Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The really ironic thing, is that a feminist is the person who would pay her own meal. It is the old fashion girl who does not identify as a feminist woman that expects her way paid. Many men claim to want an old-fashioned girl, a woman like women used to be back in the day, but then they expect a woman to pay on the date, which would repel that type of woman. You have to make up your mind what you want, if you want an old fashioned woman then you have to court her, if you want to date a strong bf independent woman who will pay for the date, you can’t say you won’t date women who identify as feminists.
I want to add, ghosting is not right for anyone but it happens to both men and women. It is simply that the person was too cowardly to tell you at the end of the date that they didn’t want a second date. The best way to avoid this for that poster, is to not do a full-blown dinner on a first date do something simple that doesn’t cost much money and see if you get along. If there’s a second date then you can go to dinner. Very simple to avoid laying out lots of money when the vast majority of first dates end up as one and done.
Well said.
(Is a self-sufficient former feminist who now views feminism as a scam. Maybe it is still a thing for wealthy empty-nester women, but she wouldn't know. )
I definitely feel like I've been taken advantage of over the course of my life. Certainly, there were dates where I wanted out because the woman was not good at all, but a lot of times I wanted more and the woman didn't, and I felt like the particular interaction left me with a sour taste in my mouth. That's where feminism comes into this discussion. Women are still enjoying the privilege of getting their dates paid for without the downsides of equality. There have been times in my life where I have paid for a date for a woman earning more money than I was earning at that time. How does that represent fairness and equality to me? I understand that I have to do it to be competitive in an environment where there is a single male surplus.
In my dating endeavors, over time, I have pursued extended relationships. Because I absorb a ton of costs on the front end of dating relationships, the only way in which I can justify the absorption of early stage costs is through longer term relationships. A relationship does not have to be eternal, but any sort of interaction that results in an extended relationship of 1-2 years, even if it does not work out forever, I can at least walk away from that interaction feeling that there was benefit for me, and probably for both parties.
It's irritating that we can talk about feminist and it ends up coming down to guys feeling put upon by the dating process. I guess that's all guys consider women important for - sexual entertainment?
I can guarantee you that for women there is a lot more to life and to feminism than whether or not they get a meal paid for. That is all quite trivial in the face of life and career opportunities, healthcare, and control over our own bodies - that includes birth control, sexual harassment, and sexual assault.
lol. You've been having trouble sticking with the point of the my original question to you, from the start. Oh well. At least we know you're a "feminist" guy. That's the main thing.
What did this sentence of yours mean?
Originally Posted by Ruth4Truth
People meaning what they say is irrelevant to whether their stand is within the stated platform of a given movement, or not.
It's irritating that we can talk about feminist and it ends up coming down to guys feeling put upon by the dating process. I guess that's all guys consider women important for - sexual entertainment?
I can guarantee you that for women there is a lot more to life and to feminism than whether or not they get a meal paid for. That is all quite trivial in the face of life and career opportunities, healthcare, and control over our own bodies - that includes birth control, sexual harassment, and sexual assault.
And that's what gets me about these circular conversations about feminism, when some men try to frame feminists as "anti-male" or having "gone too far." One the one hand I don't hate men. Men are great. But on the other hand, society as a whole as been "anti-woman" in so many ways over the course of history, that I don't care that some guys feel bad about having to think before they speak or behave more mindfully in public and at work. Join the club. They don't think that women have policed their thoughts and words and actions for decades, if not centuries, to make life smoother for men and less dangerous for themselves? Turnabout is fair play.
And that's what gets me about these circular conversations about feminism, when some men try to frame feminists as "anti-male" or having "gone too far." One the one hand I don't hate men. Men are great. But on the other hand, society as a whole as been "anti-woman" in so many ways over the course of history, that I don't care that some guys feel bad about having to think before they speak or behave more mindfully in public and at work. Join the club. They don't think that women have policed their thoughts and words and actions for decades, if not centuries, to make life smoother for men and less dangerous for themselves? Turnabout is fair play.
No, turnabout is not fair play.
Fair play is fair play.
The idea that "turnabout is fair play" is based on a perception that society is a zero-sum game, and that for one person to win, the other person has to lose.
That was not something black people expected in the 60s. We believed that the pie was large enough for all, and we wanted our slice. We didn't want society turned around so that black people ruled over white people.
The same has been true for homosexuals--they don't seek a "turnabout," just their piece of the pie.
Yes, when you say "turnabout is fair play," that is exactly the point. You're talking about a zero-sum game in which in order for women to win, men must lose.
Yes, when you say "turnabout is fair play," that is exactly the point. You're talking about a zero-sum game in which in order for women to win, men must lose.
No, I'm talking about men in general made to be as aware and thoughtful about their words and actions currently and in the future as women have generally had to be in the past. That doesn't require anyone losing anything (except for some biases, both conscious and unconscious,) and society as a whole is better for it.
Eh....you forgot an apparently large portion of women who proudly are expressly NOT feminists - they never needed it, never wanted it and don't seem to like anyone who thinks there is such a need. That doesn't necessarily mean they are "traditional" but they are anti-feminist. Not sure there is a parallel category for men....
That's the category I fall into. I hate feminists. I think they're largely hypocritical. They want things to be "equal" but then when they run into something where they obvious are not equal (military), they want special concessions to be made to them.
Men and women are not equal just as obviously as (gasp! very unpopular opinion here!) black and white people aren't the same. It doesn't mean those differences indicate any kind of superiority to one or the other, but to try to brainwash our minds to believe the mantra "We are all the same. We are all the same. We are all the same," when we are obviously not to me points to some kind of underlying issues in the person's mentality. Something perhaps with insecurity, I don't know.
But no, in my view women are not equal to men. There are obvious and very factual differences. In my view both men and women have equal value to their worth as human beings (just based on the fact that they are either a man or a woman; obviously other characteristics would take into the account their worth as a human being), just as a white person and a black person, based just on that characteristic, have equal values as human beings. But neither of those peoples in either characters are, or ever will be, equal to each other. It is healthy to acknowledge this fact.
What do many men who keep pulling the: “You weren’t in the Military!” Refrain, think of the fact that it was MEN who made those decisions, and it was MEN who KEPT WILLING WOMEN out of the military. They were very surprised when one of “their own” turned up pregnant. Pregnant and fighting next to you! Even though MEN declare women unable to ENLIST?
Have you read any history? Or do you make it up as you go, hoping everyone is younger?
The idea that "turnabout is fair play" is based on a perception that society is a zero-sum game, and that for one person to win, the other person has to lose.
That was not something black people expected in the 60s. We believed that the pie was large enough for all, and we wanted our slice. We didn't want society turned around so that black people ruled over white people.
The same has been true for homosexuals--they don't seek a "turnabout," just their piece of the pie.
Yes, when you say "turnabout is fair play," that is exactly the point. You're talking about a zero-sum game in which in order for women to win, men must lose.
Well if you wanted Fairplay, you should’ve called for Fairplay in FIRST place. Where were you then?
The really ironic thing, is that a feminist is the person who would pay her own meal. It is the old fashion girl who does not identify as a feminist woman that expects her way paid. Many men claim to want an old-fashioned girl, a woman like women used to be back in the day, but then they expect a woman to pay on the date, which would repel that type of woman. You have to make up your mind what you want, if you want an old fashioned woman then you have to court her, if you want to date a strong bf independent woman who will pay for the date, you can’t say you won’t date women who identify as feminists.
Oooooh, good point!
Quote:
Originally Posted by ocnjgirl;
I want to add, ghosting is not right for anyone but it happens to both men and women. It is simply that the person was too cowardly to tell you at the end of the date that they didn’t want a second date. The best way to avoid this for that poster, is to not do a full-blown dinner on a first date do something simple that doesn’t cost much money and see if you get along. If there’s a second date then you can go to dinner. Very simple to avoid laying out lots of money when the vast majority of first dates end up as one and done.
That's what I was getting at with my earlier comment, about having the first date be free or if negligible cost. The first date is mainly to get to know someone, to decide if you want a second date, and if she wants a second date, too. So why make it dinner? That only makes sense as a first date if you already know the person you want to start dating, and you've both already established a rapport and attraction.
Dinner should be a treat, not something ordinary. If you have dinner on the first date, what are you going to do on the next one, for an encore? It's a hard act to follow. Unless you spend big $$ for a concert or something, anything that follows a nice dinner would be a let down. You've already set a high bar on Date 1. Not a good idea, in most cases.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
