3rd date "rule" being brought into conversation by a guy

[louise_23]

When you pay for dinner in a restaurant, you are buying food, you are not buying sex. You do get something in return for the money you spend. You give money to the restaurant, and the restaurant gives you food. It's a fair transaction.

 

If you want to buy sex from a woman, you'll have to give her money directly. That's what prostitutes are for.

 

When you treat someone on a date, it's supposed to be a gift. Like when I took my boyfriend out to dinner for his birthday. I paid for his dinner as a gift to him. I didn't expect anything in return. He didn't owe me anything for it.

 

If you pay for a woman on a date, it's considered a gift. That's why it's a "gentleman" thing to do. If you demand something in exchange for that "gift," it is no longer a gift and you are no longer a gentleman. If you don't want to treat the woman on a date and you don't want to be a gentleman, then don't pay for her. You don't have to pay; it's voluntary.

 

I never expect the man to pay for me on dates. I always offer to pay for myself. If he insists on paying, I'll let him because I assume he wants to be a gentleman and do something nice for me. That is the only acceptable reason to treat someone on a date. If you pay for a woman because you expect something in return, you're not treating her, you're bartering with her. Bartering is not acceptable behavior on a date.

 

Besides, wouldn't it be more gratifying to know that a woman is having sex with you because she wants to, rather than because she feels obligated to? If you pay for a woman on a date and you want compensation, then ask her to pay for you on the next date. That's a fair and equal exchange.

 

Understand this: No one owes you sex. For anything. If you paid for a woman on 200 dates, she still wouldn't owe you sex. If you bought a car for a woman, she still wouldn't owe you sex. If you saved a woman from a speeding train, she still wouldn't owe you sex. That is too much to expect. Her body is not a bartering tool.

 

 

there should be an applause smiley! well said!

[louise_23]

Really, if there is some kind of barter system in place, it would be useful if both people agreed upon the terms very specifically before any portion of the business transaction took place.

 

Who knows? Maybe the woman is operating under a system where after 3 dates she is supposed to change the oil in the guy's car. He might be missing out on some great bartering opportunities just because he's stuck in a rut of thinking that paying for dinner equals sexual intercourse.

 

What a bunch of weirdos.

 

 

lol this is so funny!

[fishtaco]

If two people are attracted to each other, sex shouldn't take too long to happen. But sex shouldn't happen just because the man paid for drinks and then pointed at his penis. The guy has no tact. That's not how it's done.

 

As for making the guy wait or whatever, I've made that mistake before. Just because a woman makes you wait doesn't mean she's a better choice. In fact, that's when you have to turn on the caution sign and really observe to make sure she's not playing you.

[Cypress25]

But sex shouldn't happen just because the man paid for drinks and then pointed at his penis. The guy has no tact. That's not how it's done.

 

Hahahaha, omg that would be awful.

 

As for making the guy wait or whatever, I've made that mistake before. Just because a woman makes you wait doesn't mean she's a better choice. In fact, that's when you have to turn on the caution sign and really observe to make sure she's not playing you.

 

I think you could tell if a woman was playing you. (Playing you for what, exactly? Free food? LOL) It's not hard to tell if someone genuinely likes you and enjoys spending time with you, especially if you communicate openly with each other.

 

Personally, I like to wait awhile before having sex in a new relationship. I'm not making the guy wait; if he doesn't want to wait, he knows where the door is. I just don't feel comfortable having sex with someone until I know him very well and trust him completely. That doesn't mean I'm playing him, and I always make it clear that I'm serious about him and I make sure he understands my reasons for waiting. And I don't make him pay for dates either.

[fishtaco]

I think you could tell if a woman was playing you. (Playing you for what, exactly? Free food? LOL) It's not hard to tell if someone genuinely likes you and enjoys spending time with you, especially if you communicate openly with each other.

 

Okay...

 

1) Women never lead men on?

2) When women lead men on, they are open with their communication?

 

Maybe you're a nice person that doesn't do this and can never imagine a person doing this. But I tell you there are a lot of people out there with emotional baggage. Sometimes they hide it well. Sometimes their perfect boobs give you a lethal dose of wishful thinking.

 

Are you a man or a woman? I'm guessing man. Because women know this. Every woman have had crazy female friends. Smart ones drop them eventually. They tend to be emotional black holes. They'll get all competitive and fight with you for attention from men that neither of you even care about. The smart ones learn to change their behavior and hide their emotional baggage around men. But if you're a woman, you get the full unobstructed view.

 

And no, I'm a stupid guy, and I don't have good judge of character. Sometimes I can tell, sometimes I can't. And it could take up to a month, maybe more, before I figure out what the woman is about.

[louise_23]

For the last few months, I've been seeing articles about the trouble with dating in the recession. It seems that today's economic circumstances has put a severe bite in the modern dating ritual. And the women are all in a tizzy about it.

 

Account after account tells of women forlornly describing their woes of the decreased stable of men. "There's just no one left out there. All the men have seem to have gone into hiding. We're out here all alone. Help us, please!"

 

Now, really, all this trouble with dating in the recession is just a bunch of syndicated whining. What women are really expressing is their dismay that there are fewer men out there who are willing and able to PAY for the dating and mating ritual.

 

This is not an outreach to men to share their feelings or come to the table to discuss things. It's a loosely orchestrated whinge that screams, "Waaaaaahhhh, no one wants to pay for our sushi and Cosmopolitans anymore!"

 

You would think that today's empowered women would step to the plate and pick up the financial slack in the dating scene, right?

 

Well, think again.

 

Although they might not realize it, the majority of women take a third wave feminist tact of "equality when it's convenient for me, traditionalism when it's convenient for me." "Give me equality in the workplace. But when the bills come, YOU'RE the one forking it over."

 

It's doesn't take a genius to see the hypocrisy here. The vast majority of women have no intention whatsoever of paying their share of the dating and mating ritual. That part is up to men, as it's always been. The simple solution, which the so-called experts don't have the balls to tell you, is to date cheaper and to split the bill, or *gasp* maybe even pay the bill yourself.

 

Nope.

 

Today's women will do what they've been trained to do by the experts, the media, and legions of stupid men who are caught up in out-dated roles of chivalry: they'll whine and moan until they get what they want.

 

But this also reveals a more subtle and insidious hypocrisy at work. Let's talk about "feelings" and "communication." For years now, men have been told to communicate more and share our "feelings" and "true selves" with women. Well, men, we have the perfect chance now, right? Now that the money is gone, all that we're left with is ourselves in place of all the money and material things we waved in front of women in order to attract them. And since women are the more "compassionate" and "understanding" gender, according to legions of experts and editorialists, they should be excited at the rare chance to discover the true selves hidden behind the money and all this stuff.

 

Yeah, right!

 

The truth is is that women, and the rest of the world, cannot care less about what men feel. For the vast majority of them, particularly in the dating and mating scene, we are walking ATM machines.

 

Why else would we see scads of articles (all written from women's perspective, by the way) crying about the crunch the recession has put on dating? Shouldn't there be article after article telling women, "Hey, it's ok. Fancy dinners and clubs and Cosmopolitan don't mean anything. What matters is discovering the true person you're with."?

 

The reality is is that a vast majority of women in the dating scene are spoiled, entitled little brats who cannot care less about anyone else, especially the guys they're dating. They are horrified that their "standards of living" will decrease. And they are even more horrified of the idea of having to pay for their own way in this world. They're so fed on the idea of men paying for everything, despite their whinging and whining about everything else, that they cannot see the prostitute that looks back at them from the mirror in the morning after.

 

A couple of months ago, I tried an experiment on a dating site. I posted an ad that said I had two concert tickets. I offered to bring the woman to the concert (tickets on me) if she foot the bill for a reasonable dinner at a low-priced, fun restaurant afterwards. A pretty reasonable offer for a night of fun, right? I then posted a second ad that said that I wanted to bring a woman out for a night in the town. Expensive dinner, fancy club, and everything else that goes with it -- ON ME. Guess which ad got the most responses? The second one, of course. In fact, the first ad received ZERO responses.

 

So here I am with the first ad, trying to give women a chance to step up to the plate and show how "strong" and "independent" and "adventurous" they are. Zero responses. Then I offer the women a chance to be concubines, and I'm flooded with responses.

 

Surprised?

 

No.

 

When you read between the lines, women today have gotten what they always wanted: a fun and exciting ritual paid for by somebody else. Give them a chance to prove how independent they are, and they scatter like roaches. And God forbid any man sheds any light on this truth. Our jobs, as it always been, is to keep our mouths shut and our wallets open.

 

This is the reality about dating in today's day and age: it's about a bunch a spoiled and entitled little brats who are upset because there are less men out there who are willing to pay for things.

 

These articles have been dying down somewhat lately, which is a good sign that there are more people out there who wish that these pathetic and liquor soaked beasts would just shut the hell up.

 

Here are some advice for these dating-challenged women who are looking for success out there. You must date cheaper and split the bill. Give him a chance to see how strong and independent and understanding you are. You've been saying it long enough, right? Well, now is the time to show it.

 

Surprise us. Step up to the plate and walk the walk, discover new things, go throw a frisbee at a park, go see some live music at a local venue, have cheeseburgers at a drive-in, take a ferry ride around the city, use your imagination and solve your own dating crises. Take your fingers out of your mouths, ditch the fancy drinks, and rough it out with the rest of us. And take out your wallets -- it's time you payed for your own way in this dating world.

 

And here's an even stronger message to men: any working woman who requires that you pay for the entire dating and mating ritual, is a f-cking prostitute, plain and simple. Her directive is very clear: you ain't getting any of this unless you pay for that. And if you are a man who does pay for the dating ritual in order to get sex, then you're a John, and you will be treated as such throughout the entirety of your so-called relationship. You might as well go to a brothel instead, where the transaction is at least clear and honest. At a brothel, no one claims to want to get to know you better. They want your money, period. A hooker who requires you to fork over the green before sex, is much more honest than a hypocrite who claims to be independent on one hand, but requires that you pay for her lifestyle in the other. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure this out.

 

 

 

you, sir, are an idiot. i dont even know why im getting answers from you men-on-high-horses. i paid out more than this douche and any other guy ive dated. ive never expected anyone to pay for me (despite being in college and the guys are employed in good jobs) its just not how i am.

 

as for not caring about what men feel - i do care, just not the creeps that are trying to get in my pants and the lesser creeps that defend them with an out-of-date argument (thats you)

[Mme. Chaucer]

Women who are compassionate individuals do care what men feel, as well as caring about what other women feel.

 

Sociopaths don't care what anyone feels.

 

The fourth planet guy … is obviously living on another planet. It's kind of amusing how he proposes to "teach us a lesson" about what and how women are, though, when he clearly has no vestige of a clue.

[Lucky_One]

When you pay for dinner in a restaurant, you are buying food, you are not buying sex. You do get something in return for the money you spend. You give money to the restaurant, and the restaurant gives you food. It's a fair transaction.

 

If you want to buy sex from a woman, you'll have to give her money directly. That's what prostitutes are for.

 

When you treat someone on a date, it's supposed to be a gift. Like when I took my boyfriend out to dinner for his birthday. I paid for his dinner as a gift to him. I didn't expect anything in return. He didn't owe me anything for it.

 

If you pay for a woman on a date, it's considered a gift. That's why it's a "gentleman" thing to do. If you demand something in exchange for that "gift," it is no longer a gift and you are no longer a gentleman. If you don't want to treat the woman on a date and you don't want to be a gentleman, then don't pay for her. You don't have to pay; it's voluntary.

 

I never expect the man to pay for me on dates. I always offer to pay for myself. If he insists on paying, I'll let him because I assume he wants to be a gentleman and do something nice for me. That is the only acceptable reason to treat someone on a date. If you pay for a woman because you expect something in return, you're not treating her, you're bartering with her. Bartering is not acceptable behavior on a date.

 

Besides, wouldn't it be more gratifying to know that a woman is having sex with you because she wants to, rather than because she feels obligated to? If you pay for a woman on a date and you want compensation, then ask her to pay for you on the next date. That's a fair and equal exchange.

 

Understand this: No one owes you sex. For anything. If you paid for a woman on 200 dates, she still wouldn't owe you sex. If you bought a car for a woman, she still wouldn't owe you sex. If you saved a woman from a speeding train, she still wouldn't owe you sex. That is too much to expect. Her body is not a bartering tool.

 

This is an EXCELLENT post!

 

Madame Chaucer, you are right on with this post. "Absolutely. Honestly Louise, its barely worth responding to Musemaj and the other creepy guys [please add Fourth Planet to this list!] on this site. There is actually something mentally wrong with them and none of them have ever had a date with a woman anyway, what a surprise . They never respond to anything properly except to say all women are nothing more than prostitutes basically. Total jerks and creeps to a man.

[blueskyday]

If I go out with a guy, pay for four dates, he better put out...or he's a gold-digger! Very silly either way.

 

Dating is getting to know each other. Paying for the dates is up for negotiation, but the pleasure of each other's company is the goal. Sex is NOT a commodity, ever. If someone treats it as such, male or female, it's wrong.

 

I've never used sex to get what I want. I like the poster who said sex isn't something you give someone; it's something you share.

 

Any guy who pulls some "rules" based crap about sex to pressure you into doing it isn't a good guy. He was obviously putting in the minimum "dating" effort/appearance to get sex. Once he got it, he would have suddenly disappeared or said "I'm just not ready for a relationship now. I need some me time. Ciao"

 

NEXT! Don't give that guy the time of day if he ever calls again. What a loser.

[musemaj11]

Its funny how on the internet all women are considerate women who dont expect to get paid for on dates but ironically I never met any of them in real life. :rolleyes:

[fishtaco]

Its funny how on the internet all women are considerate women who dont expect to get paid for on dates but ironically I never met any of them in real life. :rolleyes:

 

LOL. It's easy to be the armchair quarterback.

 

My personal experience is that women that are as wise and proper and well adjusted as women on LS, are extremely rare. By extremely I mean EXTREMELY in all caps.

 

Most women, just like most men, unsurprisingly, fall into the same category of the general stereotypes. Because average people tend to be, well, average. And if you're out on the town meeting people, chances are, you are meeting average people.

[louise_23]

This is an EXCELLENT post!

 

Madame Chaucer, you are right on with this post. "Absolutely. Honestly Louise, its barely worth responding to Musemaj and the other creepy guys [please add Fourth Planet to this list!] on this site. There is actually something mentally wrong with them and none of them have ever had a date with a woman anyway, what a surprise . They never respond to anything properly except to say all women are nothing more than prostitutes basically. Total jerks and creeps to a man.

 

lol, i should know better than to respond now. but its so annoying!

 

If I go out with a guy, pay for four dates, he better put out...or he's a gold-digger! Very silly either way.

 

Dating is getting to know each other. Paying for the dates is up for negotiation, but the pleasure of each other's company is the goal. Sex is NOT a commodity, ever. If someone treats it as such, male or female, it's wrong.

 

I've never used sex to get what I want. I like the poster who said sex isn't something you give someone; it's something you share.

 

Any guy who pulls some "rules" based crap about sex to pressure you into doing it isn't a good guy. He was obviously putting in the minimum "dating" effort/appearance to get sex. Once he got it, he would have suddenly disappeared or said "I'm just not ready for a relationship now. I need some me time. Ciao"

 

NEXT! Don't give that guy the time of day if he ever calls again. What a loser.

 

 

yeah i can see it now i've had a bit of distance and other peoples' viewpoints. he's a complete tool. i like that i dont feel particularly gutted with this one actually. its just like....meh. whatever. not a good guy at all. despite actually proclaiming he was one more than once .

(example: he was driving like an idiot to annoy/scare someone that cut him up and i said jeez calm down already....and he was like "oh, its because i care about my passengers SO much, if i was on my own i wouldnt do this. i feel protective...and i just care...i care too much.")

 

LOL.

 

he doesnt get beaten up enough.

[RiverRunning]

You didn't put out, louise, so he has moved on.

 

 

Plenty of folks here will ascribe to the "third date" rule, but sometimes that's what - a week or two in? I don't think there's anything wrong, at all, with not wanting to bed somebody that early on and taking risks before you fully know 'em (and their STD-status).

 

I think it's also a little too aggressive to bring this up and to start essentially telling you, "You haven't put out yet, babe, and I'm bored." Who does this? You're right. He's only looking for one thing, he's on the rebound, and you would end up being the one to get hurt.

 

Consider it a blessing he's gone flaky! What a crude loser.

[Thierro]

Money has never been a problem between me and the women I dated.

 

If I pay for the movies, she will pay for the popcorn and drinks. If I pay for dinner, she pays for icecream after and vice versa. They don't insist or wait for me to pay, they just do and I let them. No hard feelings what so ever.

 

It's just a healthy and mutual understanding. There are no rules. You are not dating the right kind of person when this is such an issue. It's not about the money, it's about getting to know eachother and enjoying each other's company without a ****load of dating rules. Do what feels good to the both of you.

[Thierro]

Dating rules are pathetic. Especially how a lot of people here on LS hold on to them. They suck all the fun out of dating. Come on people, keep it light and fun.

 

It's disgusting to see how BADLY people NEED someone in their life. The only reason why a lot of people on these boards don't have any success in dating is because of their attitude towards the dating scene and the opposite sex. It’s ridiculous, really.

 

This guys is clearly obsessed over it. Do the things you want to do when it feels right. If you BOTH want to have sex on the first date; go for it. If you want to wait a couple of months; even better.

[SincereOnlineGuy]

3rd date "rule" being brought into conversation by a guy

 

so we've been out on 5 seperate occasions, and had a nice time. and then on the last one he says the sentence "technically people sleep together on the 3rd date and we're past that". its not that im prudish, but a.) we were never in a place to do anything more (ie in public!) b.) i was playing it a bit safe because i mean, if hes on the rebound it wont last anyway, and c.) who the hell brings that up!

 

during said conversation he also mentioned things he likes in bed etc. this came across way to strong for me.

 

 

 

OK, well what if you were married to someone for 50 years, and he too mentioned the "3rd date rule"?

 

It seems one thing if it is 10:30pm on the eve of the 3rd date and he is mentioning it, but quite another if you've been out 5 times or been married 50 years.

 

Why don't you instead paint your own perfect scenario of at what point that same guy might have finally gotten around to being intimate with you and been well-received in so doing?

 

It really isn't out-of-bounds for a guy to be wanting intimacy after he has been out with you five times. So lets here how you would have him approach the topic/thought ???

[oaks]

Its funny how on the internet all women are considerate women who dont expect to get paid for on dates but ironically I never met any of them in real life. :rolleyes:

 

Your people picker needs adjusting.

 

I just did a count of who has paid on dates with the woman I'm currently dating, and so far it's her 3 times, me once, and the other times we split the bill. There are women out there who don't require you to fund their evening meals. Whether, in return, there's any correlation between this and when they put out I'll leave as a study for someone else.

[louise_23]

OK, well what if you were married to someone for 50 years, and he too mentioned the "3rd date rule"?

 

It seems one thing if it is 10:30pm on the eve of the 3rd date and he is mentioning it, but quite another if you've been out 5 times or been married 50 years.

 

Why don't you instead paint your own perfect scenario of at what point that same guy might have finally gotten around to being intimate with you and been well-received in so doing?

 

It really isn't out-of-bounds for a guy to be wanting intimacy after he has been out with you five times. So lets here how you would have him approach the topic/thought ???

 

 

this doesnt make sense. whats 50yrs of marriage got to do with going out 5 times IN PUBLIC on relatively short dates? and my main question really is who brings this up? are you sincerely telling me that YOU would turn to someone and say "hey, sugar, its been 5 dates, and we shouldve slept together on the 3rd" ?

 

im just stunned guys are stupid enough to say such crap. i mean, other guys ive dated had their faults but they werent THAT STUPID. things happen when they happen, why bring it up like a complaint? hardly going to get you anywhere is it? unless you're going out with your personality twin.

 

guessing you play by these rules. smooth

[louise_23]

Look, there are exceptions to every rule, and I'm quite certain that you're one of them. But I'm not here to talk about the needles in the haystack.

 

 

 

So everything I said was a flat out lie? Everything? Liar liar, pants on fire.

 

Just because women are in denial of I say, doesn't make the information I spread in here false. Unpopular and appalling? Yes. Misinformation and flat out lies? I'll bet my five hundred dollars to your one that they're not.

 

 

 

 

Why do you keep dating douchebags? I keep telling you guys that being a jerk and not giving a f-ck about not giving a f-ck is what's going to get the ladies. If you show them too much interest in the beginning, they'll blow you off. If you don't they'll, just blow you.

 

 

 

You say that like it's a bad thing. Guess what, when men take you outs on dates, their primary objective IS to get in your pants. ALL MEN. When we ask you out, is to have sex with then. This is not to say that all men will ONLY stay interested in sex for the long run because there might be other qualities to you that he'll like. What I'm saying is that only after the sex can we then think about if you're the type of girl we want to get serious with or if you're the type that he'll just toss to the side like I do so proudly. When he asks you out, what he's really asking is if he can have sex with you. But since we can't say that for fear that you'll file a sexual harassment suit against us, we disguise that question by asking you out.

 

When a guy meets up with his buddies after a first date with a girl, all they want to know is if he f-cked you. That's it. You being a sweet person with two cats and all that other nonsense is irrelevant to them.

 

----

 

 

The problem here is people are afraid of hearing the truth, or they're afraid of others hearing the truth. They don’t want to damage their own egos by admitting they’re wrong, or having some spoiler like me coming in here and ruining everything for them.

 

The great example of this is the never-ending debate on who gets to pay on dates. When I express my view that women should pay for their own ways in the dating world, I won't be surprised if I get responses in the way of shaming statements. They might say that I either have never gotten laid or that I never went out on a date, etc. If I get these statements from women, it’s because they enjoy having their dates paid for. And the last thing they need is some a—hole like me giving other men ideas. If I get them from men, it’s because they don’t want to admit that they don’t have the confidence to attract women without waving a lot of cash in their faces.

 

So, one party wants to shut me down because I’m killing their Golden Goose; the other party wants to shut me down because I’m killing their egos. And, boy, I just live for situations like that. Gold diggers, meet your nemesis.

 

In matters sexual, relational, and gender related, women are so used to society agreeing with whatever they have to say, that they have lost the ability to argue effectively. The logical muscle has become atrophied. In its place, the flab of unquestioned subjective is in their brain, claiming moral superiority by virtue of reproductive function.

 

In the Women’s Study lecture hall, the professor says, “We are women, and we’re all oppressed. Men are evil. This is true because I say it is.” In the courtrooms, the judges say that the natural place for a child to be raised is with his mother, regardless of any evidence to the contrary in specific situations. In the media, fathers and husbands are portrayed as bumbling fools; so of course they must be. After all, those media folks are so much smarter than the rest of us.

 

Hence, the culture has created an atmosphere where proof or evidence is never required of women. Women are morally superior to men because, well, they just are. And men are icky, anyway.

 

It’s no wonder that women, and not just feminists, react with horror when a man stands up and says, “Wait a minute. Something is not right here.” A man MUST understand that merely having a contrary view to women when it comes to relationships or matters of gender, then it’s a violation of what most women consider their birth rights.

 

And so the usual comments from women ensue.

 

----

 

 

The purpose of men going on dates is to get laid. There is no other goal. It’s not a time to be auditioning someone to be your girlfriend, it is not an opportunity to be drinking the new chocolate-banana mocha over there at Starbucks or Barns and Noble, or to talk aimlessly about nothing in particular. It’s not to go to a new movie or a concert. The purpose of dates is to get laid.

 

Guys, I want you to do a gut check. If you have dates scheduled with anyone within the next couple of weeks, and you don’t think these will lead to sex anytime soon, FORGET THEM.

 

Forget them.

 

It’s that simple – forget them.

 

Dating is for sex. I mean, I’m just amazed at the number of guys who are convinced that the purpose of dating is to sit around and to … flap your gums. There ought to be something else flapping, if you know what I mean.

 

I’m a firm believer in the thee-date rule. If she doesn’t put out by the end of the third date, kick her to the curb and move on. Always have several plates spinning. You don’t date one woman or nest all of your eggs in one basket. You date several bitches. That way, if you go out with a woman and she doesn’t put out on a given night, you always have a booty call coming in from the bullpen.

 

And let me tell you ladies who, over the years, have … held out: believe me, girls, there’s always another girl up the block and around the corner who will do the heavy lifting when you won’t. Don’t believe that your vagina is a monopoly because there are many of them out there.

 

And anytime you think you have a man wrapped around your little finger, keep in mind that the vast majority of us are getting it somewhere else. If you don’t give it to us, somebody else will. Don’t think that we’re going to tolerate you holding out and, uh, being coy about this. We may appear to be accepting it, but we’re not.

 

 

 

 

 

That's funny!

 

It's also amazing how all the "exceptions" to everything I say just so happen to be women who are members of this forum. They can do no wrong. They all want to have us believe that they're virgins or not sluts and how they don't "do things like that."

 

Ever.

 

 

you're insane if you think im interested enough in your opinion to read an a4 page worth of crap. i got to "why do you keep dating douchebags" - obviously they dont appear to be on the surface. how stupid are you? im guessing you go in all idiot-guns blazing. bless your honesty, at least that gives the girl the opportunity to not make it through one date with you let alone 5.

[louise_23]

Money has never been a problem between me and the women I dated.

 

If I pay for the movies, she will pay for the popcorn and drinks. If I pay for dinner, she pays for icecream after and vice versa. They don't insist or wait for me to pay, they just do and I let them. No hard feelings what so ever.

 

It's just a healthy and mutual understanding. There are no rules. You are not dating the right kind of person when this is such an issue. It's not about the money, it's about getting to know eachother and enjoying each other's company without a ****load of dating rules. Do what feels good to the both of you.

 

exactly!

 

Dating rules are pathetic. Especially how a lot of people here on LS hold on to them. They suck all the fun out of dating. Come on people, keep it light and fun.

 

 

It's disgusting to see how BADLY people NEED someone in their life. The only reason why a lot of people on these boards don't have any success in dating is because of their attitude towards the dating scene and the opposite sex. It’s ridiculous, really.

 

This guys is clearly obsessed over it. Do the things you want to do when it feels right. If you BOTH want to have sex on the first date; go for it. If you want to wait a couple of months; even better.

 

totally agree actually.

 

You didn't put out, louise, so he has moved on.

 

 

Plenty of folks here will ascribe to the "third date" rule, but sometimes that's what - a week or two in? I don't think there's anything wrong, at all, with not wanting to bed somebody that early on and taking risks before you fully know 'em (and their STD-status).

 

I think it's also a little too aggressive to bring this up and to start essentially telling you, "You haven't put out yet, babe, and I'm bored." Who does this? You're right. He's only looking for one thing, he's on the rebound, and you would end up being the one to get hurt.

 

Consider it a blessing he's gone flaky! What a crude loser.

 

crude is the right word actually. i couldnt imagine even thinking of saying it to someone. and you're right about getting hurt, not going there again. spent the best part of a year getting over stupid men, not going to throw it away on some clueless guy on the rebound.

[betterdeal]

Sounds like he's got a clumsy way of suggesting sex. Not surprising, given he's recently out of a relationship and may actually be a bit afraid of intimacy at the moment.

 

If you were up for having a nothing serious, scratch an itch, in-between thing, he'd be ideal for that. But seems you're not looking for what he's looking for. Probably best to step back a bit.

[Els]

Ewww. I don't have any rules involving an arbitrary number of meetings, and I expect a guy with a decent head on his shoulders to not have them either.

 

IMO you dodged a bullet.

[blueskyday]

Yeah, we women know all men who ask us out want to have sex with us. It's called chemistry. It's just that we want a guy who also wants to be with the WHOLE woman, and get to know us. It's great to have an emotional and physical connection, plus an intellectual/mental one.

 

Any guy who expects me to put out and not consider my (emotional) needs isn't worth my time. Any smart guy knows in order for a woman to feel wild and uninhibited she must "trust" the guy she is with so she can let go. It's worth it on both sides.

 

I realize guys need sex to feel close and emotional with a woman. It's what drives the intimacy. No guy is going out on a date with a woman he doesn't want to sleep with. We women are the same. I wouldn't date a guy I didn't envision sleeping with if all else goes well.

 

My checklist on a guy is longer than #1: Do I want to sleep with him? That's important, but not the whole story. I just want the same consideration from a guy. A lot of men want to have sex with me, but I want the ones who also want a relationship on other levels, too.

 

Too much to ask? I don't think so.

[musemaj11]

Your people picker needs adjusting.

 

I just did a count of who has paid on dates with the woman I'm currently dating, and so far it's her 3 times, me once, and the other times we split the bill. There are women out there who don't require you to fund their evening meals. Whether, in return, there's any correlation between this and when they put out I'll leave as a study for someone else.

Didnt you say you live in Britain? How do you know its my people picker not the lack of women with that certain quality in the place where I live?

 

ROFL!!!! Guess you blew the wind right out of Musemaj11's sails with this statement. He's so incredibly BITTER and obviously begrudges treating a lady to the All-You-Can-Eat Shrimp dinner for $14.99 at Red Lobster. How's that silly argument about women's rights and equality and paying for dates working for ya, Muse?

You sound so bitter.

 

Here's a little 411 for ya, Muse. Women's rights were NOT about changing the face of dating or the mating ritual between men and women - it was about women having the right to make their own decisions about procreation and contraception and being able to have a career IF THEY CHOSE TO DO SO. It was about equal PAY for equal WORK if a woman CHOSE to have a career.

 

So knock it off painting the entire female gender as a bunch of money-sucking gold diggers looking to take YOU for a ride, simply because alot of women STILL prefer the more traditional ways of dating.

We all men get it that women only want men's opportunities not the responsibilities.

 

"I deserve to get paid as much as you at work, but when we go out you are totally paying."

 

And lastly, I can guarantee that if you ARE able to snag a woman with that selfish and bitter attitude you're sporting, I'm willing to bet the FARM that if you do end up living together, you're going to be a lazy ass like MOST men and dump 80-90% of the household chores on the woman - even though she's ALSO working a fulltime job. It's quite comical how some of you scream and cry about paying for dates and drag the 'equality' argument into it (which had NOTHING to do with dating) but you'll all be the FIRST jackasses to dump all the household work on a woman because you feel you're above doing it.

Considering I had always been the one doing at least 80% of the paying in all of my relationships despite hating it, hell yeah if I ever lived with a woman, I would never lift a damn finger at home. Edited October 21, 2011 by musemaj11

[SincereOnlineGuy]

this doesnt make sense. whats 50yrs of marriage got to do with going out 5 times IN PUBLIC on relatively short dates? and my main question really is who brings this up? are you sincerely telling me that YOU would turn to someone and say "hey, sugar, its been 5 dates, and we shouldve slept together on the 3rd" ?

 

im just stunned guys are stupid enough to say such crap. i mean, other guys ive dated had their faults but they werent THAT STUPID. things happen when they happen, why bring it up like a complaint? hardly going to get you anywhere is it? unless you're going out with your personality twin.

 

guessing you play by these rules. smooth

 

 

 

How can someone who admittedly "doesn't know what normal is" know how to tell the difference between somebody talking about a "3rd date rule" in hindsight from 50 years into the future and two dates into the future.

 

The problem here is your not knowing what normal is, and you established that much loud and clear from the start.

 

Nobody says you ever have to sleep with him or anyone, but HEEEEEEEEEEE is not wrong for having some desire to get hot-n-heavy with you by a 5th date.

 

To refresh your memory, your "main question" seemed to be:

 

"... should I have slept with this guy from the off?"

 

 

... which begs the further question: "what does 'the off' have to do with the "3rd date rule" ??

 

 

Er, wait, "Whats 'from the off' got to do with the '3rd date rule' ???"