You're right, women have it easier. Now what?

[somedude81]

Well, it depends. If it's a guy I already know - who I have been around a little and talked with at least once before, chances are I know if I am attracted to him or not.

 

That's what I can't relate to women about.

 

Unless the woman doesn't meet my minimum standards, I am attracted to her by default. Then it's down to her personality to turn me off.

 

Women seem to be the opposite.

 

So despite a guy not being ugly, or having a bad personality or obvious rude flags, a woman won't give a guy a chance unless she was attracted to him, which is down to some unexplainable criteria.

[clia]

I think you misinterpreted what I wrote. In that class, there was one girl that I really liked and felt I had a strong connection with which I didn't feel with the other 19. I liked her more than the rest, but didn't say I would not go out with anybody else.

 

This is what you said:

 

There are a lot of girls in one dance class. Probably around 20 if not more. Busy girl was the only girl that I actually felt compatible with.

 

So, you would be interested in going out on dates with girls you didn't actually feel compatible with? Okay. Maybe I did misunderstand. I don't go on dates with guys unless I feel compatibility.

 

That sounds really picky and complicated. It's almost like you have a preset type that you would only date and were trying to see what men would fit into that.

 

It's actually not picky and complicated at all, and I do have a preset type of guy that I prefer. I think many people do.

 

Honestly, unless a girl has a mean and stuck up or super shy I don't have problems with girls' personalities.

 

So you meet a girl just like Janice from Friends. Do you want to date her?

 

As for the girls I do ask out, I really felt that they did click with me because they did seem to enjoy my company. But that in itself is not enough to get a date with them. Neither of the girls asked out gave me their phone numbers because they didn't get along with me.

 

Getting along with you doesn't mean they are romantically interested in you, as you discovered. You felt the "click" but it's possible they did not. It happens all the time. I had quite a few first dates where I felt a "click" but the guy did not, for whatever reason. We also see that all the time on these boards.

 

Isn't that the whole point of dating, to find out if you can really like the other person. Why date at all if you already really like them and just jump into a relationship insead?

 

I'm not sure where I said anything about jumping into a relationship.

 

My point is that I agree to go out on a first date with a guy because I like him, because he appears to meet my standards in what I want in a man, etc. I don't know him that well yet, obviously, but on the surface all looks fine. The date gives me the opportunity to get to know him better and to then decide whether or not I want to get into a relationship with him or to continue dating him. Sometimes red flags erupt on the first date, sometimes they don't. That's part of the dating process.

 

No, I would not go out with a girl who doesn't meet my standards. Though I am extremely confused about what standards I'm not meeting that college girls have set up.

 

It could be anything. "College girls" are not an amorphous mass. Every single girl will have her own "list" (for lack of a better word) of what they are looking for in a guy. There isn't just one thing.

 

In the past two months I have tried to pursue about 10 women. Does that seem like a small number to you?

 

The only reason I'm not asking out more women is that I'm getting tired of being rejected. Asking out 30 more women and getting rejected by all of them is only going to make me feel worse.

 

You've asked out ten women in the past two months?

 

It doesn't work. That's the point. No guy wants to keep on asking out woman after woman trying to find one who will actually say yes. At that point the individual woman doesn't matter anymore. She's just a female.

 

It does work and has worked for centuries.

[MissBee]

eSympathy.com

 

The domain is for sale if anyone's interested in starting up a dating website that matches up the pathetic with the sympathetic.

 

It's like those sugar daddy sites except instead of the common exchange being material wealth for lavished attention, it would be sobbing pity for self-effacing analysis.

 

LMAOOO!!!!

[xxoo]

Try to imagine things from my shoes, where every single girl I'm interested in tells me "I don't see you that way."

 

How do you think it feels to get rejected a seemingly unending number of women who never even gave me a chance to show who I am?

 

None of the girls that I've written about recently were willing to even spend 30 minutes with me.

 

I'm sure it doesn't feel good. But it isn't that dating is flawed. Millions of people successfully date and mate.

 

instead of complaining about how women want something more than decent looking and nice, why not focus on developing something to offer beyond that?

[somedude81]

Blowing socks off...and simply wanting to know more are very different types of things.

 

If I liked the conversation and was attracted to him there naturally arises a feeling of wanting to know more.

 

If I don't have that feeling I may think of him as a friend but have no desire to date him OR on the other hand he may have turned me off where I view him negatively. You can either like a guy, like him a lot, kinda like him, be neutral about him, dislike him or be repulsed. Anything in the like range usually leads to wanting to see if there is more there. Neutral to repulsed means most likely I won't go anywhere with you.

 

"I may think of him as a friend but have no desire to date him." Story of my life.

 

How to get past neutral with women is something I need to figure out.

 

 

You say if a woman is obese or has an ugly face she isn't your type...okay...so why can't you accept that a woman can also meet a man who does not match up to her physical type? I'm confused as to why in your mind what you're doing is rational but you somehow fail to see how a woman may also be doing the same thing deciding: he's obese, he's bald, he has an ugly face, he's too tall whatever other feature and uses that to eliminate you just like you're doing.

 

No, I think the problem is that I trying to imagine women using the same exact criteria that I do. But that's obviously not the way it is, unless they really do care about height

 

Also you mentioned a woman saying she is high and it turned you off...SAME thing...I can talk to a man for 5 minutes and based on stuff he says and other aspects about him know he is not my type just like you do. We aren't two different species but are using the very SAME choosing processes in terms of ascertaining interest and type upon meeting.

 

Being on drugs during a rave is a extreme thing. I really doubt I've given any woman I've talked to something like that that's been a big red flag.

[Maleficent]

That's what I can't relate to women about.

 

Unless the woman doesn't meet my minimum standards, I am attracted to her by default. Then it's down to her personality to turn me off.

 

Women seem to be the opposite.

 

So despite a guy not being ugly, or having a bad personality or obvious rude flags, a woman won't give a guy a chance unless she was attracted to him, which is down to some unexplainable criteria.

 

I had a date last night with a man who would use the biological approach. Men are biologically programmed to 'spread their seed' and women are biologically programmed to chose the best mate to copulate with.

Which makes sense.

 

I'm not sure how 'if this girl isn't ugly or fat I will go on a date with her' is any different than 'If I don't find him physically attractive, I will not go on a date with him' though.

 

How is 'not ugly' different from 'beautiful'?

 

Do you have different shades of grey when it comes to people's appearances?

 

You know.

Fugly, buttugly, veryugly, ugly, not ugly, pretty, cute, atractive, hot, OMGIjustgotaboner, OMGIjizzedinmypants...

etc

 

Because for women, it's pretty much attractive/not attractive.

[ThaWholigan]

That sounds really picky and complicated. It's almost like you have a preset type that you would only date and were trying to see what men would fit into that.

 

Duh!

 

She knows what she likes. This is not gender specific - I know what I like. It's not too narrow, but it's particular.

[Tik]

This thread is going off and I apologize of not scrolling through but only the last few replies. All I have to say is...

If dating is harder for you then DO something about it. Life was not meant to be easy; get use to it. Tip the odds in your favor. The problem is that none of us are willing to put the hard work in and sit on our thumbs twiddling thinking we deserve to have a 10/10 model presented to us on a plate.

 

I actually love being rejected because guess what, it means I've screened out one less woman to meet to meet one that's worth it. Because guess what, I know I am a catch. I know I came from ground 0 (where many of these guys sit) and I've put in the hours at the gym, the hard work trying to further my career, how I am with my friends etc. My focus is NOT on woman; it is on myself and there lies the problem with many guys dating. If you're the one being constantly rejected what is the common denominator? YOU. It's obvious something about you needs to change then so change it. Don't blame the woman, blame the game of life and play life on life's terms.

 

No sex has it easier or harder; in fact if I was to say, woman have it harder as guys can increase their odds in dating that much easier than a chick. Ugliness is nothing. Get in shape, take good care of yourself and you're in with a chance any where - it is your presentation that gets you in the door and from there on, you're on your own.

[Anela]

 

It's not hard at all to find a decent guy who wants a relationship.

 

How would you know?

 

SD, you are a hypocrite, when you expect these girls to give you a chance, but you wouldn't date the girl with the unattractive (to you) face.

[Anela]

Try to imagine things from my shoes, where every single girl I'm interested in tells me "I don't see you that way."

 

How do you think it feels to get rejected a seemingly unending number of women who never even gave me a chance to show who I am?

 

Try to imagine the same thing for us, because it happens. A lot, for some of us. Men we're interested in - and it's no different from you wanting to date women (or girls) that you're interested in.

 

I don't want to hear, "Oh, you expect too much" because I do not.

[Mr Scorpio]

So despite a guy not being ugly, or having a bad personality or obvious rude flags, a woman won't give a guy a chance unless she was attracted to him, which is down to some unexplainable criteria.

 

Unexplainable? Like difference in age, lack of career prospects, lack of social circle, lack of hobbies outside of video-games, lack of perspective, lack of focus. Things like that? Hypothetically? For example?

[Tik]

Unexplainable? Like difference in age, lack of career prospects, lack of social circle, lack of hobbies outside of video-games, lack of perspective, lack of focus. Things like that? Hypothetically? For example?

 

Bahaha how ironic the very topic this thing is about and how we've missed the ball. That unexplained criteria? That's love; that's the spark - the attraction you get from meeting someone you click with. And guess what, it's oblivious of whether you're ugly or what not although it is helped if you brush up on those points.

[Rejected Rosebud]

My dating pool is already severely diminished because of my race. I'm not going to diminish it further by eliminating women who are potentially interested in me but still expect me to pay. Balance by definition would require equal investment by both parties. As it stands right now, one is investing time while the other is investing time and money. In what world is that balanced?

 

I did not say it was balanced, but if you choose to pay for dates to keep your dating pool bigger, that's on you. That is not the fault of women or society.

[Quiet Storm]

I think it is hard for some men to understand "chemistry". Many women need strong chemistry to see a man as a compatible long term partner. Men often feel physical attraction to many different women, so this "chemistry" feeling isn't valued by men as much as it is by women.

 

For women, it's not just physical attraction that plays into chemistry, but it's the pattern of interaction, and the feelings he inspires in her. Men are often satisfied with "we get along, we like the same music, we laugh together, she's attractive, we both want the same things in life"- they see a potential match based on those reasons alone. So they think, if she just gives me a chance, she'll like me. But often all of that means nothing if you can't inspire her to feel a certain way.

 

So it may be easier for a woman to get a date, but it's harder for her to find a compatible guy that she feels this chemistry with.

 

And I understand men are going to say she's too picky, and she's passing over great guys... but for many women, that "sparks" feeling is so essential that it doesn't matter how great the guy is- the lack of chemistry is proof that he is not the guy for her.

 

I know guys read this and think how stupid can she be, I will love her, treat her great and be the best BF a girl could ever want....she's going to pass that up over a lack of "feelings"? What is wrong with her?

 

And women think, what is the point of going out with him if there's no chemistry? I'd be leading him on, and that's not right, especially when I already know I'm not feeling it.

It's not fair to waste the guys time.

 

The problem is that many men don't know how to inspire that chemistry, and this is even more pronounced now because so many men were raised by single moms. They have no one to guide them or model behavior, and many of the natural masculine behaviors get buried without that male influence. My sons see my husband flirt with me, they see how he jokes and teases me, they see how he is a strong , decisive "leader" at times and a romantic softie at other times. They see our "dance" so to speak, and I'm sure that influences how they interact with women.

 

Women aren't going to stop seeking chemistry, so men that have trouble getting dates need to learn how to inspire it. Stop blaming the good looking and naturally charming men, and instead find some guys that aren't exceptionally good looking or charmers and see what they do. Look at the communication style, the body language, the mannerisms, the "banter". Lose any aura of desperation, as she wants to feel that you will add value to her life, not that she is just one in a long line of women that rejected you. She wants to feel drawn to you. This is what many women are looking for. And its also why many women don't feel that they have it easier, because the connection they are looking for is hard to find.

[Rejected Rosebud]

How would you ladies even know that he is absolutely not the right guy for you if you barely know him?

 

Unless a girl had some very obvious red flags, or she was completely not my type, I would have no way of knowing that she was the wrong girl for me unless I spent some time with her and got to know her better. It's basically "Innocent until proven guilty."

 

Well, that's how you are but it doesn't mean that everybody is like that. I CAN tell. Never once in my life have I regretted not going out with somebody. Several times I have regretted going out with someone who I could tell was not for me. I did that out of pity once and another time because my friends were all nuts about this one guy but he liked me. I wasn't attracted but went out anyway because I thought I must be missing something. Mistake.

 

From what you two are saying, it's like you believe in "Guilty unless proven otherwise.

Because a guy is not attractive to me "in that way" doesn't mean he's guilty! And he might be some other girls perfect cup of tea.

 

It's like you'd only go on a date with guys that you absolutely already liked. That is the generally mentality with women.

 

Exactly right! What is wrong with that? If I know when I'm interested, I'm interested! If not, I have a lot going on in my life and I love my friends, reading, etc. No offense but those things are more important to me than dating unless I am REALLY into the guy.

 

Men are far less picky.

 

So damn right women have it easier.

 

That does not make sense. If I won't go out with anyone unless he blows my sox off, and you will go out with ANY girl who is "nice" and "decent looking," clearly YOU have it easier. Your pool of potentials is massive!

[Rejected Rosebud]

Try to imagine things from my shoes, where every single girl I'm interested in tells me "I don't see you that way."

 

How do you think it feels to get rejected a seemingly unending number of women who never even gave me a chance to show who I am?

 

None of the girls that I've written about recently were willing to even spend 30 minutes with me.

 

I am sure that it feels terrible and I'm sorry that you are having such a tough time. But that doesn't mean that women should be doing anything differently so that you can feel better. Do you agree with that?

 

I don't know what you look like or what you're into, but I'm sure there are things you could do to boost your own attractiveness - I mean we all have room for improvement, right?

[PJKino]

Maybe if men stuck to their league it would be easier for them.

 

If I could get a handsome man why would I want an average or unattractive one?

 

Go after women with limited options who can't afford to value looks if you're a struggling non handsome man.

 

Maybe if more women were honest like you about this instead of giving men false hope that confidence can make a man attractive to a women who's she's not initially attracted to or that personality is more important then looks then maybe men would stay in their league..

 

I always knew women were just as if not more into looks then men but a lot of guys but the bs some women spew about these things..

[preraph]

The problem is that many men don't know how to inspire that chemistry, and this is even more pronounced now because so many men were raised by single moms. They have no one to guide them or model behavior, and many of the natural masculine behaviors get buried without that male influence. My sons see my husband flirt with me, they see how he jokes and teases me, they see how he is a strong , decisive "leader" at times and a romantic softie at other times. They see our "dance" so to speak, and I'm sure that influences how they interact with women.

 

I agree with that on theory, but in my own experience a whole lot of the guys I liked best were raised by single moms or widowed moms. I liked them better because they would pick up their own glass and take it to the kitchen. They weren't modeling the "women do all the housework" mentality, which is very strong in my part of the country.

[Lernaean_Hydra]

Love it! I don't expect anyone to have read all 15 pages of this thread but it's like you didn't even skim.

 

Maybe if more women were honest like you about this instead of giving men false hope that confidence can make a man attractive to a women who's she's not initially attracted to or that personality is more important then looks then maybe men would stay in their league..

 

The point is that confidence can help make a woman initially attracted to a man. Now if you're just objectively ugly no, I'm not going to lie, *you have little hope. That's not my fault or my problem. I can't help with your face.

 

I always knew women were just as if not more into looks then men but a lot of guys but the bs some women spew about these things..

 

Ok fine you're right. Women are even more into looks than men. In fact, men barely care about looks at all and just want a woman who is loving and kind. So what? What are you going to do about it? What does now knowing this undeniable, universal truth do for you?

 

*general "you".

[Rejected Rosebud]

Maybe if more women were honest like you about this instead of giving men false hope that confidence can make a man attractive to a women who's she's not initially attracted to or that personality is more important then looks then maybe men would stay in their league..

 

I always knew women were just as if not more into looks then men but a lot of guys but the bs some women spew about these things..

 

Confidence IS actually very attractive.

 

I think every woman on this thread will say that we care about what the guy looks like, but if he's a selfish, boring dud or some other kind of jerk being handsome isn't gong to get him far. There is a lot more to being a sexy man than a handsome face.

[Lernaean_Hydra]

Confidence IS actually very attractive.

 

I think every woman on this thread will say that we care about what the guy looks like, but if he's a selfish, boring dud or some other kind of jerk being handsome isn't gong to get him far. There is a lot more to being a sexy man than a handsome face.

 

 

B..b...but.. George Clooooney:bunny:!!

[xxoo]

Maybe if more women were honest like you about this instead of giving men false hope that confidence can make a man attractive to a women who's she's not initially attracted to or that personality is more important then looks then maybe men would stay in their league..

 

I always knew women were just as if not more into looks then men but a lot of guys but the bs some women spew about these things..

 

That poster is honest, and so are the women who say it is NOT even close to mostly about looks.

 

Women are not all the same.

 

Personally, attraction is vital to me. I've got to be stirred in my loins. But that stirring comes from many sources, visual being just one.

 

Guys who wish they could just be handsome and get women with no work come across as lazy. Other guys, highly motivated, developed attractive traits and get the dates.

Edited November 3, 2014 by xxoo

[Maleficent]

Try to imagine things from my shoes, where every single girl I'm interested in tells me "I don't see you that way."

 

How do you think it feels to get rejected a seemingly unending number of women who never even gave me a chance to show who I am?

 

None of the girls that I've written about recently were willing to even spend 30 minutes with me.

 

We don't have to try anything because every single person on this forum has been in your shoes.

[Lernaean_Hydra]

Another point I'd like to make is that men who do not have success say they're not physically attractive, however, they are looking for attractive women. The ugly women don't have it good. The fat women don't have it good.

 

So basically the attractive people are looking to date only each other and the less attractive people want to date the attractive people too and get upset when they can't. Women are guilty of that too, but men I think a bit more so.

 

Ah, this is a fantastic analysis.

[ThaWholigan]

That poster is honest, and so are the women who say it is NOT even close to mostly about looks.

 

Women are not all the same.

 

Personally, attraction is vital to me. I've got to be stirred in my loins. But that stirring comes from many sources, visual being just one.

 

Guys who wish they could just be handsome and get women with no work come across as lazy. Other guys, highly motivated, developed attractive traits and get the dates.

Yeah, it's interesting how some of us as guys view seduction as "work" aswell. I mean, there's an element of work in getting better at it, but the seduction itself - depending on the type of person you are - is more akin to a science, an art or a game if you will. A dance. To some, even a battle . But either way, they frame it in some way that they relish going forward.

 

You only really discover these things when you find out how you relate not just to women but how you relate to yourself and where your interests lie. If you're fortunate enough to be well-rounded, you can appeal to a larger demographic. Obviously there's a glass ceiling as far as physical attraction goes, but that does not make up the entire bracket of sex appeal IMO.