Message Font: Serif | Sans-Serif
 
No. of Recommendations: 0
I hope you know, once again, that I wouldn't do this for just anybody, as this stuff is highly prized intellectual property, but I really want to see you meet a nice girl and if I could help you by sharing my schtick, well that would just warm my cockles.

So here is some food for thought. I've gone through my emails and these are the posts that I was able to find, in roughly chronological order. You are free to C&P these in part or in their entirety, but just remember that you're not me so you can't really pull it off. All of these garnered replies and some of them got me some ankle.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
The earliest one I could find. This one attracted, obviously, cat people.

-----

2 cats seek female companions - 27 (alameda)

We are two young, attractive, tabby kittens, in great shape. We clean
each other and wrestle to keep ourselves trained for a fight, otherwise
we are very well-behaved. We are looking for fun people to play with.

Included is a human owner, 6'1", 175 lbs, also in great shape. He is
very friendly and likes to play with us. Sometimes he gives us tuna
fish, the good stuff that isn't all red with bone bits in it. He might
want to take you somewhere without us, but we have a very open
relationship. We think you won't mind him as he is generally a good guy.
Please make contact with him directly via this message (our typing
skills aren't so good). Hope to hear from you!
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
I dated a girl for a couplefour weeks from this one.

-----

Transplant

I moved to NYC from California two weeks ago. One island to another.
I've almost gotten mugged already! I swear I'll be able to write a
book about this city. Anyway, I'm interested in meeting pretty much
everyone, but more specifically I'd like to, you know, go out with
some chicks. I was at a party last week and someone told me it is very
hard to date in Manhattan. "All the good ones are taken," she said. I
wanted to tell her that that's true everywhere but instead I just
said, "hmm." I strongly suspect that some good ones are not taken,
it's just a matter of finding them and, when I do, not acting like
some tool who hasn't gotten laid in a month.

So in a desperate attempt not to sleep with my roommate, because that
would be just wrong, not to mention a very dangerous idea, I am
posting this ad on craigslist.

Here are some pictures of my sister and me. I included a baby pic
because I stopped being photogenic after age 10. So she got the looks.
I got the brains and I'm pretty OK with that most of the time. Write
to me and tell me where to go have fun on this island. We can go have
fun together! It'll be, like, a date, or something.

Please send a pic to save us both a lot of time and annoyance while we
exchange 20 emails where my only goal is to get you to send me a pic.
Thanks!
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I met several nice, healthy chicks from this one and made out with one of them but it never turned into anything.

-----

A Running Date

OK, this isn't so silly. I'm sure someone has thought of it before. A
date where I meet you and we go on a run together. Think of the
advantages:

-It increases the probability that we are both attractive people.

-It guarantees that we have at least ONE thing in common.

-It guarantees that we are both healthy and fit. You can't false
advertise a 5 mile run!

-We can show off our "personalities" without all the hassle of getting
dressed up in uncomfortable clothes.

-If we talk during the run, it will keep the pace at a good level.

-It has the proximity advantage of a movie, but unlike a movie, the
point is not to be quiet, sit still, and look straight ahead for 2
hours.

-Exercise generates endorphins that enhance social experience -- we're
more likely to have a good time!

-Sex is better after a run. I'm just sayin! (But you're not getting
any sex from me until you buy me dinner)

To spare you the time of replying (and me the let-down of unanswered
emails), here is my pic. Thank you for including yours in your reply.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I got a GF from this one. We dated for a few months. I just copied and pasted it directly from here:

http://boards.fool.com/Message.asp?mid=21663337
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
This one was fun

-----

Please Do Not Reply If

You are crazy. Please please please. I need no more crazy.

You speak daily or semi-daily with your ex. You'll just be using me.

You are looking for The One. I'll just be using you.

Your idea of getting to know someone is a 50 email exchange.

You don't like sushi. It will never work with us.

You're looking for a free night out. I'm poor and the last chick I dropped $80 on for drinks on a first date blew me off and didn't even have the courtesy to do it with a phone call, she txted me. So it's Dutch until I like you.

You don't like getting flowers. I'm a goober that way.

You haven't exercised in the past week. I'm picky that way.

You just want to have some casual sex. Actually, this one is OK but please make it clear in your email.

You are not prepared to send a pic. It's only fair.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
An early version of my office schtick.

-----

To Whom it May Concern

I would like to apply for the position of boyfriend, for which I believe I am very well qualified. In addition to having worked successfully in similar positions with several previous girlfriends, I am particularly well suited for this relationship because of my current physical conditioning and extensive recent dating experience. When I am not being a boyfriend, I also enjoy sushi, running, the gym, coffee, going to museums, drinking, and exploring New York City, where I recently relocated.

I am interested in learning more about this position. Please contact me at your earliest convenience to further discuss my qualifications. Thank you in advance for including a brief description and visual identification in your correspondence. Have a great day!
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
This one delivered as promised.

-----

Um, I just want to get laid.

I mean, let's face it. I could spend some time writing a few paragraphs about my interests, the kind of girl I'd like to meet, the great relationship I'd like to have, the marriage that would theoretically follow, and the beautiful babies we could make together. But honestly, every time I've done that here on craigslist, I meet with these girls and there's nothing there. She's not interested, I'm not interested, we have a banal conversation about the weather and never see each other again. It's just not very exciting. I think there's too much pressure to date when all I really wanted to do was get laid in the first place.

So I've tried the friendship route, now I'd like to try the sex route. I'd like to find someone to form a good, solid sexual foundation with, in the hopes that maybe it could develop into a friendship and, who knows, maybe a relationship. Ass backwards? Maybe, but I'm sure stranger things have happened. And don't get me wrong – I love a good, fiery conversation over drinks. It makes the sex all that much more satisfying.

I'm not exactly suggesting a let's-meet-a-stranger-and-go-fcuk-right-away sort of thing, though I could see that being kind of cool and exciting. Oh wait, that's actually exactly what I'm suggesting. I could see that being kind of cool and exciting.

Please do us both a favor and send a recent pic, or, at the very least, a pic of your hotter days so I can have that in my mind's eye when we're snogging drunkenly at the bar. Oh, and don't be older than 35 or weigh more than me. I'm 28, 6'1", 175, charming, funny, devilishly handsome, and can hardly be blamed for trying this out when drinking until 4 and going to all night diners has resulted in nothing but drunk girls trying to take me to the bathroom for some good times. I probably would have, but it was a really filthy bathroom.

Oh, and hey - thanks for using craigslist!

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
I met some nice girls from this one but none of them developed into anything.

-----

Hi. I am moving to Park Slope from the UWS next month and I'm looking for someone fun with whom to go out and do stuff. Fun stuff, like the park and sushi and bars and whatever else it is that you people do in Brooklyn. Bowling and mini-golf and Cony Island and things? I don't know. That's why I need you.

I have a boring desk job that pays well, brown hair, kinda greenish eyes and a propensity for wearing hats. I'm 6'1" and 180 with a ginormous, rapidly ballooning gut that's resulting from me taking the
aforementioned boring desk job and not being able to work out like a male model 5 times a week for 3 hours a day anymore. I am not at all insecure about this.

Please be a good conversationalist, cute in both form and function, athletic enough to run 3 miles, taller than 5'3", younger than 27, and jewish, in order of importance.

Thank you for sending a pic so I can see who I'm talking to. I have included a representative sample of myself through the ages. I'm sorry if you find my baby pictures to be orders of magnitude cuter than my current self. I'm just doing my best with the materials I was given.

Oh and hey, thanks for using Craigslist!
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
My most recent one, this is the best one in terms of the quality of respondants.

-----

Girlfriend Sought

There is an exciting new opportunity opening in the Park Slope area. We are actively seeking qualified applicants for the position of Girlfriend. Job duties will include sushi outings, movies in theaters and on-site, walks in the park and other seasonal outdoor activities such as running, beach-going, skiing, and various other activities TBD. Some travel may be required.

The successful applicant will:

Be located in or around Park Slope;
Possess outstanding conversational and other interpersonal communication skills;
Be physically fit as this reslationship will involve occasional strenuous activity;
Be a motivated, engaging and engaged person with a demonstrated track record of success in other areas of life.

No management experience is necessary! This is a great chance to get in on the ground floor of an amazing venture!

As this position will involve interfacing directly with the client, a representative sample of your personal appearance is requested with your cover letter. Please apply to the principal directly by responding to this post. No agencies, please! Serious inquiries only.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
You just don't get it, do ya? You don't.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 9
You just don't get it, do ya? You don't.


The results speak for themselves, bitterboy.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
You just don't get it, do ya? You don't.


The results speak for themselves, bitterboy.
---

What, you're single and alone? Still?
A catch like you?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
You just don't get it, do ya? You don't.

---

The results speak for themselves, bitterboy.

---

What, you're single and alone? Still?
A catch like you?

---

I can't help it if I'm picky.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I can't help it if I'm picky.

Too bad they do the picking, huh?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
I can't help it if I'm picky.

---

Too bad they do the picking, huh?

---

You just don't get it, do ya? You don't.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I can't help it if I'm picky.

---

Too bad they do the picking, huh?

---

You just don't get it, do ya? You don't.

---

Yes, yes I do.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I can't help it if I'm picky.

---

Too bad they do the picking, huh?

---

You just don't get it, do ya? You don't.

---

Yes, yes I do.

---

I can't help it if I'm picky.

---

Too bad they do the picking, huh?

---

You just don't get it, do ya? You don't.

---

Yes, yes I do.
I can't help it if I'm picky.

---

Too bad they do the picking, huh?

---

You just don't get it, do ya? You don't.

---

Yes, yes I do.

---

What, you're single and alone? Still?
A catch like you?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
crap.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
You just don't get it, do ya? You don't.

---

The results speak for themselves, bitterboy.

---

What, you're single and alone? Still?
A catch like you?

---

I can't help it if I'm picky.

---

Neither can they.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
Waffle could have about 20 girlfriends by now if he wanted, but they keep failing the test.

He seduces them, and then dumps them for being easy.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
He seduces them, and then dumps them for being easy.

That's nice of you to humor him.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
Whoa. Using the words "Waffle" and "Seduce" in the same sentence made me LOL a little.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Waffle could have about 20 girlfriends by now if he wanted, but they keep failing the test.

He seduces them, and then dumps them for being easy.

---

I think I see the problem.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Waffle could have about 20 girlfriends by now if he wanted, but they keep failing the test.

He seduces them, and then dumps them for being easy.


THANK you.

One day I'll meet a girl who annoyingly refuses my advances for months, and forces me to do stupid goobery things while I pine away. I may have hung out with her last night, actually.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
One day I'll meet a girl who annoyingly refuses my advances for months, and forces me to do stupid goobery things while I pine away.

So the thought that they help you when they like you is entirely foreign.

You'll go far.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
So the thought that they help you when they like you is entirely foreign.

You'll go far.


I think your idea of them helping me and my idea of them helping me is different, that's all.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Thanks again, Waffle. I don't know if I'll use any of these, but they were fun to read!
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Make your own, just keep it fun.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Make your own, just keep it fun.

I'm still tempted to fall back on basically how my Match profile is.

"I'm loyal, blah, blah, blah..."

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I'm still tempted to fall back on basically how my Match profile is.

Dare to be different.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I'm still tempted to fall back on basically how my Match profile is.

Dare to be different.


I'm trying.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 4
I'm still tempted to fall back on basically how my Match profile is.

"I'm loyal, blah, blah, blah..."


Erik, no offense, but your match profile was depressing.

6
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Erik, no offense, but your match profile was depressing.

6


I know. I'm still in the process of updating it...
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0

I know. I'm still in the process of updating it...


Think Less Defensive.

6
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I know. I'm still in the process of updating it...

Think Less Defensive.

6


So don't say, "I'm loyal...", etc?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I know. I'm still in the process of updating it...

Think Less Defensive.


Think the less said the better.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
"Think the less said the better."
----------

Not a bad Koan.

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Think the less said the better.

That's my motto.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Think the less said the better.

That's my motto.


That's what?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Think the less said the better.

That's my motto.

That's what?


Dude.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Think the less said the better.

That's my motto.

That's what?

Dude.

Some motto when you go telling everyone what it is.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Some motto when you go telling everyone what it is.

I don't think that's a bad thing.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
I don't think that's a bad thing.

I didn't say it was.

The mob would never give you the nickname, Erik "Tight Lips".
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
So don't say, "I'm loyal...", etc?


I dunno, your whole attitude in that profile was like, you're gonna reject me you're gonna reject me please don't reject me. Just try to get in a positive head space and then write.

6
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I dunno, your whole attitude in that profile was like, you're gonna reject me you're gonna reject me please don't reject me. Just try to get in a positive head space and then write.

6


$500 mil.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
The mob would never give you the nickname, Erik "Tight Lips".

I don't think I want to be associated with the mob.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I dunno, your whole attitude in that profile was like, you're gonna reject me you're gonna reject me please don't reject me. Just try to get in a positive head space and then write.

6


Crap. I didn't think I was THAT negative. Then again, I'm not a woman. Maybe I'll get drunk this weekend and update it while listening to some upbeat music...
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
update it while listening to some upbeat music...

---

like what?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
update it while listening to some upbeat music...

---

like what?

---

Tool.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
update it while listening to some upbeat music...

---

like what?


Wagner.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
update it while listening to some upbeat music...

---

like what?

---

Tool.


No need to be meen.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
"I dunno, your whole attitude in that profile was like, you're gonna reject me you're gonna reject me please don't reject me. Just try to get in a positive head space and then write."

6
---------

Heads up to this good councel, Erik

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Ouch, waffle.

& just today I was thinking how kind hearted that you took the time to post all your scrolling tips for Erik.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3

Crap. I didn't think I was THAT negative. Then again, I'm not a woman. Maybe I'll get drunk this weekend and update it while listening to some upbeat music...

*********************************************

It's part of the "game." Women say they want honesty but they really don't. So when you are honest you get penalized. The biological imperative means that women strive to obtain the alpha male (best genes/chances of reproductive success). If you are honest in the sense of exposing any insecurities, then you are not alpha male material. Despite the b.s. that women claim they adhere to, in reality they are almost purely hormonally driven. That's why you can't understand them and they're impossible to deal with.

As a man, Erik, you're trying to be logical. You say to yourself: "Hmm...the kind of woman I like--intelligent, articulate--says she wants to be with an honest man who doesn't play games." That's what they say, but that's not what they mean. What they mean is they do want to be gamed, but in such a way that they can pretend that they don't know about the game or that they are not willing participants in the game.

This is why with many women, "yes" means "no," and "no" means "yes."

You would have better results by posting an ad with your picture showing yourself with toussled hair, a three day growth of beard, and an arrogant smirk on your face. The text should say something like:

"Ladies, if you're looking for a sensitive nice guy, look elsewhere. I'm no bad boy but I'm no door mat either. Let's be real, have a good time, and see where things lead. I have been called handsome and if I like the pic that you e-mail to me, I might even be willing to shave for you."
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
Ouch, waffle.

& just today I was thinking how kind hearted that you took the time to post all your scrolling tips for Erik.


Tool is the name of a metal band. Classifying them as upbeat was sarcasm.

waffle was being funny.

cd
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Ouch, waffle.

& just today I was thinking how kind hearted that you took the time to post all your scrolling tips for Erik.


Tool is the name of a rock band, josephwithnumbers.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Tool is the name of a metal band. Classifying them as upbeat was sarcasm.

waffle was being funny.

cd


To be fair, it wouldn't have been as funny if it weren't a double entendre.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
The results speak for themselves...

So you don't want to find a anything long term thing just continuously prove your CraigsList prowess
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
<<So you don't want to find a anything long term thing just continuously prove your CraigsList prowess >>


He's dating, not hunting. What's wrong with that?

Sometimes it seems that we forget not everyone who dates is looking for either a superficial roll in the hay OR a lifetime partner. Frankly, I enjoy just having an interesting dinner companion who can carry on a conversation and make me laugh. I like it when they go home later.

;-D
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
So you don't want to find a anything long term thing just continuously prove your CraigsList prowess


Tell us of your success story, oh watery one.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
"Tool is the name of a metal band. Classifying them as upbeat was sarcasm.
waffle was being funny."

cd
---------

Yes I got all that the first time through.

I was teasing Waffle a little.

Thanks anyway.

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 8
"Ladies, if you're looking for a sensitive nice guy, look elsewhere. I'm no bad boy but I'm no door mat either. Let's be real, have a good time, and see where things lead. I have been called handsome and if I like the pic that you e-mail to me, I might even be willing to shave for you."

What you fail to understand (among other things) is that "sensitive and nice" is not a synonym for "doormat". They are two entirely different animals.

Water seeks it's own level.

You revere "the game" because you're a game player and you attract game players for which you have contempt. It's a nasty cycle.

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Tell us of your success story, oh watery one.

Well, I am getting married at the end of Dec to a woman I meet on eHarmony. Of course I am sure there are those who will not consider getting married a success...
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Well, I am getting married at the end of Dec to a woman I meet on eHarmony. Of course I am sure there are those who will not consider getting married a success...


I consider it a success. How about some details? Everybody loves a good story. Also, did you find eHarmony worth the $50 a month? I filled out their 10 page evaluation a while back but couldn't stomach the cost.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
"You revere "the game" because you're a game player and you attract game players for which you have contempt. It's a nasty cycle."

-----------

"Players always love you cause they're playing"

old Fleetwood Mac

It's also very true.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Don't hate the player, hate the game.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Oops:

OCD "only" rather than always
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Also, did you find eHarmony worth the $50 a month?

I'm going out on a limb here, but I think he'll answer yes.

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I'm going out on a limb here, but I think he'll answer yes.


Oh, well, yeah. I guess I'm just wondering how long it took and how much $ he laid out before finding his wife.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
I consider it a success.
Thanks
How about some details? Everybody loves a good story. Also, did you find eHarmony worth the $50 a month? I filled out their 10 page evaluation a while back but couldn't stomach the cost.

Not a good story teller. Now I think the $50 (I think it was a little less when I was paying) bucks was worth it, but I wasn't so sure in the beginning. I was only going to do it for a month but had a few dates that were fun that didn't lead to any big romance so being new where I lived I went one more month. Oddly or not, I was the first guy my fiancé meet from the site so she probably would speak very high of it. However I do have a friend in CO. who signed up and she is into hiking, concerts, outdoorsy kinda girl, and every guy she either meet or corresponded with didn't seem to like any of that. So I guess there is a good bit of luck involved too.

Oh and I'll save some of the SmartA.. the time

Not a good story teller.

True.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
"Players always love you cause they're playing"

old Fleetwood Mac


Thunder only happens when it's raining
Players only love you when they're playing

from DREAMS, Fleetwood Mac

Andrea
stickler for accuracy in song lyrics
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Don't hate the player, hate the game.

Is this a waffleism?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Thanks for lyrics accuracy.

I knew something was not quite right.

In any event, applies to the thread I should think.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Don't hate the player, hate the game.

---

Is this a waffleism?

---

No, no it isn't.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
No, no it isn't.

Sounds waffleismish to me.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Sounds waffleismish to me.


You may attribute it to me if you like.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
He's dating, not hunting. What's wrong with that?

Sometimes it seems that we forget not everyone who dates is looking for either a superficial roll in the hay OR a lifetime partner. Frankly, I enjoy just having an interesting dinner companion who can carry on a conversation and make me laugh. I like it when they go home later.

;-D

****************************

You see? You see? I told you so.

Here's a lady who wants to have it "both ways." She says she's not looking for 1) casual sex NOR 2) a lifetime partner. She entirely leaves out option 3), which is an LTR (including "benefits) and with the possibility of leading to a "lifetime" relationship.

She states her real objective: a free dinner, with her option of having sex, or not, if she likes the guy.

Then, to top it off, she "winks" at the end, so that way, she can do anything she wants, or not do anything she wants. If you object, or are confused, she will say, "Didn't you see the wink? That means I was only joking."

On the other hand, if you go out with her for "dinner," and it leads to something else, but then after a few dates you dump her, she will say that she never ruled a serious relationship out, and that you are a big meany for taking advantage of her (i.e. you turned the tables on her.)

This is a pretty illuminating post. It reveals the fundamental insincerity and dishonesty of women.

The bottom line, ladies, is that you are ALL looking for a "lifetime partner," ALL THE TIME. It is a biological and sociological imperative. [Note, I did not say you are looking for ANY AVAILABLE lifetime partner.]

Typically, when a woman "gets serious" and stops playing games with all this, she will clearly advertise that she is looking for a husband. She will eventually lower her unrealistic expectations concerning available men [this is called "settling" by some] and usually will find someone of roughly comparable quality who has also lost the rose-colored glasses and who also has actually decided that they want to get married.

Then they will.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
You may attribute it to me if you like.

It's not like I was planning on quoting you.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
You may attribute it to me if you like.

---

It's not like I was planning on quoting you.

---

It's a good quote.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
It's a good quote.

Eh.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
It's a good quote.

Eh.


If you prefer: Don't hold it against a person for operating in a system where he has observed that certain actions produce better results than others.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
What you fail to understand (among other things) is that "sensitive and nice" is not a synonym for "doormat". They are two entirely different animals.

Water seeks it's own level.

You revere "the game" because you're a game player and you attract game players for which you have contempt. It's a nasty cycle.


***************************

In the world of relationships, "sensitive"/"nice"--when applied to a guy = "doormat." I am surprised you claim to be totally unaware of this.

Not only do you deny what everyone knows to be true, you claim there is no possible "overlap"--they are "entirely different animals".

Isn't it true that many guys who believe themselves to be "nice" and "sensitive" take it WAY too far and are actually doormats? And as a result, they are unattractive to women?

I am not playing this "game", I am a critic of it. I am Mr. Blunt. I say exactly what I mean. As a consequence, I have little or no "game," and I have never really had much if any "game." I have never posted an ad on Craigs List or any other website, nor do I have any intention [nor need] to do so. However, if I were going to post an ad, my ad would say little or nothing about myself, but rather, it would be a list of characteristics that I was seeking in the other person.

In other words, it would be like a want ad. When an employer posts a want ad, do they put information about themselves in the ad? No. They put in a list of their REQUIREMENTS applicable to the person responding to the ad.

So, the ad should describe what you want, and say almost nothing about yourself.

The whole idea of meeting people via internet and other methods of non-personal contact is filled with landmines. You will have far too many false positives and far too many false negatives, because people ultimately "relate" to each other based on personal contact: sight, smell, hearing, touch, etc.

I think someone who is having trouble dating or establishing relationships needs, most of all, to get out from behind the keyboard and actually practice meeting REAL people and simply interacting with them. All kinds of people. Just to get comfortable with REAL PEOPLE.

This whole notion of wasting a lot of one's time attempting to perfect an internent dating ad is completely counterproductive. You will have more luck meeting someone that you might actually like, and who might actually like you, if you devote 99% of your time to getting out and meeting REAL LIVE PEOPLE, and doing lots of actual social activities.

It's hard to meet people when you are sitting in your house pecking away at your keyboard all the time.

It's a numbers game. It's all a numbers game. If you are the shy intellectual guy and perhaps 1 out of 100 women might be compatible with you, then the sooner you get through those 100 women, the closer you will be to your objective. The only way to meet women [or men] is to actually MEET THEM.

In actuality, however, even the most hopeless nerd has a much better than one percent chance. The problem with the typical hopeless nerd is that, due to insecurity, HE NEVER EVEN TRIES. He never even tries to strike up a conversation with a pretty girl that he happens to meet in public for some reason or other.

I would wager that if skybluewater [just as an example] made himself reasonably presentable went to some bar tonight, and tried to interact with ten women at random, he would almost certainly get at least one phone number if not actually set up a date for Saturday night. And more likely, he would never get through ten women because probably he would find someone interesting who was mutually interested in him long before that. It is also more than possible that he could get laid tonight if he simply tried.

The great barrier is simply getting the shoulder off the bat and overcoming the fear and shyness.



Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 6
Here's a lady who wants to have it "both ways." She says she's not looking for 1) casual sex NOR 2) a lifetime partner. She entirely leaves out option 3), which is an LTR (including "benefits) and with the possibility of leading to a "lifetime" relationship.

She states her real objective: a free dinner, with her option of having sex, or not, if she likes the guy.


Did I miss the part where she expects her date to pay for her dinner?

And why wouldn't having sex be her "option", EVEN IF, GOD FORBID, the poor sad sack does pay?

The rest of your post just underscores your basic dislike and distrust of women, most likely because you aren't likeable or trustworthy yourself.




Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Don't hold it against a person for operating in a system where he has observed that certain actions produce better results than others.

The only thing I "hold against a person", if you want to phrase it that way, is not looking inside themselves to see why they are attracting or are attracted to a particular type of person.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 5
In the world of relationships, "sensitive"/"nice"--when applied to a guy = "doormat." I am surprised you claim to be totally unaware of this.

It's not that I am unaware that this is assumed. It's just bogus.

Isn't it true that many guys who believe themselves to be "nice" and "sensitive" take it WAY too far and are actually doormats? And as a result, they are unattractive to women?

Some guys who in actuality ARE doormats think, erroneously, that they are indeed "nice" and/or "sensitive" when they are just doormats. Doormats, in my experience, are not particularly nice or sensitive, they just lack a sense of self. Doormats are indeed unattractive to women. I think they are equally unattractive to men.

The rest of your post just sounds angry and I have no response except to suggest you get some counseling.




Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0

Well, I am getting married at the end of Dec to a woman I meet on eHarmony. Of course I am sure there are those who will not consider getting married a success...

**********************

Congratulations!

So, does that guy Dr. Neal Clark Warren or whatever his name is, get a commission or something? Like a real estate broker?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
Oh, well, yeah. I guess I'm just wondering how long it took and how much $ he laid out before finding his wife.

Not as much money it will take to get rid of her. Getting married is rather easy, staying married is the challenge.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
The bottom line, ladies, is that you are ALL looking for a "lifetime partner," ALL THE TIME. It is a biological and sociological imperative.

What fun is this?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
The great barrier is simply getting the shoulder off the bat and overcoming the fear and shyness.

Shyness is a fear of rejection and according to you, rejection will occur 99 times out of 100.

Play the odds.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Did I miss the part where she expects her date to pay for her dinner?

And why wouldn't having sex be her "option", EVEN IF, GOD FORBID, the poor sad sack does pay?

The rest of your post just underscores your basic dislike and distrust of women, most likely because you aren't likeable or trustworthy yourself.

*******************************************


See, the woman's logic is completely busted by my male, superior, Mr. Spock-like analysis. So what we get is a personal attack rather than an actual defense of the position previously espoused.

As you can see, I certainly have at least proved my point that I have no "game" whatsoever because I am so honest and blunt. I was not trying in any way to curry favor with you, and you have reacted [as would any typical female] as a shrieking harpy.

It is so ingrained in your mentality that because you are a female, a male is obligated to curry to you to obtain your favors, that when you actually run into someone who challenges that sexist notion, you essentially "freak out."

So let me break down your latest completely irrational post with my Vulcan-like mind powers:

1. Your prior post did NOT say that the woman would pay for the dinner. Your current post does NOT say that the woman would, should, or ever will pay for the dinner. Deviously, you attack me for drawing a reasonable inference from what was left intentionally vague in your prior post [i.e. who pays for the dinner]. Yet, while attacking me with your current post, you FAIL TO ACTUALLY CLARIFY who pays for the dinner.

That all means that IT WAS your expectation that the man pays for the dinner, but you didn't want to state that "outright." I busted you for this, and rather than clarifying who pays for the dinner, you attack my reasonable inference but without actually demonstrating that my inference was incorrect.

2. Again, with the issue of the "option" of having sex, you respond emotionally but YOU DO NOT LOGICALLY REFUTE THE POINT I MADE. On the contrary, your response substantiates the point I made. The woman thinks that, because when she poops, gold coins supposedly come out of her back end, therefore, the decision of whether or not to have sex is totally HER "option." Actually, the more appropriate term is "whim." You are creatures of emotions, hormones, and whims--at least insofar as it pertains to how you interact in romantic/social/emotional relationships. [This is not at all about whether a woman can do the same kind of work as a man can, so don't try to pull that little switcheroo either.]

As I stated, and you confirmed, when in your original post you stated that the date would simply be for dinner, and would not include sex, you DID NOT REALLY MEAN THAT. You meant that there would not be sex UNLESS the woman changed the rules in the middle of the date and decided that there WOULD be sex. [At her sole option, of course.] Isn't that exactly what my point was? "No" doesn't always mean "no"? "Yes" doesn't always mean "yes"?

3. Oh, yes--now the victimized male who agrees to go out to this "dinner only" is a "sad sack," is he? Didn't you recently claim that the "nice"/"sensitive" guy is NOT a "doormat"? OK if you want to call that guy a "sad sack" rather than a "doormat", we can do that if you prefer. I think they're essentially expressing the same female attitude towards this guy. [Note: That's YOUR--the woman's--attitude towards the guy, not mine.]

4. By what leap of female, hormone-driven pure illogic did you come to the conclusion that I have a "basic dislike and distrust of women"? I was/am responding to YOUR post(s). Due to my admittedly utter and total lack of "game" [i.e. the lack of the ability/desire/need to agree with silly illogical statements by a woman solely in order to get into her pants], I challenged things that YOU posted.

In response, do you say that I'm somehow being unfair to YOU? [You can't because I'm not. Everything I've posted is logically irrefutable. ] No, in order to avoid defending the indefensible, you say that I "dislike and distrust women" as a class.

It IS true that I dislike women that I find unlikeable, and it IS true that I distrust women who I find to be untrustworthy.

I never claimed that subset was congruent with the set of ALL women, however.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 6
<<She states her real objective: a free dinner, with her option of having sex, or not, if she likes the guy. >>

I don't see anything in my post about who is paying for dinner. I am financially independent and have been for many years. I don't need to spend time with someone just to get a free meal. If I have dinner with someone, regardless of who pays/cooks, it's because I think they'd be interesting to spend time with.

<<On the other hand, if you go out with her for "dinner," and it leads to something else, but then after a few dates you dump her, she will say that she never ruled a serious relationship out, and that you are a big meany for taking advantage of her (i.e. you turned the tables on her.)>>

I don't get taken advantage of. If I decide that "dinner" leads to "something else" that's my decision. Being a grown up, I recognize that decisions have consequences. Intimacy has risks. I have no problem with that.

Assuming that "dumping me" didn't include deceit or unnecessary nastiness, I would have no reason to call anyone "a big meany". (I don't consider something to the effect of, "It's been fun, but this isn't working for me, have a nice life" to be unnecessary nastiness.)

I date - I don't hunt. I may not rule a serious relationship out, but I also don't rule it in. Some relationships have a shorter shelf life than others. That doesn't mean they aren't/weren't good relationships. As long as they haven't lied to me and they show a degree of kindess/politeness in their departure, I wish them well. (I have remained good friends with almost all my ex-boyfriends. I'm even friends with most of their current wives/girlfriends.) The only 2 exceptions are very early in my dating history.

This is a pretty illuminating post. It reveals the fundamental insincerity and dishonesty of women.

As opposed to the bitterness and paranoia of certain men??

<<The bottom line, ladies, is that you are ALL looking for a "lifetime partner," ALL THE TIME. It is a biological and sociological imperative. >>

Balderdash.

I do not now, nor have I ever had an overwhelming desire to be married or in a permanent relationship. I suppose if the survival of the species depended on my procreation, I would feel differently, but from what I can see, the world is not in danger of the human race dying out any time soon. At least not from a low birthrate.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 4
<<So let me break down your latest completely irrational post with my Vulcan-like mind powers:>>


No wonder Vulcans only mate once in 7 years.



(Incidentally, your "Vulcan-like mind" is attributing my original post to Andrea/Chaconne.)
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Some guys who in actuality ARE doormats think, erroneously, that they are indeed "nice" and/or "sensitive" when they are just doormats. Doormats, in my experience, are not particularly nice or sensitive, they just lack a sense of self. Doormats are indeed unattractive to women. I think they are equally unattractive to men.

Translated from hormone-driven, illogical "LadySpeak" into English, what you are really saying is:

"As the woman, I alone get to decide whether the male's attempts at being nice/sensitive should be accepted at face value, i.e., as a positive characteristic, or whether I will choose to view those attempts in a derogatory manner. Of course, being a woman, I'm NOT GOING TO TELL you what objective criteria, if any, exist for distinguishing between "nice guy" and "doormat", because there ARE NO objective criteria. If I get the "hots" for you, no matter how rude you may be, I will characterize you to my female friends as a "nice guy" rather than a "bad boy", because I don't want to admit that I'm turned on by "bad boys. And, if I don't happen to be physically attracted to you, I will use your "nice guy" qualities against you, because I don't want to admit that I'm dumping you due to a lack of primal sexual attraction."



The rest of your post just sounds angry and I have no response except to suggest you get some counseling.

Are you such a wimp that you intend to hide behind your criticism of the style of my post rather than attempting to logically refute its content?

Why do I need to get "counseling" because YOU are so illogical? Does every male who dares to disagree with you need "counseling"?

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 5
As you can see, I certainly have at least proved my point that I have no "game" whatsoever because I am so honest and blunt. I was not trying in any way to curry favor with you, and you have reacted [as would any typical female] as a shrieking harpy.

You haven't proved anything but that you're basically distrustful of women and fully expect them to try their deceitful ways on you. But you'll outfox them and win at their little game! Face it, you're a game player.

And who's shrieking?

1. Your prior post did NOT say that the woman would pay for the dinner. Your current post does NOT say that the woman would, should, or ever will pay for the dinner. Deviously, you attack me for drawing a reasonable inference from what was left intentionally vague in your prior post [i.e. who pays for the dinner]. Yet, while attacking me with your current post, you FAIL TO ACTUALLY CLARIFY who pays for the dinner.

That all means that IT WAS your expectation that the man pays for the dinner, but you didn't want to state that "outright." I busted you for this, and rather than clarifying who pays for the dinner, you attack my reasonable inference but without actually demonstrating that my inference was incorrect.


Dude, I didn't even post about dinner. Kasuma did. And it's really pretty funny that you think she left the who pays for dinner thing "intentionally vague".

Let me clarify MY post. Who pays for dinner is irrelevant. Period.

You didn't "bust" me for anything.

I will ignore some more of your rantings in "point" #2.

3. Oh, yes--now the victimized male who agrees to go out to this "dinner only" is a "sad sack," is he? Didn't you recently claim that the "nice"/"sensitive" guy is NOT a "doormat"? OK if you want to call that guy a "sad sack" rather than a "doormat", we can do that if you prefer. I think they're essentially expressing the same female attitude towards this guy. [Note: That's YOUR--the woman's--attitude towards the guy, not mine.]

I guess your super sharp Vulcanian mind can't wrap itself around the fact that it's you who thinks a guy who pays for dinner and doesn't get what he thinks he should get for paying is some kind of sad sack or doormat and I was being facetious. I would probably just think he was nice. Or maybe I would think that he expected me to put out. Or maybe his mama taught him to never let a woman pay. Depends on the guy.

4. By what leap of female, hormone-driven pure illogic did you come to the conclusion that I have a "basic dislike and distrust of women"? I was/am responding to YOUR post(s). Due to my admittedly utter and total lack of "game" [i.e. the lack of the ability/desire/need to agree with silly illogical statements by a woman solely in order to get into her pants], I challenged things that YOU posted.

Dude, you're hostile.

In response, do you say that I'm somehow being unfair to YOU? [You can't because I'm not. Everything I've posted is logically irrefutable. ] No, in order to avoid defending the indefensible, you say that I "dislike and distrust women" as a class.

Unfair to me? I don't see this as anything personal.







Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Translated from hormone-driven, illogical "LadySpeak" into English, what you are really saying is:

"As the woman, I alone get to decide whether the male's attempts at being nice/sensitive should be accepted at face value, i.e., as a positive characteristic, or whether I will choose to view those attempts in a derogatory manner. Of course, being a woman, I'm NOT GOING TO TELL you what objective criteria, if any, exist for distinguishing between "nice guy" and "doormat", because there ARE NO objective criteria. If I get the "hots" for you, no matter how rude you may be, I will characterize you to my female friends as a "nice guy" rather than a "bad boy", because I don't want to admit that I'm turned on by "bad boys. And, if I don't happen to be physically attracted to you, I will use your "nice guy" qualities against you, because I don't want to admit that I'm dumping you due to a lack of primal sexual attraction."


Really bad translation. Really.

Are you such a wimp that you intend to hide behind your criticism of the style of my post rather than attempting to logically refute its content?

Did I miss some of it's content? I must have dozed off.

Why do I need to get "counseling" because YOU are so illogical? Does every male who dares to disagree with you need "counseling"?

You're totally boring me now.




Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I don't see anything in my post about who is paying for dinner. I am financially independent and have been for many years. I don't need to spend time with someone just to get a free meal. If I have dinner with someone, regardless of who pays/cooks, it's because I think they'd be interesting to spend time with.

So who pays for dinnner? When was the last time you had a romantic interest in someone, and asked them out for dinner at a restaurant, as your treat? Without any quid pro quo expected by you? What percentage of the time does that happen? Expanding the inquiry to the realm of women in general, which is really what's at issue, how often do you think women in general actually invite men out to dinner and pay for it? [Try to be honest when you answer this, please. No feminist agitprop.]

Typically, women expect men to pay for dinner on "romantic" dates, because the man's willingness to do so indicates that he "likes" the woman. It's also part of the manipulative process by the woman--if the man pays for dinner, then the woman knows he's willing to do things to please her. And she can manipulate that.

Most women, if asked out on a first date by a man, with the man wanting to go "Dutch treat," would think the man to be "cheap" or strange. You may be different, but you would be the exception, not the rule.

I don't get taken advantage of. If I decide that "dinner" leads to "something else" that's my decision.

Right. My point, exactly. It's totally your choice, as the woman. But usually it's more of a "whim," not a "decision." And if things don't work out, the typical woman will find some way to blame it on the man. Again, you may be different, but that would be the exception, not the rule.



Being a grown up, I recognize that decisions have consequences. Intimacy has risks. I have no problem with that.

...Until some big hunk makes goo-goo eyes at you and your heart goes all a-flutter. Then the above statement of principle goes out the window.

Assuming that "dumping me" didn't include deceit or unnecessary nastiness, I would have no reason to call anyone "a big meany". (I don't consider something to the effect of, "It's been fun, but this isn't working for me, have a nice life" to be unnecessary nastiness.)

Interesting that you put "dumping me" in quotation marks, as if the very concept of your being the "dumpee" rather than the "dumper" is entirely alien to your imagination.

I date - I don't hunt.


Ma'am, please forgive me for saying this, but this statement is simply not truthful.


I may not rule a serious relationship out, but I also don't rule it in.

...In plain English, this means that you are looking for a serious relationship, but don't want to admit that. In case things don't work out, you want to pretend that the break-up didn't hurt you so badly, because you weren't "expecting" things to work out, anyway.

Maybe a better approach would be simple honesty with yourself and others. "I am looking for an LTR with marriage as the ultimate objective." You will certainly weed out the men who might be interesting temporary playthings [I'm thinking of a kitten with a ball of yarn] but who are without any real long-term relationship potential. Time wasted is time wasted, after all. If on the other hand, you are looking for some hot sex with no strings, you should be honest about that, too.


Some relationships have a shorter shelf life than others. That doesn't mean they aren't/weren't good relationships. As long as they haven't lied to me and they show a degree of kindess/politeness in their departure, I wish them well.

Again, the real issue is: what are you looking for, exactly, in a relationship? You need to ask for what you want, or you will likely not get it. You at least need to be honest with yourself about these issues, or you will simply waste your time in a succession of unsatisfactory relationships.

If it is your preference to have a series of casual relationships with various people, none of which lead to anything deeper, then of course that is your free choice. Most people however after a few of these types of relationships want something more than that.

Women, in particular, have biological imperatives that cannot be ignored. Child-bearing becomes more and more difficult and problematic in the mid to late 30's and certainly into the 40's it can be very difficult. There is perhaps a 20 year window of opportunity for a woman to get married and raise a family, i.e. let's say between ages 20 and 40. Most women do not consider marriage at such an early age and so the window of opportunity is shorter. Having children after 35 is markedly more difficult than when younger. So the more realistic window of opportunity is ages 25 - 35. That's not a whole lot of time to waste.

Of course, if you've already been married and/or had kids, these are not issues. In that event, you might want an LTR with someone who is more mature to see you through mid life and old age. Of course, after age 35, especially if you've already had children, your "marketability" goes down dramatically, and your choices of a potential mate go down markedly as well.

In sum, finding an unattached, reasonably attractive and physically and psychologically healthy, gainfully employed male, is not so easy as it seems. But I guess you are already aware of that.


(I have remained good friends with almost all my ex-boyfriends. I'm even friends with most of their current wives/girlfriends.) The only 2 exceptions are very early in my dating history.

It's nice that you have remained good friends with your exes, however, perhaps your energies would be put to better use by looking forward rather than backward.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
It's nice to know you think I'm exceptional.

I'm done with the discussion now.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0

It's part of the "game." Women say they want honesty but they really don't. So when you are honest you get penalized. The biological imperative means that women strive to obtain the alpha male (best genes/chances of reproductive success). If you are honest in the sense of exposing any insecurities, then you are not alpha male material. Despite the b.s. that women claim they adhere to, in reality they are almost purely hormonally driven. That's why you can't understand them and they're impossible to deal with.


Hey there, fella.

6
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 5
You see? You see? I told you so.

Here's a lady who wants to have it "both ways." She says she's not looking for 1) casual sex NOR 2) a lifetime partner. She entirely leaves out option 3), which is an LTR (including "benefits) and with the possibility of leading to a "lifetime" relationship.

She states her real objective: a free dinner, with her option of having sex, or not, if she likes the guy.

Then, to top it off, she "winks" at the end, so that way, she can do anything she wants, or not do anything she wants. If you object, or are confused, she will say, "Didn't you see the wink? That means I was only joking."

On the other hand, if you go out with her for "dinner," and it leads to something else, but then after a few dates you dump her, she will say that she never ruled a serious relationship out, and that you are a big meany for taking advantage of her (i.e. you turned the tables on her.)

This is a pretty illuminating post. It reveals the fundamental insincerity and dishonesty of women.

The bottom line, ladies, is that you are ALL looking for a "lifetime partner," ALL THE TIME. It is a biological and sociological imperative. [Note, I did not say you are looking for ANY AVAILABLE lifetime partner.]

Typically, when a woman "gets serious" and stops playing games with all this, she will clearly advertise that she is looking for a husband. She will eventually lower her unrealistic expectations concerning available men [this is called "settling" by some] and usually will find someone of roughly comparable quality who has also lost the rose-colored glasses and who also has actually decided that they want to get married.


It is SO sexy how you hate women. Let's get married.

6
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 6
Isn't it true that many guys who believe themselves to be "nice" and "sensitive" take it WAY too far and are actually doormats? And as a result, they are unattractive to women?

No. Most guys who believe themselves to be "nice" and "sensitive" are passive-agressive manipulators who become bitter not because they get taken advantage of but because their sexual tactics are inferior.

I would wager that if skybluewater [just as an example] made himself reasonably presentable went to some bar tonight, and tried to interact with ten women at random, he would almost certainly get at least one phone number if not actually set up a date for Saturday night. And more likely, he would never get through ten women because probably he would find someone interesting who was mutually interested in him long before that. It is also more than possible that he could get laid tonight if he simply tried.

We've tried that before, he could not talk to them. The current working hypothesis is that if he can get through some actual dates he may become more comfortable approaching strange women.

6
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
The bottom line, ladies, is that you are ALL looking for a "lifetime partner," ALL THE TIME. It is a biological and sociological imperative.

What fun is this?


My sentiments precisely.

6
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 5
1. Your prior post did NOT say that the woman would pay for the dinner. Your current post does NOT say that the woman would, should, or ever will pay for the dinner. Deviously, you attack me for drawing a reasonable inference from what was left intentionally vague in your prior post [i.e. who pays for the dinner]. Yet, while attacking me with your current post, you FAIL TO ACTUALLY CLARIFY who pays for the dinner.

Actually, it was someone else's post, so how would Chaconne know who, if anyone, the OP was assuming would pay for dinner?

The woman thinks that, because when she poops, gold coins supposedly come out of her back end, therefore, the decision of whether or not to have sex is totally HER "option."

Not true. I believe that, becase when I poop gold coins come out of my back end, you better stay away from my back end because that's MY MONEY, joker.

Really, are you trying to say that women should not be able to choose when and with whom they have sex? Is that your point here?

Oh, yes--now the victimized male who agrees to go out to this "dinner only" is a "sad sack," is he? Didn't you recently claim that the "nice"/"sensitive" guy is NOT a "doormat"? OK if you want to call that guy a "sad sack" rather than a "doormat", we can do that if you prefer. I think they're essentially expressing the same female attitude towards this guy. [Note: That's YOUR--the woman's--attitude towards the guy, not mine.]

Now you're just freaking out.

By what leap of female, hormone-driven pure illogic did you come to the conclusion that I have a "basic dislike and distrust of women"? I was/am responding to YOUR post(s). Due to my admittedly utter and total lack of "game" [i.e. the lack of the ability/desire/need to agree with silly illogical statements by a woman solely in order to get into her pants], I challenged things that YOU posted.

I'd go with foaming hatred, really. You say that women are dishonest, stupid, illogical, untrustworthy and inconsistent, that they are incapable of providing for themselves ("marriage is a social imperative") and that their bodies are yours for the taking. Is there anything, besides orifices, that you like or respect about women?

It IS true that I dislike women that I find unlikeable, and it IS true that I distrust women who I find to be untrustworthy.

I never claimed that subset was congruent with the set of ALL women, however.


You did, several times.

6





Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 5
"As the woman, I alone get to decide whether the male's attempts at being nice/sensitive should be accepted at face value, i.e., as a positive characteristic, or whether I will choose to view those attempts in a derogatory manner. Of course, being a woman, I'm NOT GOING TO TELL you what objective criteria, if any, exist for distinguishing between "nice guy" and "doormat", because there ARE NO objective criteria.

Nice guy: Hey babe, I really want to see Borat but if visiting your grandmother in the nursing home is that important to you, I can see the movie another time

Doormat: I don't care, whatever you wanna do

Nice guy: You cooked, let me do the dishes

Doormat: Don't move a muscle, I'll take care of everything


There are objective criteria. You wish there weren't so you could continue with the hatin', but there are. The nice guy is willing to 1. identify his partner's likes and dislikes and 2. compromise on his own likes and dislikes in order to form a more equal partnership. The doormat is either so lame he has no real likes or dislikes, which is creepy, or is so underhanded that he pretends to have none in order to give the impression of being a nice guy, which is dishonest.

6
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
"No. Most guys who believe themselves to be "nice" and "sensitive" are passive-agressive manipulators who become bitter not because they get taken advantage of but because their sexual tactics are inferior."
------------

Whoa!

That is exceptionally insightful for that sub-group.

6, you always get my prefrontal cortex all active like.

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
"There are objective criteria. You wish there weren't so you could continue with the hatin', but there are. The nice guy is willing to 1. identify his partner's likes and dislikes and 2. compromise on his own likes and dislikes in order to form a more equal partnership. The doormat is either so lame he has no real likes or dislikes, which is creepy, or is so underhanded that he pretends to have none in order to give the impression of being a nice guy, which is dishonest."

6
------------
This is so succinct. Erik, if you are monitoring any of this, please do pay attention to the difference as 6 has so able-y laid out.

Embrace that finer aspect within yourself & jetison the lazy doormat notions for good.

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
See, the woman's logic is completely busted by my male, superior, Mr. Spock-like analysis...

So let me break down your latest completely irrational post with my Vulcan-like mind powers:




LovesChocolate, I think your photo helps explain why you're bitter about women:

http://www.costume-con.org/CClink/CC08/Photos/pages/ff19.shtml

You bring it on yourself.

cd
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
"No. Most guys who believe themselves to be "nice" and "sensitive" are passive-agressive manipulators who become bitter not because they get taken advantage of but because their sexual tactics are inferior."
------------

Whoa!

That is exceptionally insightful for that sub-group.


I would have said it was overstating it, but I defer to your expertise.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Whoa!

That is exceptionally insightful for that sub-group.


More people should be raised by shrinks I guess.

6
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0

Actually, it was someone else's post, so how would Chaconne know who, if anyone, the OP was assuming would pay for dinner?

We all know that the man has to pay for the dinner. Or he at least has to offer to pay for the dinner.

How often do you invite a man out to dinner, your treat? Women want the man to invite you out, and offer to pay for the dinner. In all the dating you have ever done, which I assume is a lot, how many times have you invited out a man in whom you had a romantic interest, and paid for the dinner? What percentage of times do you think it happens with respect to the general population of women?

Note: If you agreed to pay for the dinner, or split the check, because you had decided you were NOT romantically interested in the man, then it doesn't count. That's just the woman's way of signaling to the man not to expect any quid pro quo.

Really, are you trying to say that women should not be able to choose when and with whom they have sex? Is that your point here?

Not at all. My point is that you females should admit that it is your choice, only your choice, you know full well it is your choice, and you women constantly use that prerogative to your advantage in the battle of the sexes. But you also pretend it is NOT your choice, when it suits you. When you get drunk and screw, and do the walk of shame the next morning, is that ever the woman's fault? No, it's always the man's fault. The man got the woman drunk. The man seduced the woman.

Also, if it's always the woman's choice, then please don't pretend that a man who expects sex in exchange for buying a woman dinner is at fault. This situation is set up by the woman. It's her choice. You said so, didn't you?

If the choice of whether to have sex is the woman's, and I agree with you that it is, then obviously the woman is the one with the power in the relationship.

You say that women are dishonest, stupid, illogical, untrustworthy and inconsistent, that they are incapable of providing for themselves ("marriage is a social imperative") and that their bodies are yours for the taking. Is there anything, besides orifices, that you like or respect about women?

Let's evaluate what you're saying here.

Are women dishonest? Yes, frequently, especially in relationship situations. [So are men, by the way.]

Are women stupid? Again--when it comes to relationships, many women frequently act stupidly. [Men can be quite stupid, too.]

Are women illogical? Totally. All the time. Name a single woman that you know who is at all logical, particularly when it comes to relationships. [Men are usually much more logical than women. Overtly logical men are "nerds" and don't do well with women, comparatively speaking, because women don't like logic.]

Are women untrustworthy? Well, next time you go to the ladies' room, tell me if you hear any women cattily gossiping about their "friends."

If it is the woman's choice to have sex or not, then please tell me, whose responsibility is it when someone has an extramarital affair? It can't be the man's responsibility, because the choice to have sex was the woman's. So I guess there must be at least some women out there who are untrustworthy. Of course this conclusion would require the application of logic, from your stated premise. And since you are a woman, hence illogical, you will not agree that the woman bears the fault for an extramarital affair. Despite the fact that this conclusion derives directly from your premise that it is the woman who makes the choice to have sex.

Inconsistent? Well--aren't you? Do you think yourself to be different from the average woman?

I do not think women's bodies are "for the taking" because I agree with your premise that I have no choice in the matter. I have consistently maintained that there is no point in my playing various games because of the very fact that I have no choice in the matter. If a woman were to meet me and find me sexually attractive, I could act like a complete moron or "bad boy" and still get into her pants, because she wants me to. On the other hand, if the woman is not attracted to me, I could be the nicest guy in the world and it won't make a difference. We have all seen that happen many times: a jerk with physical charisma doesn't have to worry about getting women. If the woman is attracted to the man, she will overlook all flaws, however obvious. Because she is illogical.

You are being confronted with a man who is being totally honest with you, and you don't like it one bit, do you? That's because you are used to game-playing and dishonesty in your relationships with men. Your internet persona is somewhat flirtatious and you are accustomed to getting a positive response to that persona.

You are shocked when a man criticizes your viewpoint. The flirtiness isn't working. Men aren't supposed to do that. I disagree with you, therefore, I must hate all women. Gee, that's very logical. How does the premise that I disagree with you, or anyone else for that matter, lead to the conclusion that I hate all women?

Admit that you are irritated that I am not agreeing with you, that your reputation of being "sofaking 6" does not matter to me, only the quality of your ideas and thoughts. You're upset because you're playing a game and I'm not playing your game.

My own "game" is simple: what do you really want? Tell me the truth, otherwise, why are you wasting everyone's time?


Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
"There are objective criteria. You wish there weren't so you could continue with the hatin', but there are. The nice guy is willing to 1. identify his partner's likes and dislikes and 2. compromise on his own likes and dislikes in order to form a more equal partnership. The doormat is either so lame he has no real likes or dislikes, which is creepy, or is so underhanded that he pretends to have none in order to give the impression of being a nice guy, which is dishonest."

6
------------
This is so succinct. Erik, if you are monitoring any of this, please do pay attention to the difference as 6 has so able-y laid out.

Embrace that finer aspect within yourself & jetison the lazy doormat notions for good.


******************************************


No. They are purely subjective criteria.

But of course, the typical female believes her personal opinions are "the truth."

Not knowing the difference between one's subjective preferences, and "objective" criteria, is a perfect example of being completely illogical.

You are an acceptable male ("nice guy") because you express your preference for Borat, rather than simply say "whatever"?

The experienced male is always going to say "whatever" because he knows the choice of what to do that evening has already been made by the female. The typical female reaction would be to say, "What? You think Borat is more important than my sick grandmother???" and then to be angry about it for the next two weeks. So saying "whatever" is simply common sense.

The "nice guy" says "I'll dry the dishes" rather than "let me do everything?"

The normal male would say, "Just put the dishes in the sink. You can take care of them tomorrow." Only a totally whipped male would offer to do the dishes in the first place.

Again: "nice guy" = "guy I am sexually attracted to"

"doormat" = "guy I am not attracted to and want to get rid of"

That's the only difference.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 5
"How often do you invite a man out to dinner, your treat?"

loves-cacao
----------------

Only speaking for myself, this has happened quite often in my experience. & I am most appreciative that this has.

Although I wouldn't disagree with your statement that women (in general) desire to be asked, it is the global type statements you have been making that I can't go along with.

Indeed male brains have evolved to function toward the logic / aggression realm, & womens brains have evolved to process verbally & in the emotive realm, there are always exceptions to the rule.

If people could embrace respect for the differences & take the time to learn the hows / whys of the brain chemistry differences, our behavioral treatments of one another might just evolve also.



Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
Only speaking for myself, this has happened quite often in my experience. & I am most appreciative that this has.

Thank you for answering the question. Note, you're a male, and had no problem answering this question.

I have asked the exact same question to at least three of the females on the board. All have refused to answer.

You are a male. I am a male. We can strenuously disagree. Yet we are able to do so in a reasonably coherent, factual manner.

You did not screech at me that I "hated" you because I happened to express an opinion with which you might disagree.

I would only also point out that the fact that you have been "most appreciative" indicates that, whatever your personal experiences, it is not the norm for the woman to ask the man out/pay for dinner.

It also indicates you must have tight buns or something.




Although I wouldn't disagree with your statement that women (in general) desire to be asked, it is the global type statements you have been making that I can't go along with.

I am glad that you see I am trying to be global/general in my statements. I have tried to generalize, perhaps overly so, in an effort to make it clear that my comments are in no way meant to be "personally directed" to other people who happen to be on the message board. Since you are a man, hence logical, you recognize the generality of the comments. The females once again, being fundamentally illogical, choose to deem anything that they happen to disagree with as a personal attack.

Indeed male brains have evolved to function toward the logic / aggression realm, & womens brains have evolved to process verbally & in the emotive realm, there are always exceptions to the rule.

If people could embrace respect for the differences & take the time to learn the hows / whys of the brain chemistry differences, our behavioral treatments of one another might just evolve also.


I have no problem with the behavior itself. It is clearly driven by evolutionary considerations.

The difference is that usually men are direct and upfront about this; women are not.

Both of the sexes desire to go out with a "hottie". A "hottie" represents someone who is genetically/evolutionarily desirable [it is more likely that a mating with a "hottie" will produce more fit offspring].

Men dream about the supermodel. Women dream about the alpha male. This is all perfectly natural. Because the needs of our highly socialized species have changed in the past 10-20,000 years, however, other considerations also come into play: financial wealth, etc.

People get into "dating quandaries" when they play mind games with themselves.

Many women fight biological reality due to sociological/psychological problems, or because of learned politics from psychologically or sociologically disturbed educators or other sources.

It is a biological/evolutionary imperative for a woman to find a reproductively fit male during the prime child bearing years. Physical fitness and attractiveness designates a person as having better health and a superior genome. Because women also have an evolutionary bias to ensure that their children are properly cared for, males with wealth and power are also deemed highly desirable. Women are evolutionarily driven to try to make themselves attractive enough to get one of these desirable males in the first place; and then to use strategies to keep the male from abandoning the female and any offspring produced.

Women [and men] can get off-track with this process when they lose sight of the ultimate objective and get caught up in the strategies for getting/keeping a mate. The strategies include the "games people play." However, unless both parties recognize the ultimate objective of the "game" is mating and reproduction, they will get caught up in an endless round robin/string of relationships that reach a certain point, then disintegrate.

Additionally, women [and men] can go off track for psychological reasons. The game [i.e. manipulation of the opposite sex] becomes more important than the objective, reproductive success with a fit mate.

Thus whenever a female starts claiming that it is she who lays down the rules in a relationship, one can infer that she has targeted inferior males whom she believes she can manipulate, and who are willing to be manipulated as this may be the only way they can have sex. However, since the males are inferior, she can never really be satisfied with this inferior type. Yet she has accustomed herself to a series of relationships with inferior, manipulable males.

When such a female meets a strong, alpha male, who will not let her dominate the relationship, it throws her for a loop. She is extremely attracted to the alpha male, due to biology/evolution. Yet her mind tells her she should not be, because the alpha male does not conincide with the hypothetical construct of her "ideal" male.

She has two choices: 1) discontinue the relationship or 2) attitude adjustment.

After enough failed relationships with inferior males, and perhaps some psychological counseling; as well as going through the aging process, which makes the biological imperative to have children [the "biological clock"] much more forceful, the lady turns much more practical. She realizes that she needs to get married. She does not really know why her attitude has changed. It's biology. She will then accept the "best" male available, and her strategies will evolve explicitly into establishing a marital relationship.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 5
Thank you for answering the question. Note, you're a male, and had no problem answering this question.

I have asked the exact same question to at least three of the females on the board. All have refused to answer.


I was trying to avoid this discussion, since it is going nowhere, but since you've brought this point up several times, I'll state:

1. I'm female
2. I have asked men out and paid for dinner, movie, etc.
3. My last relationship, the first date was a movie, that I paid for, since I asked him out. HE was very uncomfortable with that, so much so that he insisted on buying the popcorn and drinks and coffee afterward.
4. It's been MY experience that many men are uncomfortable with a woman paying, or even being the one to initiate. It's changing some, but the first time I asked a guy out, he freaked out, thought I was too aggressive. The first time I paid for dinner was our first/last date. He tried to pay, I insisted, he got mad. I didn't see the point. We were both military, different branches, different commands, but I knew his rank and I knew that I made more money. I asked him out. The combination seemed to indicate that I be the one to pay. But HE couldn't handle that.

This status quo isn't all on women.

Ishtar
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 7
He tried to pay, I insisted, he got mad. I didn't see the point. We were both military, different branches, different commands, but I knew his rank and I knew that I made more money. I asked him out. The combination seemed to indicate that I be the one to pay. But HE couldn't handle that.

This status quo isn't all on women.



I trick women into letting me pay. Sometimes I do it when they're in the bathroom, sometimes I excuse myself and go to the register. It's fun.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
4. It's been MY experience that many men are uncomfortable with a woman paying, or even being the one to initiate. It's changing some, but the first time I asked a guy out, he freaked out, thought I was too aggressive. The first time I paid for dinner was our first/last date. He tried to pay, I insisted, he got mad. I didn't see the point. We were both military, different branches, different commands, but I knew his rank and I knew that I made more money. I asked him out. The combination seemed to indicate that I be the one to pay. But HE couldn't handle that.

Just because he had a license to shoot people, doesn't mean he isn't a whimp.

He must have been a cute guy before this.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
He must have been a cute guy before this.

That was in 1990, so I have no idea if he stayed cute, but he was then. Of course, I was, too, then, since we were both 20 and in good shape.

Ishtar
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Please note all, I am to this point the lone "recommender" of LC's post #29556.

It was quite readable & makes some lucid points regarding the pscho-physiological unfoldings that take place.

& it wasn't written in a response to attack anyone.

Thanks for the cogent reply LC.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 35
How often do you invite a man out to dinner, your treat? Women want the man to invite you out, and offer to pay for the dinner. In all the dating you have ever done, which I assume is a lot, how many times have you invited out a man in whom you had a romantic interest, and paid for the dinner? What percentage of times do you think it happens with respect to the general population of women

I don't generally invite men out for dinner, I'm usually the invitee. But unless I know I like someone I always insist on going Dutch. I sort of feel like if a man buys me dinner then he's buying a part of me, or something. I don't like it. I buy dinner for my boyfriend all the time, it just depends who has cash when we go out.

My female friends have always been professionals. I know very few who insist on having dates paid for even if they're the ones asked. But, to be fair, I don't know too many women who do the asking a lot.

. My point is that you females should admit that it is your choice, only your choice, you know full well it is your choice, and you women constantly use that prerogative to your advantage in the battle of the sexes. But you also pretend it is NOT your choice, when it suits you. When you get drunk and screw, and do the walk of shame the next morning, is that ever the woman's fault? No, it's always the man's fault. The man got the woman drunk. The man seduced the woman.

You're really projecting here. Women are capable of owning up to their own mistakes. Back in the day I did the walk of shame plenty, and never blamed the man. Also, you jump from being on a date to having drunken casual sex as it it's an inevitable outcome...maybe you should work on keeping your dates sober and see how that goes?

Are women illogical? Totally. All the time. Name a single woman that you know who is at all logical, particularly when it comes to relationships. [Men are usually much more logical than women. Overtly logical men are "nerds" and don't do well with women, comparatively speaking, because women don't like logic.]

I think I'm a very logical person, when it comes to things that logic can solve. Show me some mathematical equations that work in relationships and I'll admit that logic plays a part.

Admit that you are irritated that I am not agreeing with you, that your reputation of being "sofaking 6" does not matter to me, only the quality of your ideas and thoughts. You're upset because you're playing a game and I'm not playing your game.


Thinking that you're a misogynist is not a game. I don't understand why you think it is?

If the woman is attracted to the man, she will overlook all flaws, however obvious. Because she is illogical.

Ah, so what you're saying is, it's LOGICAL to like someone for their personality but ILLOGICAL to like someone for their appearance. I really don't think the word "logic" means what you think it means.

You are being confronted with a man who is being totally honest with you, and you don't like it one bit, do you? That's because you are used to game-playing and dishonesty in your relationships with men. Your internet persona is somewhat flirtatious and you are accustomed to getting a positive response to that persona.

I'd suggest you ask the people I date whether I'm a player or a dishonest person, except that you seem kind of, well, scary so I won't suggest that. I also do not think you're being honest, and if you truly think that you are being honest then you're in denial. You're only angry.

You are shocked when a man criticizes your viewpoint. The flirtiness isn't working. Men aren't supposed to do that. I disagree with you, therefore, I must hate all women. Gee, that's very logical. How does the premise that I disagree with you, or anyone else for that matter, lead to the conclusion that I hate all women?

I'm not shocked when a man criticized my viewpoint. It happens all the time. You haven't disagreed with me at all, actually. You have only spewed. You have not argued a point with anyone, you have only made broad statements about the failures of women to live up to your expectations. Your disagreement with people, or lack thereof, has nothing to do with the conclusions drawn about your feelings towards women. Your statements and attitude are clear.

My own "game" is simple: what do you really want? Tell me the truth, otherwise, why are you wasting everyone's time?

I want to be rich, and I want to kill all the lobbyists. What do you want?

6
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
Ah, so what you're saying is, it's LOGICAL to like someone for their personality but ILLOGICAL to like someone for their appearance. I really don't think the word "logic" means what you think it means.

Nevermind the fact that he thinks men are driven by logic and women by emotion, which displays a fundamentally sophomoric understanding of human interactions.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Ah, so what you're saying is, it's LOGICAL to like someone for their personality but ILLOGICAL to like someone for their appearance. I really don't think the word "logic" means what you think it means.
----------------
"Nevermind the fact that he thinks men are driven by logic and women by emotion, which displays a fundamentally sophomoric understanding of human interactions. "
----------------------------

I'll tell you this, LC reminds me alot of an evolutional biologist friend of mine who follows this well known track of thought.

The only diff is my friend dosen't have the time to react with anger when he is challenged. Hes actually alot of fun in an intellectual kind of way.

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 6
I'll tell you this, LC reminds me alot of an evolutional biologist friend of mine who follows this well known track of thought.

The only diff is my friend dosen't have the time to react with anger when he is challenged. Hes actually alot of fun in an intellectual kind of way.


I've known too many cold, calculating chicks to conclude that they are governed by emotion, and too many loopy guys doing completely irrational things to conclude that they are governed by logic.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
He should just go play with his own kind:

www.dontmarry.com

6
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
"I've known too many cold, calculating chicks to conclude that they are governed by emotion, and too many loopy guys doing completely irrational things to conclude that they are governed by logic."
---------

True. And goes to my reply to LC that there are always exceptions to the rule of extreems.

On occassion, iv'e worked with colder women who are being cold for reasons that LC might agree with though. Attempting to mask, cover up, wipe out, & deflect any remnant of an emotive so as to "hold an upper hand" in their life for any of a constellation of reasons.

Conversely (spell?), loopy irrational men can seem to the casual observer to simply be stuck in an arrested development place of their own choosing.

Human behaviour never ever is boring to me. It's a puzzle that isn't too difficult to see how the parts can fit together if given half a chance.

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 12
I'll tell you this, LC reminds me alot of an evolutional biologist friend of mine who follows this well known track of thought.

The only diff is my friend dosen't have the time to react with anger when he is challenged. Hes actually alot of fun in an intellectual kind of way.


I find instinctual human behavior as interesting as the next person. I just don't use it to attempt to excuse my stereotypes. Saying that women are biologically incapable of honesty is no different than saying that black people have inferior intellects. It's just straight-up prejudice with no scientific basis.

The more LC writes, the more I think it's a show just to get people upset.

6
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
On occassion, iv'e worked with colder women who are being cold for reasons that LC might agree with though. Attempting to mask, cover up, wipe out, & deflect any remnant of an emotive so as to "hold an upper hand" in their life for any of a constellation of reasons.

But, no men of the exact same type?

Conversely (spell?), loopy irrational men can seem to the casual observer to simply be stuck in an arrested development place of their own choosing.

But, no women of the exact same type?

6
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
"I find instinctual human behavior as interesting as the next person. I just don't use it to attempt to excuse my stereotypes. Saying that women are biologically incapable of honesty is no different than saying that black people have inferior intellects. It's just straight-up prejudice with no scientific basis."

----------

Your point here is of course as correct as could be. The stereotyping automatically undermines credibility, but I believe LC did flesh out his views in a non agressive way when he answered my post.

Now that may be solely due to my being male as he kept referring to, but for me, it seems that we all have far more similar aspects than not & giving the person some space rather than go blow for blow can often draw the most arrogant into some form of middle ground.

Insults & ignorance are just that though, & prejudice is a prison of ones own making.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Now that may be solely due to my being male as he kept referring to, but for me, it seems that we all have far more similar aspects than not & giving the person some space rather than go blow for blow can often draw the most arrogant into some form of middle ground.Now that may be solely due to my being male as he kept referring to, but for me, it seems that we all have far more similar aspects than not & giving the person some space rather than go blow for blow can often draw the most arrogant into some form of middle ground.

I think flattery got you reading his post a little...lightly.

6
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
"But, no men of the exact same type?"

"But, no women of the exact same type?"

6
----------

Point taken. I was of course, replying to waffles post & you are right, I ought have given example of these as well. There are indeed males in first group galore, & females in second.

I'll try to be less sloppy up the road.

Thanks for pointing this out.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
"I think flattery got you reading his post a little...lightly."

6
--------

I don't do flattery. Rather, as I said, giving space looking for common ground.

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 7
but I believe LC did flesh out his views in a non agressive way when he answered my post...

Now that may be solely due to my being male as he kept referring to,


I'm pretty sure that's it. He's a woman hater who backs his arguments with broad generalizations and stereotypes. He even admitted that. How can you even argue rationally with someone like that?

He's trying to come off as "non-agressive" to show that he's "logical", while in fact, they are two completely different and unrelated things.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
"He's a woman hater"

*********************************

No, I'm a hypocrisy-hater.

You've jumped to an absurd conclusion, with absolutely no evidence to support it, about my presumed personal life.

There's many ways you could have criticized me, but interestingly enough, you chose to claim me to be a "woman hater."

Simply because I've expressed opinions that obviously do not comport with your political/sociological prejudices.

If you would simply look at what I've actually written, rather than what you think I've written, or how others may have characterized what I've written, you'll see that I'm not "angry" nor do I "hate women."

What's happening is that I'm expressing opinions which vary from the apparent status quo of the message board. This apparently has violated an unstated but accepted norm of the message board which rules differing ideas to be "out of bounds." You're a willing participant in "group think."

I try to think for myself.

Sorry if that bugs you.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Saying that women are biologically incapable of honesty is no different than saying that black people have inferior intellects. It's just straight-up prejudice with no scientific basis.

6


***************

If you don't think it's true, then you shouldn't have said it.

I certainly didn't say it.

You need to read a little more carefully.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
Sorry if that bugs you.

It doesn't bug me. If you want to look crazy, who am I to get in your way?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1


6

I don't generally invite men out for dinner, I'm usually the invitee.


Point, LC. Score: 1-0, LC

But unless I know I like someone I always insist on going Dutch.

Point, LC. Score: 2-0, LC

I sort of feel like if a man buys me dinner then he's buying a part of me, or something. I don't like it.

Point, LC. Score: 3-0, LC

I buy dinner for my boyfriend all the time, it just depends who has cash when we go out.

Point, 6. Score: 3-1, LC

My female friends have always been professionals. I know very few who insist on having dates paid for even if they're the ones asked. But, to be fair, I don't know too many women who do the asking a lot.

Point, LC. Score: 4-1, LC

Women are capable of owning up to their own mistakes. Back in the day I did the walk of shame plenty, and never blamed the man.

Point, 6. Score: 4-2, LC


I think I'm a very logical person, when it comes to things that logic can solve. Show me some mathematical equations that work in relationships and I'll admit that logic plays a part.

Point, LC. Score: 5-2, LC


LC: "If the woman is attracted to the man, she will overlook all flaws, however obvious. Because she is illogical."

[6] Ah, so what you're saying is, it's LOGICAL to like someone for their personality but ILLOGICAL to like someone for their appearance. I really don't think the word "logic" means what you think it means.

{No, 6, that's the opposite of what I just said. Besides, you previously have just said that you don't believe logic belongs in relationships.}

Point, LC. Score: 6-2, LC


I'd suggest you ask the people I date whether I'm a player or a dishonest person, except that you seem kind of, well, scary so I won't suggest that. I also do not think you're being honest, and if you truly think that you are being honest then you're in denial. You're only angry.

(6, you just said you have "a boyfriend"--singular. Now you're saying that you date multiple "people." Note the present tense. I don't know whether that makes you a "player" or not. The fact that you date multiple "people" and simultaneously claim to have "a" boyfriend, and that I am pointing this apparent logical conundrum out to you, certainly does not make me "scary," lacking in "honesty", in "denial," nor "angry." It does seem that you like to call people names, however.)

Point: LC. Score, 7-2, LC.


I'm not shocked when a man criticized my viewpoint. It happens all the time. You haven't disagreed with me at all, actually.

(So now you're claiming that we're in agreement? Pray tell, about what? Ooops...I forgot. We're not allowed to use logic.)

Point: LC. Score, 8-2, LC.

You have not argued a point with anyone, you have only made broad statements about the failures of women to live up to your expectations.

(Strange. I certainly feel as if we have been arguing about something. Of course, I never uttered a word about MY "expectations" for any woman in my life, nor did I ever state that any woman in my life had failed to live up to my expectations. By the way, I am completely satisfied with the woman who is in my life. I will agree there are many who do not measure up to her. Perhaps my standards are artificially high due to my exposure to a clearly superior woman in my own life.)

Point: LC: Score, 9-2, LC.

Your disagreement with people, or lack thereof, has nothing to do with the conclusions drawn about your feelings towards women. Your statements and attitude are clear.

(Awesome. Now read what you wrote. My disagreement with people has nothing to do with my feelings towards women. What I've been saying. My statements and attitudes are clear. Also what I've been saying. But I'll be kind and only award myself one point here.)

Point: LC: Score, 10-2, LC.

I want to be rich, and I want to kill all the lobbyists. What do you want?

(An obvious evasion by you of a serious question, i.e. what are your relationship goals?)

Point: LC: Final Score: 11-2. Game, set and match, LC.

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
It doesn't bug me. If you want to look crazy, who am I to get in your way?

***********

Tell me about your love life.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 5
You're in idiot.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
OCD: an
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
That may be the stupidest post i have ever seen.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
No games, indeed.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
too scrolly
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
Tell me about your love life.

You're not an adequate judge.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
You're in idiot.


***********************

And you smell like goat cheese.

I know what I just wrote makes no sense, but I figured I would bring things down to your level.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
And you smell like goat cheese.

I know what I just wrote makes no sense, but I figured I would bring things down to your level.


No need to brings things down, you haven't made sense since you got here.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Tell me about your love life.

You're not an adequate judge.

****************************************

Hey, I've judged short-story competitions before.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Hey, I've judged short-story competitions before.

Wanking competitions don't count.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
Point, LC. Score: 1-0, LC

Points? If we really are playing a game here, please first explain, what are the rules, how are points awarded, how many points are required to win and what is the prize?

(An obvious evasion by you of a serious question, i.e. what are your relationship goals?)

Enjoyable companionship, good sex and no cohabitation.

6
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 5
Hey, I've judged short-story competitions before.


I thought you made some good points at first, but you have become less and less sensical over time. Especially with your assertion that men are logical. Men are more emotional than women and have far less control over their emotions. When was the last time you saw a chick punch another chick over a bar disagreement?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
No need to brings things down, you haven't made sense since you got here.

IIRC (and I'm not going back to check) there were a few things at the beginning that made some sense. Unfortunately it quickly jumped the plane to WTF land and hasn't returned since.

CiB
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 6
I thought you made some good points at first, but you have become less and less sensical over time.

It's typical when they know they hate women. In the beginning, they can filter it because no one is challenging them. After a bit, the lack of respect come roaring back because they refuse to admit to it and then go on the attack to cover their ass.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Wanking competitions don't count.

*****************************

Of course I defer to your expertise on this subject.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Of course I defer to your expertise on this subject.

Which, of course, is how much you hate women.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 5
Excerpts from LC's postings what make me think he is a misogynist:

Despite the b.s. that women claim they adhere to, in reality they are almost purely hormonally driven.

It reveals the fundamental insincerity and dishonesty of women.

The bottom line, ladies, is that you are ALL looking for a "lifetime partner," ALL THE TIME. It is a biological and sociological imperative.

And if things don't work out, the typical woman will find some way to blame it on the man.

And since you are a woman, hence illogical, you will not agree that the woman bears the fault for an extramarital affair.

But of course, the typical female believes her personal opinions are "the truth."


6
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
. My point is that you females should admit that it is your choice, only your choice, you know full well it is your choice, and you women constantly use that prerogative to your advantage in the battle of the sexes. But you also pretend it is NOT your choice, when it suits you. When you get drunk and screw, and do the walk of shame the next morning, is that ever the woman's fault? No, it's always the man's fault. The man got the woman drunk. The man seduced the woman.

You're really projecting here. Women are capable of owning up to their own mistakes. Back in the day I did the walk of shame plenty, and never blamed the man.


I'm confused by the use of the word 'fault' here.

Unless maybe it was bad sex because they were too drunk? Whose fault was it that it was bad sex? In that case I'm going to argue that it might be the man's fault more often because too much alcohol can sometimes cause erectile disfunction.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
The bottom line, ladies, is that you are ALL looking for a "lifetime partner," ALL THE TIME. It is a biological and sociological imperative.

Wait a minute. I'm married. Am I still looking for a lifetime partner? Do I need two?

Can I have two?

Can one of them be Sacha Baron Cohen?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
In that case I'm going to argue that it might be the man's fault more often because too much alcohol can sometimes cause erectile disfunction.

Or premature ejaculation, at least in college boys.

6
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 6
<<I'll tell you this, LC reminds me alot of an evolutional biologist friend of mine who follows this well known track of thought.
>>

I'll tell you this, LC reminds ME of a doppel of someone who just likes to stir things up. Having an actual conversation has never been his goal.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
Name a single woman that you know who is at all logical, particularly when it comes to relationships.

I can name plenty. It depends on the person, not the gender.

On the other hand, if the woman is not attracted to me, I could be the nicest guy in the world and it won't make a difference. We have all seen that happen many times: a jerk with physical charisma doesn't have to worry about getting women. If the woman is attracted to the man, she will overlook all flaws, however obvious. Because she is illogical.

Once again, women are HARDLY the only ones susceptible to acting loopy because of appearances.

For every woman who has gone gaga over some self-destructive Byronic anti-hero or square-jawed toyboy, there's just as many men who have made complete fools of themselves for a woman whose qualities are mainly found on the surface.

You're kidding yourself if you think otherwise.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Despite the b.s. that women claim they adhere to, in reality they are almost purely hormonally driven.

It reveals the fundamental insincerity and dishonesty of women.

The bottom line, ladies, is that you are ALL looking for a "lifetime partner," ALL THE TIME. It is a biological and sociological imperative.

And if things don't work out, the typical woman will find some way to blame it on the man.

And since you are a woman, hence illogical, you will not agree that the woman bears the fault for an extramarital affair.

But of course, the typical female believes her personal opinions are "the truth."

6

_________

Emotions are alien to me. I'm a scientist.

—Spock, "This Si