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.
Good point. I just couldn't see myself harrassing or disrespecting a woman who turned me down. Sad to think there are guys like this out there.
My experience is the vast majority of men are like you and respectful. But there are enough who aren't that it makes every man a gamble. I think just about every woman who's dated has run into that type too. After you meet a man like that, it makes dating each man feel like playing Russian Roulette and wondering if this one is the loaded chamber.
My experience is the vast majority of men are like you and respectful. But there are enough who aren't that it makes every man a gamble. I think just about every woman who's dated has run into that type too. After you meet a man like that, it makes dating each man feel like playing Russian Roulette and wondering if this one is the loaded chamber.
But does this not apply to essentially any endeavor in life? Have one vehicular collision with deer in the forest, and never drive at night on country roads again. Have one officious and condescending police officer write you a ticket, and never trust the police again. Have one shoddy or fraudulent repair by a plumber, roofer, landscaper or car mechanic, and never trust a tradesman again. And so forth. If we devolve to a mindset of "guilty until proven innocent", then any encounter becomes a threat, any venture an ungainly and oppressive risk.
Besides, even a generous and loving spouse can turn into a monster, even the most steadfast adherent to probity and to commitment can eventually cheat, even the most upstanding champion of decency can become a raving sadist. No amount of experience is complete proof that the very next encounter won't be tragic.
How ought we then to live? Where lies the distinction between prudence and paranoia?
My experience is the vast majority of men are like you and respectful. But there are enough who aren't that it makes every man a gamble. I think just about every woman who's dated has run into that type too. After you meet a man like that, it makes dating each man feel like playing Russian Roulette and wondering if this one is the loaded chamber.
If you knew me and my friends in real life, you and every woman on this forum would see us as the most docile and non violent men out there. Sure most women wouldn't know this because we are strangers but we are all geeky and wouldn't hurt a fly with minimal success women. We don't care if women reject us. We will get rejected, tell them their bf or husband is lucky, go out to eat, laugh about it with each other, and we don't remember the woman after that. My friends are in relationships now with nice women. They respect them. Overall, we are nice guys, not "nice guys". But actual nice guys.
But does this not apply to essentially any endeavor in life? Have one vehicular collision with deer in the forest, and never drive at night on country roads again. Have one officious and condescending police officer write you a ticket, and never trust the police again. Have one shoddy or fraudulent repair by a plumber, roofer, landscaper or car mechanic, and never trust a tradesman again. And so forth. If we devolve to a mindset of "guilty until proven innocent", then any encounter becomes a threat, any venture an ungainly and oppressive risk.
Besides, even a generous and loving spouse can turn into a monster, even the most steadfast adherent to probity and to commitment can eventually cheat, even the most upstanding champion of decency can become a raving sadist. No amount of experience is complete proof that the very next encounter won't be tragic.
How ought we then to live? Where lies the distinction between prudence and paranoia?
I didn't say never trust again or such... it's just makes you more careful. Bad accident, maybe you drive defensively from now on... bad tradesman, maybe you check their references better in the future. It's the same thing except there is no way to really "pre-check" or "date defensively." You just have to take the risk and hope the guy you date doesn't end up being one of "those guys." Luckily, like I said, most men aren't bad. But that doesn't mean you can take all strangers at face value.
This is not unique to this forum this is life. I can't tell you how many women I hear how come I never attract guys I'm into, how come I only attract jerks, etc.
This is not unique to this forum this is life. I can't tell you how many women I hear how come I never attract guys I'm into, how come I only attract jerks, etc.
That's a good question for those people to ask themselves. I know several straight women who only attract alcoholics and junkies, time after time. They have not a clue.
The men (who complain) tend to complain about getting rejected by women, but rarely admit to doing much of the rejecting. Nobody wants them, according to them.
The women (who complain) tend to complain about rejecting men, but rarely admit to getting rejected themselves. They're always in hot demand, according to them.
Pretty interesting dichotomy if you ask me. Thoughts?
Virtually every single time I started getting better with a certain class of women I found that the root cause was actually that I didn't like them. Weird twist to think the problem with "hot" women is that guys are actually rejecting them.
This particular Dichotomy is based in the fact that men aren't willing to share a woman, while women will often share a man. Historicaly, 80% of women will reproduce at some point in their lives, but the same in true for only 40% of male population. Woman's hypergamy is at work here, and is also the same reason most women are only interested in top men, while ignoring existence of the remaining, less desirable men. In a bit of a twisted way, this is actually healthy for our civilization, considering only men with desirable traits and genes, have the opportunity to reproduce. You're welcome.
That's a good question for those people to ask themselves. I know several straight women who only attract alcoholics and junkies, time after time. They have not a clue.
Because of a disconnect between what causes the tingles and what women can rationalize that should cause the tingles. Womans attraction cues takes place in hindbrain, thus it is not a conscious process. They are based on concepts that haven't evolved much over thousands of years. For example, women in general are still attracted to men who display traits of a good protector and a provider. Even though many of the very same women are quite successful in their careers and wealthy, and have very little if any need for a protector in their life. Reptillian part of the brain has not developed at the pace that our civilization has.
This particular Dichotomy is based in the fact that men aren't willing to share a woman, while women will often share a man. Historicaly, 80% of women will reproduce at some point in their lives, but the same in true for only 40% of male population. Woman's hypergamy is at work here, and is also the same reason most women are only interested in top men, while ignoring existence of the remaining, less desirable men. In a bit of a twisted way, this is actually healthy for our civilization, considering only men with desirable traits and genes, have the opportunity to reproduce. You're welcome.
I think you need to watch the movie Idiocracy, because I think there's some truth to what it describes. And if that's the case, it gives little credence to what you're saying here.
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.