention", which is the offical feminist definition of harassment.
Being sensitive and emotional will get you nowhere. Be a fucking man.
Do you honestly think that physiological differences in, let's take the most basic masculine hormone ever: testosteron, don't account for anything? A man who grows less facial hair, who is smaller, who is less mascular by default already is de-masculinized (not a word, but you get my meaning) by simply being around his bigger, hairier, stronger peers. He has to either: overcompensate (by being louder, acting more badass than his peers) or he can accept himself (or already be fine with how he is, without going through some kind of acceptence process) and be less archetype masculine, where his confidence (which is honestly the most important trait not only in dating, but human interaction in general) will pull him through. You seem to think in binaries where its basic biology that implies the normal tendencies we see in this modern world that are finally being accepted, like sexual/gender fluidity. It's why dating can be such a hassle (Do you prefer dependent, or independent women? Shy or outgoing? Cynical or naive? Conformist or anti-establishment? The funny thing is between all these polarities, there's a quasi infinite middle grounds. The one thing modern society is starting to do well (or at least understand), is acknowledging the innate difference our biology give us and the acceptance of you being able to be yourself, no matter what your gender, ethnicity, cultural background, sexual preference or intellect might be.
Edit: You seem to be brainwashed with what masculinity for you actually means. For some women it means one thing, for other women it might mean a bunch of things, for others it might not even be anything you've described at all. So fuck you for trying to push people into little boxes.
How long have you tried? If I take myself as an example, I kinda tried online dating half hearted, and I had semi-success, but nothing to write home about. Everyone I met wasn't long term potential. Everytime I go out, I never met someone, didn't even care to talk to women actually, just focused on having a good time. I eventually stopped caring about dating someone, didn't care about getting a girlfriend. And then she just basically dropped into my lap lol. I've been together with this sweet girl for 5 months now Never say you're not capable of being dating material, there's an extreme amount of diversity on this planet. You're underestimating yourself and your surroundings (unless you live in one of those villages where everyone knows eachother )
But the third time doesn't specifiy how long you've been busy trying to message other people. How many women have you messaged? I'm also pretty sure people tend to take a while to get some traction with (online) dating, which might seem discouraging at the start, but just like anything, it takes time to get used to and even skilled at it. If I may offer advice on my limited experience: just do it as some kind of sidethingy, advance on it when you see/find opportunities and keep doing your daily thing. I think this is better than declaring yourself as undate-able at least. I'm pretty sure Lemon/Igne might have a different take on this though haha
On June 08 2016 23:51 plasmidghost wrote: >ask her what she wants out of this site
From my experience this is generally a shit question unless you know how to handle the answer. You: "So what are you after on Tinder?" Her: "Nothing really." Then you think. Wow, she is being dishonest, doesn't know what she wants.
It's completely wrong to think like this and I am not even sure what answer you would have liked to hear. Do tell me, what would you like her to answer on "So what are you after on this site?".
She just doesn't want to say "I'm just looking for a fuck buddy/relationship.". Don't just ask questions without some kind of direction. The only reason you should ever ask what she wants from the site in my opinion is if you want to find out if she is interested in something serious or not. Assume everyone is on a dating site to fuck unless they state otherwise.
On June 08 2016 23:34 Uldridge wrote: LOL dis guy.
Do you honestly think that physiological differences in, let's take the most basic masculine hormone ever: testosteron, don't account for anything? A man who grows less facial hair, who is smaller, who is less mascular by default already is de-masculinized (not a word, but you get my meaning) by simply being around his bigger, hairier, stronger peers. He has to either: overcompensate (by being louder, acting more badass than his peers) or he can accept himself (or already be fine with how he is, without going through some kind of acceptence process) and be less archetype masculine, where his confidence (which is honestly the most important trait not only in dating, but human interaction in general) will pull him through. You seem to think in binaries where its basic biology that implies the normal tendencies we see in this modern world that are finally being accepted, like sexual/gender fluidity. It's why dating can be such a hassle (Do you prefer dependent, or independent women? Shy or outgoing? Cynical or naive? Conformist or anti-establishment? The funny thing is between all these polarities, there's a quasi infinite middle grounds. The one thing modern society is starting to do well (or at least understand), is acknowledging the innate difference our biology give us and the acceptance of you being able to be yourself, no matter what your gender, ethnicity, cultural background, sexual preference or intellect might be.
Edit: You seem to be brainwashed with what masculinity for you actually means. For some women it means one thing, for other women it might mean a bunch of things, for others it might not even be anything you've described at all. So fuck you for trying to push people into little boxes.
Was this directed at me? The first paragraph is really poorly written and hard to parse. I'm not sure what point your trying to make.
The second paragraph is easier to understand. You seem to think that masculinity is subjective? I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume the point you're trying to make is that different women are attracted to different things. This is true to a certain extent, but what women are attracted to is not as arbitrary as you seem to think.
Consider this; are you attracted to older women? Probably not, very few men are. Women on the other hand can be attracted to older men. Why do you think this is?
You want to be a submissive, sensitive and emotional man? Fine by me. I'm not judging, but if the goal is to be successful with women, these arent qualities you want.
On June 08 2016 21:51 Daxz wrote: Abandon feminism is the best dating advice there is. Be unapologetically masculine. Don't apologize for your desires. Don't listen to feminists talking about "harassment", objectification or rape culture. Be strong, do not submit, and watch them panties drop.
Through the lens of dating, finally...
Be masculine if you want, but it's more important to be yourself, and confident with yourself, regardless of where on the spectrum of cultural masculinity you technically fall.
"Cultural" masculinity? Masculine is masculine, regardless of culture. Masculinity is dominant, strong, assertive and confident.
Gender/ masculinity/ femininity is a social and cultural construct, by definition. That's what I'm referring to. What is considered manly or girly in one place isn't necessarily the same as in another. Different families, nationalities, and environments may perceive things differently. Being confident doesn't mean you're necessarily being manly, but what's important is that you are confident. Women should be confident too. Talking about being "dominant" (and the other things you've been mentioning) is getting you dangerously close to talking about being "alpha", which is banned nonsense in this thread (see the banner atop the page), so be careful. Also keep in mind: "3) Any misogynistic bullshit, including discussion about rape culture." when you say things like: "Don't listen to feminists talking about "harassment", objectification or rape culture."
Be emotionally strong, regardless of whether or not you're physically strong, but don't be afraid to open up, communicate, and share your feelings with individuals who you're comfortable with. A reasonable level of transparency can help both parties learn more about each other and become better friends and more intimate partners.
Just terrible advice. Open up and share your feelings? Yeah, that's not exactly a trait men who get laid a lot have.
Again, I don't think you understand the purpose of this dating thread. It's not a PUA discussion board. It's not Ten Easy Steps To Getting Laid. I'm not sure how it's really possible to have a meaningful, intimate dating relationship with someone if you don't communicate and open up to each other, but I'm willing to hear you explain your rationale. Please elaborate on how you can have a loving, happy, and substantive relationship if you never open up or share feelings.
And of course, respect the girls (or guys) you're pursuing. You don't have to have formal conversations about harassment, objectification, and rape culture, but those are realities that many women face. Being aware, understanding, sensitive, and empathetic allow you to be both an appealing partner and just a good person overall.
No, those are not realities at all. They are myths. Sure a lot of women experience being hit on by men they consider unattractive, but this is not "harassment", and I have zero sympathy for women who complain about "unwanted sexual attention", which is the offical feminist definition of harassment.
Being sensitive and emotional will get you nowhere. Be a fucking man.
Can you please share your experiences (successful or otherwise) in the dating scene? Do you date a lot? Online dating? Are you in a relationship/ married/ single? I'm curious as to where you're coming from, given your very... interesting... suggestions.
You want to be a submissive, sensitive and emotional man? Fine by me. I'm not judging, but if the goal is to be successful with women, these arent qualities you want.
Why do you consistently group all women together and assume that none of them want someone who's sensitive? You're demonstrably wrong, but I'm curious as to where you're coming from.
Keep in mind we're talking about dating women, not just having meaningless flings and getting laid.
EPT
)
