An ironic thing I've noticed on LS

[Lonely Ronin]

This is why women need to accept their new responsibility of approaching themselves.

 

Some have, I dated 2 women last year that approached me in a coffee shop. I was strait up propositioned in a bar back in January. it took me a good 10 seconds to realize what just happened. Then she got all pissy because I said no.

[fortyninethousand322]

This is why women need to accept their new responsibility of approaching themselves.

 

Worst idea of all time.

 

If women as a whole were more proactive about approaching, etc., it's not the guys like you and me who would benefit. No sir.

 

The only way you get out of your predicament is luck, or somehow defeating the odds/your genetic biological make up and attracting women.

[aed]

Worst idea of all time.

 

If women as a whole were more proactive about approaching, etc., it's not the guys like you and me who would benefit. No sir.

 

The only way you get out of your predicament is luck, or somehow defeating the odds/your genetic biological make up and attracting women.

 

those guys already benefit from it. think about it: why do you think women keep hanging around a dj in a club = showing interest/approaching. Hot guys get signals from girls. Girls do show interest in guys (standing next to a guy, smiling looking at him, having their friend go talk with the group of guy). So that doesn't change. it will only give average guys more options with average girls.

 

But then some guys will have the same complains that some women have right now..... "there are no girls hitting on me, that I find attractive"

[salparadise]

Thanks for the clarification. Not all women are drowning in male attention. Only the attractive ones. Now what about the math conundrum?

 

Unless you can convince me that there are less heterosexual women than men out there in the world - this evens out.

 

Or is this about different expectations, in essence, the casual sex vs relationship expectations?

 

It does even out somewhat, but reluctantly, and only because at some point society decided to switch to monogamy as the standard. If you look at other societies throughout history you'll see that the most beautiful women would be in polygamous marriages with a very small number of men––the wealthiest, most powerful, and of the highest social status. Kings would have literally hundreds of women because a) he could get them, and b) he could afford them. Then as you go down the ladder in terms of wealth, men would have as many women as they could afford to keep. At the bottom of the ladder there would be many men who were denied the privilege of having a wife and reproducing. This lower class of men would become restless and unhappy and cause lot's of problems, so monogamy was invented to distribute women more or less evenly through the population of men. This older natural system is still alive and well today in Salt Lake City, Utah among modern day Mormons. They are constantly excommunicating young males out of the religion/society in order to balance the number of men and women in a polygamous society.

 

This is all about the natural fact that women, being the bearers of children, and only able to do so in limited numbers, are highly valued. Men, on the other hand, given the opportunity, could theoretically impregnate several women a day, every day. Each and every egg is a rare and valuable reproductive opportunity, while sperm exists in such abundance that it has no value, or even negative value. It is only valuable when packaged with abundant resources and high social status.

 

Everyone is playing this game in an effort to maximize their reproductive opportunity. Men try to spread the seed far and wide, while women seek to maximize their relatively small number of opportunities by securing resources and the benefits of moving up in social class.

 

So yes, it is about casual sex vs. relationship in that sense.

Edited March 7, 2013 by salparadise

[ltjg45]

If women as a whole were more proactive about approaching, etc., it's not the guys like you and me who would benefit. No sir.

 

I didn't say that for my benefit.

 

I said it for the female's benefit. They keep mentioning they are getting hit on by males they don't want yet the males they do want keep their distance from them.

 

Instead of expecting the males to come to them, the females should go to them.

 

It's no different with the males. Everyone here can control their destiny. It is entirely up to us if we want to do so.

[JuneJulySeptember]

Sometimes, but often its because she is surrounded by men that value her only for her looks.

 

If men valued women for things other than their looks, this problem wouldnt exist.

 

There are exceptions but for every guy who is respectful there are 5 guys who arent and see women as commodities. Shame because they ruin it for the few good ones left

 

Pretty much all men do that- heavily focus on looks and ignore the rest. You have to be good looking first, then other stuff comes into play. Dont beat yourself up, all the other men out there do the same thing (being shallow)

 

I have no problems getting dates either. I have chosen by choice to be single for the past 6 months and have turned everyone down

 

Most men today are shallow and superficial in their 20's. This is pretty much a fact so me understanding reality doesnt make me a bad person.

I get dates all the time because Im told Im friendly and goodlooking.

Those are some posts all from the same poster. If that poster happens to read this, know that I wasn't thinking of this mentality in a negative way (per se), it's just something that popped into my head one morning as being ironic.

 

I'm surprised others don't notice this kind of stuff, the psychology of other posters. They're too busy battling it out in the gender war threads.

 

I can also name 10 other female posters who are the same to varying degrees, but I won't of course.

 

But men who have no trouble getting dates, I've never heard them complain about women being too shallow.

 

Food for thought, huh?

Edited March 7, 2013 by JuneJulySeptember

[veggirl]

So lets say there was 20 guys and 20 girls in one room.

 

What you are saying is all or most of the 20 guys would approach each woman, assuming they are cute girls. So each girl would have say...15 suitors? But each girl would only be interested in what....3 of the guys maybe, according to you? So 3 guys and 3 girls would pair up. That leaves 17 of each....all those girls just stay alone?

 

I don't get it.

 

Your "math" doesn't work, ever.

 

I still stand by MY theory that guys all go after the same girls, goofy/weird looking guys would never settle for a goofy/weird looking girl.

[JuneJulySeptember]

So lets say there was 20 guys and 20 girls in one room.

 

What you are saying is all or most of the 20 guys would approach each woman, assuming they are cute girls. So each girl would have say...15 suitors? But each girl would only be interested in what....3 of the guys maybe, according to you? So 3 guys and 3 girls would pair up. That leaves 17 of each....all those girls just stay alone?

 

I don't get it.

 

Your "math" doesn't work, ever.

 

I still stand by MY theory that guys all go after the same girls, goofy/weird looking guys would never settle for a goofy/weird looking girl.

 

So, it's pretty obvious you think men are very shallow. That's super evident from your post.

 

Have you ever had any trouble getting dates?

[ltjg45]

So lets say there was 20 guys and 20 girls in one room.

 

What you are saying is all or most of the 20 guys would approach each woman, assuming they are cute girls. So each girl would have say...15 suitors? But each girl would only be interested in what....3 of the guys maybe, according to you? So 3 guys and 3 girls would pair up. That leaves 17 of each....all those girls just stay alone?

 

I don't get it.

 

Your "math" doesn't work, ever.

 

I still stand by MY theory that guys all go after the same girls, goofy/weird looking guys would never settle for a goofy/weird looking girl.

 

I doubt the majority of the goofy/weird looking males even know they are goofy/weird looking.

 

And what would quality as goofy/weird looking? I look at that as being retarded.

 

I don't know if I'm goofy/weird looking/retarded/whatever.....but I wouldn't be surprised if I qualify.

[GoodOnPaper]

What you are saying is all or most of the 20 guys would approach each woman, assuming they are cute girls. So each girl would have say...15 suitors? But each girl would only be interested in what....3 of the guys maybe, according to you? So 3 guys and 3 girls would pair up. That leaves 17 of each....all those girls just stay alone?

 

I think the hidden assumption is that even though there are 17 girls who didn't pair off, some of them will later try to hook up with one or more of the top 3 guys in ONS/FWB fashion while waiting to find guys they (the girls) do want to pair off with. I don't see how else the math can work . . .

[ltjg45]

Also, I'm pretty confident the remaining 17 girls don't want any of the remaining 17 guys.

 

After all, there is a reason the top 3 females turned them down and I'm sure the remaining 17 girls who didn't get selected agreed. In fact, the remaining 17 is happy that those 17 guys went after those 3 females and not them.

 

I'm sure it's no difference with the guys when looking at the 17 females.

[iKING]

I don't see how pairing mates is a math problem.

[Kamille]

Those are some posts all from the same poster. If that poster happens to read this, know that I wasn't thinking of this mentality in a negative way (per se), it's just something that popped into my head one morning as being ironic.

 

I'm surprised others don't notice this kind of stuff, the psychology of other posters. They're too busy battling it out in the gender war threads.

 

I can also name 10 other female posters who are the same to varying degrees, but I won't of course.

 

But men who have no trouble getting dates, I've never heard them complain about women being too shallow.

 

Food for thought, huh?

 

But what thought? Could you please spell it out? Because, really, I don't see how that makes any of the genders "more shallow" than the other. (Which is something you hinted at as the purpose for your thread in a previous post).

[Kamille]

I think the hidden assumption is that even though there are 17 girls who didn't pair off, some of them will later try to hook up with one or more of the top 3 guys in ONS/FWB fashion while waiting to find guys they (the girls) do want to pair off with. I don't see how else the math can work . . .

 

Oh brother. Is the assumption that men never ever try to pair off in ONS/FWB with more than one women?

 

The problem with the math is that the survey is skewed from the get go.

 

You guys are comparing women who have success in dating with men who don't. Successful women means there are successful men. Unsuccessful men meand there are unsuccessful women. Most of us are in the median of these two extremes.

 

So, really, if you want to compare men and women and link it to a quality such as shallowness, you should compare succesful/successful and unsuccessful/unsuccessful.

[JuneJulySeptember]

But what thought? Could you please spell it out? Because, really, I don't see how that makes any of the genders "more shallow" than the other. (Which is something you hinted at as the purpose for your thread in a previous post).

 

I didn't say it.

 

You said it.

 

If a man posted that women are too shallow but he has no problems getting dates with women, I'd be equally confused.

[Kamille]

I didn't say it.

 

You said it.

 

If a man posted that women are too shallow but he has no problems getting dates with women, I'd be equally confused.

 

So what are you saying? What thoughts sprung into your head when you realized that:

 

"Women who are successful in dating complain that men are shallow

but men who have no trouble getting dates, I've never heard them complain about women being too shallow."

 

Please put us out of our misery and enlighten us.

[JuneJulySeptember]

So what are you saying? What thoughts sprung into your head when you realized that:

 

"Women who are successful in dating complain that men are shallow

but men who have no trouble getting dates, I've never heard them complain about women being too shallow."

 

Please put us out of our misery and enlighten us.

 

Honestly nothing.

 

I just posted it one morning because I noticed that it was an odd thing. There's a few examples on the previous page if you care to read.

 

People see my Loveshack handle and they expect that every single post of mine has the hidden message of "Women suck. Yea, I'm miserable and all women should die."

 

The truth is I have a sister, a mother, and a girlfriend. And they all rock.

 

So, I dunno.

[xxoo]

But men who have no trouble getting dates, I've never heard them complain about women being too shallow.

 

Food for thought, huh?

 

They might if they had trouble getting relationships with the women who wanted to date them.

[Kamille]

Honestly nothing.

 

I just posted it one morning because I noticed that it was an odd thing. There's a few examples on the previous page if you care to read.

 

People see my Loveshack handle and they expect that every single post of mine has the hidden message of "Women suck. Yea, I'm miserable and all women should die."

 

The truth is I have a sister, a mother, and a girlfriend. And they all rock.

 

So, I dunno.

 

Ok, fair enough. It's the first time I see your handle so I have no idea what it means to others. My posts were mostly responses to how the topic was taken up as the thread unraveled. Clearly, people have imbued your thread with a meaning you had not intended.

[JuneJulySeptember]

women are going after the same guy. hence the imbalance. women will stay single bc they want something they cant have. there are single guys everywhere but women dont want them. they want the guy who is married, unavailable men, men who have girlfriends. once a guy is engaged white women will chase you for sex like no tomorrow. only 20% guys get to sleep with 80% women. women will kiss frogs bc that is what she picks in the beginning. when white women begin to age, the skin dries out, they are not young and tight like they used to be. now since they cant use there looks anymore, they settle. badboys got to enjoy her when she was young and tight, nice guys are told to wait for the dry wrinkle prune. pity

 

BTW.

 

I never, ever understood why this kind of post elicits such hatred and castigation. So, some guy thinks women have it easy. Maybe they do, maybe they don't. What do you care if you are a woman and you have had a number of men attracted to you?

 

If some gal come on here all huff and puff like "God. Guys only go for the hottest gals. They are so shallow." So, she's faced a lot of rejection and she's venting.

 

Why would I care? I'm not like that. And to prove it to that poster, I'd probably ask for her phone number.

[Lonely Ronin]

I didn't say it.

 

You said it.

 

If a man posted that women are too shallow but he has no problems getting dates with women, I'd be equally confused.

 

You know their is a differences between getting a date, and getting a date with someone who ends up being shallow right?

[SJC2008]

Rhetorical question:

Does a bunch of little horn balls hitting on women because they see them as a trophy to obtain make your dating life easier or harder?

 

Hint:

Harder

 

You're not going to convince me that attractive women don't have more options and that they get unwanted attention is enough to make being attractive a bad thing. Kobe Bryant couldn't walk down the street without getting mobbed, do you think he's going to trade his fame an fortune to go back to not being noticed so he can walk down the street? Hell no!!!

[Lonely Ronin]

You're not going to convince me that attractive women don't have more options and that they get unwanted attention is enough to make being attractive a bad thing. Kobe Bryant couldn't walk down the street without getting mobbed, do you think he's going to trade his fame an fortune to go back to not being noticed so he can walk down the street? Hell no!!!

 

huh? your response is in no way connected to my post you quoted.

Edited March 7, 2013 by Lonely Ronin

[TheBigQuestion]

BTW.

 

I never, ever understood why this kind of post elicits such hatred and castigation.

 

Because without righteous indignation, LoveShack wouldn't exist.

[SJC2008]

huh? your response is in no way connected to my post you quoted.

 

Don't the direct quote, was more in the grand scheme of our debate. TBS harder how? That you have to shoo away a couple of pervs before you meet the guy your attracted and is attracted to you? Not too much of a trade off IMO.