musemaj11 Posted October 16, 2011 Share Posted October 16, 2011 Why is the former accepted while the latter is degraded? Link to post Share on other sites
oaks Posted October 16, 2011 Share Posted October 16, 2011 Why is the former accepted while the latter is degraded? I'd never heard of either of these stupid rules until you discussed them in a thread yesterday. If I can re-phrase the first part as "why do (some) men tolerate selfish behaviour from women they fancy?" then I think the answer is in the question. Link to post Share on other sites
Els Posted October 16, 2011 Share Posted October 16, 2011 Both are idiotic. Link to post Share on other sites
LittleTiger Posted October 16, 2011 Share Posted October 16, 2011 Both are idiotic. Agreed! Since when was there a 'rulebook' on dating? Dating is a 'free-for-all'. If you're not grown-up enough to work out your own 'rules' as you go along, then you shouldn't be dating. Link to post Share on other sites
january2011 Posted October 16, 2011 Share Posted October 16, 2011 I don't accept either rule. At best they are very rough guidelines. At worst they take away all the personal responsibility of getting to know yourself and your partner so that you can come to a mutually satisfactory agreement about what works best for you both. Link to post Share on other sites
soserious1 Posted October 16, 2011 Share Posted October 16, 2011 Muse I follow only one rule with regards to my romantic life "sworn to fun, with allegiance to none" I pay for the entire date,not just my portion, if I find the guy physically attractive I jump his jock at evening's end,no holds barred sex, with no strings attached or wanted. If I don't find the guy attractive enough, I still pay for the entire date & we go our separate ways, no harm,no foul. Link to post Share on other sites
phineas Posted October 16, 2011 Share Posted October 16, 2011 I've never really heard of these rules either. I have my own rules. I don't treat women until their my GF & I don't consider a woman my GF until my needs are being met. I no longer waste my time or money on women who are bored & just looking for attention. Link to post Share on other sites
zengirl Posted October 16, 2011 Share Posted October 16, 2011 I think people with arbitrary rules are a bit odd. At the same time, you can choose not to go out with anyone you like. If you don't want to date someone who doesn't pay or who doesn't "put out" (what a gross phrase) in a timely fashion or whatever, just don't date them. Link to post Share on other sites
grkBoy Posted October 16, 2011 Share Posted October 16, 2011 I never deal with those rules. If one sees paying for dates as paying for sex, then stop dealing with dating and just hire escorts. I pay because I want to pay, because I like the idea of being a gentleman. If one worries this girl is using him for free dinners, then end it. I generally have not gotten to date 3 with women who were not into me. I have never met a woman who used me for free nights out and yet had no intentions of going further. If I get through four dates and can see there isn't any deep enough chemistry that this would become more, then I'll either talk about it and gauge how she feels about "us", or move on. Some of you guys worry too damn much about there. There isn't any exact science to this. Link to post Share on other sites
Cypress25 Posted October 16, 2011 Share Posted October 16, 2011 I don't treat women until their my GF & I don't consider a woman my GF until my needs are being met. LOL, I guess you don't date women who have needs of their own. Do you consider a woman's needs after she becomes your girlfriend, or do you remain selfish throughout the course of your relationship? Link to post Share on other sites
phineas Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 LOL, I guess you don't date women who have needs of their own. Do you consider a woman's needs after she becomes your girlfriend, or do you remain selfish throughout the course of your relationship? Oh look! my angry woman stalker is back! Well, one of them. LOL! Do you hate men so much you just assume they are selfish & everything is one-sided or do you just think women are not smart enough in general to stay out of relationships with men who aren't meeting their needs? You don't seem to have much faith in either men or women it appears. Apparently, you consider dinner at a restaurant a "need" to a woman? Why don't you define "needs" to a woman & i'll let you know how realistic they are, if I meet them & how I meet them. m'kay? Link to post Share on other sites
Mme. Chaucer Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 I knew a young woman who had sex with a guy the first night she met him, which happened to be at a party and not on a date. Do you vigilant scorekeepers believe that the guy should retroactively take her on 3 (or 4, I'm confused about the rule you depend upon for dating) in order to "pay" for the sex? I'm sure that being such equitable fellows, you would not want to see a guy "stealing" sex. That would be considered legally fraudulent, right? Link to post Share on other sites
oaks Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 I'm sure that being such equitable fellows, you would not want to see a guy "stealing" sex. That would be considered legally fraudulent, right? Brilliant! Link to post Share on other sites
rightfield Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 If the girl has sex with the guy the first night she meets him, the guy owes her 4 dates, with 3 dates being owed by rule, and date 4 tacked on as a convenience charge for express service. Link to post Share on other sites
fortyninethousand322 Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 I have a question about this "rule". Does paying for two dates get you "half sex"? Like an installment plan. Link to post Share on other sites
OliveOyl Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 It seems to me that it is one paid date per "base" covered. Does that sound about right? :lmao: Link to post Share on other sites
Mme. Chaucer Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 If the girl has sex with the guy the first night she meets him, the guy owes her 4 dates, with 3 dates being owed by rule, and date 4 tacked on as a convenience charge for express service. Haha! :D:D Link to post Share on other sites
alphamale Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 Why is the former accepted while the latter is degraded? if a broad really really likes you she's going to put out sooner or later... Link to post Share on other sites
Mme. Chaucer Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 It seems to me that it is one paid date per "base" covered. Does that sound about right? :lmao: Very astute observation. Also, is the tally ongoing? Is the act of sexual intercourse supposed to occur one time per four dates? Maybe one of the vigilant rule guys here can create a handy iphone ap for keeping track of when sex or more dates are owed. They certainly have time for it - since they never go out with women, despite their obvious expertise. Link to post Share on other sites
Mme. Chaucer Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 if a broad really really likes you she's going to put out sooner or later... Yes, but I think that would be because the broad really really likes you. Not because you paid for 3 (or is it 4?) dates. Honestly, boys, if you are as miserable in real life as you are here on LS, I would be surprised if you ever hit the requisite mark to receive your sexual payment, anyway. I can't imagine any woman spending 3 (or 4, or … 2 for that matter) valuable portions of a day or night with you. After all, she could be on LoveShack having fun, or watching Toddlers and Tiaras. Or turning 12 months worth of compost. Anything. Link to post Share on other sites
alphamale Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 Or turning 12 months worth of compost. i'm been on many dates wishing i was rather doing the above anyhoo guys: if a chick is really into you then you could take her for coffee on the first date, mcdonalds on the second date and then applebees on the third and you'd still get laid Link to post Share on other sites
fishtaco Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 There is no rule she has to put out by date number X, and there is no rule that you have to take her out to X number of dates. Not into paying for her dinners anymore? Then bail out and go find someone else. I've had women that'd drag me around for a month without any intention of anything more. Probably just in it for the entertainment value or the free meals, or to satisfy some sort of personality deficiency. Who knows. When I give the benefit of the doubt, that's when I regret it later. But I cut them off at around a month max, usually less. And it's not because they didn't put out, but because I can feel that something isn't right. The last bad one lasted a month. I started being suspicious at week #2, it never got better, so by the end of the month I was already having sex with someone else. Of course she then came back and got all interested after I gave her the cold shoulder. So predictable. There are all kinds of different people out there. Find the ones that match what you want. Bail out on ones that don't. You can't make everyone behave the way you want them to. It's up to you to make the right selection. Link to post Share on other sites
phineas Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 (edited) I have a question about this "rule". Does paying for two dates get you "half sex"? Like an installment plan. What about just the tip? Edited October 17, 2011 by phineas Link to post Share on other sites
anne1707 Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 What about just the tip? I think you have answered your own question Link to post Share on other sites
Cypress25 Posted October 17, 2011 Share Posted October 17, 2011 Oh look! my angry woman stalker is back! Well, one of them. LOL! Huh? Do you hate men so much you just assume they are selfish & everything is one-sided or do you just think women are not smart enough in general to stay out of relationships with men who aren't meeting their needs? I don't hate men, nor do I assume they're selfish. Your post in particular sounded very selfish, which is why I called it out. It's not all men, it's just you. Relationships are supposed to be give and take, but you didn't even mention what you would contribute to a relationship. You only said what you expect the woman to provide for you. She would have to pay her own way on all dates and meet your needs. But would you attempt to meet her needs as well? Or is it all about you? You don't seem to have much faith in either men or women it appears. I never said anything about men or women. I'm asking about you. Apparently, you consider dinner at a restaurant a "need" to a woman? I didn't say that either. Every woman has different needs. But you're only concerned about your needs, it seems. Why don't you define "needs" to a woman & i'll let you know how realistic they are, if I meet them & how I meet them. m'kay? I'm not trying to define the typical woman's needs. Everyone is different. I'm wondering if you make any attempt to meet the woman's needs (once you identify them) when you're dating. I mean, if she's supposed to meet your needs, then you should be doing the same for her, yes? Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts