Why do a lot of women expect MORE for LESS?

[ascendotum]

From my perspective, it is VERY FEW men who want a relationship with her, specifically. Men are far more picky about this than you acknowledge. Lots will happily date for a month or 3 and have sex, but don't actually consider her a candidate for long term partner.

 

This is from your perspective as you say. The average girl in her prime years (a 24yr old 6 in looks, not too heavy) will have a stack of men who want a relationship with her. Depends where she goes as to will she meet them. In a club half drunk on Fri/Sat night most wont be looking for a relationship but certainly some will be fine hooking up and staying on or getting her number for later in the week. I have friends who are quite picky and others who aren't. Guys above her in looks & accomplishments will be pickier, guys below her in looks & accomplishments wont be so picky. Yes lots more guys are out to date for a few months these days. I also find a lot of women seem to be fine doing this to. The closer she finds a comparable & compatible guy to her, the better the chance the guy will want to put the handbreak on and stay.

[Mister Zen]

Rather than saying women have a larger pool than men, maybe you should say women (most of them) have a larger pool than YOU. You seem to be implying that all men share your lack of success, which you've been pretty open about here.

 

Stop with the generalizations. Those ten guys probably have plenty of other options too - how would you know? Remember that your observations are of a fishbowl of 18 to 24 year old college students. You're on the outside, looking in.

 

This is just another example of the common double standard in society. A man's "lack of success" with women is something to be laughed at, attacked and shamed. Not so with women. They get sympathy and kind advice.

 

Why?

 

In western culture, women are told again and again, that not only should men not expect anything of them (even common decency), but that they should leave any man who places any demands (or requests) on them.

 

So many women are acting accordingly because that is the culture of today. They are being "picky" and believing they "deserve" the sun, moon and stars even if what they bring to the table is significantly less. But a man not DARE "expect" anything from a woman or society for that matter.

 

Nothing wrong with that though. Not whining or anything.

[Els]

This is from your perspective as you say. The average girl in her prime years (a 24yr old 6 in looks, not too heavy) will have a stack of men who want a relationship with her.

 

You clearly have no idea what xxoo looks like, do you?

 

So much of what you people claim happens to 'average girls' and 'average guys' is so distorted, I'm not even sure what the cause is. Could it be that you are defining Megan Fox as the 'average girl', but defining yourself as the 'average guy'? Or perhaps that you don't actually know any women IRL and don't know how many guys have actually wanted a LTR with them?

 

I've known girls who have literally worked as part-time models and they did not have a 'stack of men' wanting a relationship with them. Never mind that I did not at 24 either.

 

Fortunately many of us don't NEED a 'stack of men/women' interested in us - all it took for us is one (or a few before that one, but still). This goes for both men and women, and yes, I do know many 'average' men and women who are happily partnered, as I (and xxoo, and many of the others posting here) am.

[Phoe]

This is from your perspective as you say. The average girl in her prime years (a 24yr old 6 in looks, not too heavy) will have a stack of men who want a relationship with her. Depends where she goes as to will she meet them. In a club half drunk on Fri/Sat night most wont be looking for a relationship but certainly some will be fine hooking up and staying on or getting her number for later in the week. I have friends who are quite picky and others who aren't. Guys above her in looks & accomplishments will be pickier, guys below her in looks & accomplishments wont be so picky. Yes lots more guys are out to date for a few months these days. I also find a lot of women seem to be fine doing this to. The closer she finds a comparable & compatible guy to her, the better the chance the guy will want to put the handbreak on and stay.

 

I'm an average 25 year old female and I don't have a stack of men, and never have. I've struggled all my life with getting dates or getting men to be interested in me.

 

I don't know what your idea of average is, but it seems a tad warped

[Shining One]

Just imagine if the circumstances were reversed and it was men who were constantly being approached or had more "access". Only now the majority of women you came across were bitchy, asexual gold-diggers? Yeah, once in a blue moon you might meet a gold-digger who's not also a bitch and might actually sleep with you relatively often, or, if you're really lucky you meet a woman who happens not to be any of those things and is actually nice. How long would you consider this position "easier", truthfully?

I get that you're trying to say that the grass isn't always greener, but this example is not a true reversal. An asexual gold-digger offers nothing a man wants. A true reversal would require the following:

• Women pursue
  
• Women pay (at least initially)
  
• Women offer something that is important to them but less important to men (this is the replacement for sex in this scenario)
  

[Lernaean_Hydra]

I get that you're trying to say that the grass isn't always greener, but this example is not a true reversal. An asexual gold-digger offers nothing a man wants.

 

The point was a guy offering just casual sex is not what a relationship-minded woman wants so he's not offering her anything either. If you come across a bunch of people offering things you don't want then them being in your "dating pool" is useless.

[Lernaean_Hydra]

Depends on the guy. Usually, it just means he sees her as relationship material, which many guys say is tough to find these days.

 

Gosh, isn't that the complaint of most people these days though? I just find it thoroughly hypocritical and irritating how it's fine for a guy to state that he's waiting to settle down until he meets the right girl but when women say it........oh! choosy bitches, the lot of them!

 

Why does it matter if someone is pursuing or just open to the idea? I have never really looked for a GF, but I still found one, a great one even. A lot of guys just want to have a good time, but meeting that right girl changes everything.

 

It matters because many of those guys who say they are open to it are "open to it" in that they might be down if it just happens to fall into their laps in the midst of their endless pursuit of casual sex. Blah, blah meeting the right person changes everything for everyone that's a given but not really the crux of the issue. You stated most guys would be willing to be in a serious relationship if... as if that contradicted my assertion that most of them were looking for casual hookups first and foremost.

I disagree. I am pretty sure most guys would rather wade through 100 women than sit and look at an empty OLD inbox, or to have a thing for a bunch of women who don't give them the time of day. Spending your days alone isn't a cakewalk either.

I'm sure it is. But so is sitting around absolutely dateless. Each time some guys try to hit on a woman they end up in the friendzone. I have a buddy that all but hates women now. A lifetime of being friendzoned while every woman he likes would rather date everyone other than him. The guy never gets a date, let alone get laid.

 

Right, welp this is turning into another one of those discussions in which the question of "who has it worse" gets argued to death so I'm not even going to go there.

You're the one that used the job analogy, I just ran with it.

I used the job analogy to illustrate why more "options" doesn't necessarily mean better, that was it. You ran with it about seven miles south of the point so I really don't have much to add.

 

I'm not saying they should just get with anyone. I'm saying they should realize why they can't get what they want.

 

Ok then.

[somedude81]

The point was a guy offering just casual sex is not what a relationship-minded woman wants so he's not offering her anything either. If you come across a bunch of people offering things you don't want then them being in your "dating pool" is useless.

 

I look at it this way.

 

Tom gets a ton of mail every day. Piles of it, most of it is junk. Though if he takes the time to go through it each day, he usually finds two or three great coupons and special offers for stuff he would use.

 

Jane doesn't get any mail. Sure she doesn't have to deal with going through the junk. But she doesn't get the coupon for buy one milkshake get a second one free; and she really likes milkshakes. They bring all the boys to the yard.

[Lernaean_Hydra]

I look at it this way.

 

Tom gets a ton of mail every day. Piles of it, most of it is junk. Though if he takes the time to go through it each day, he usually finds two or three great coupons and special offers for stuff he would use.

 

Jane doesn't get any mail. Sure she doesn't have to deal with going through the junk. But she doesn't get the coupon for buy one milkshake get a second one free; and she really likes milkshakes. They bring all the boys to the yard.

 

Oh help me I think I've inhaled too many dye fumes tonight because I found that funnier than I'm sure it was.

 

Anyway, what if Jane is diabetic or lactose intelorant, or on a diet or has a sugar addiction and should stay away from milkshakes entirely, etc, etc? Whatever the case, some would say Jane is better off never getting mail if it's full of nothing but crap she doesn't need.

 

It doesn't matter, no one on this site will ever agree on this issue so I'll leave it at that.

[xxoo]

I look at it this way.

 

Tom gets a ton of mail every day. Piles of it, most of it is junk. Though if he takes the time to go through it each day, he usually finds two or three great coupons and special offers for stuff he would use.

 

Jane doesn't get any mail. Sure she doesn't have to deal with going through the junk. But she doesn't get the coupon for buy one milkshake get a second one free; and she really likes milkshakes. They bring all the boys to the yard.

 

So what you're saying is, you would like the free milkshakes women are offered. But if women don't like them, how does this benefit them?

[stillmind]

Almost all perpetually single people out there have the same issue, they want more than they offer.

 

So would you say that perpetually single MEN want more than they offer, or is this only true for those dang picky women?

[Maleficent]

I believe you're referring to me in this post. To be clear, I was disappointed because none of these women had any sexual interest in me, not because none of them ended up as a serious relationship. I was also disappointed by the amount of money I spent.

 

They all wanted to be my friend. Their definition of a friend:

• I still take them out (do all of the driving)
  
• I still pay for things
  
• I still do them favors
  
• I still deal with their emotional baggage
  
• Sex is off the table
  

I would have been happy with any of the following outcomes:

• Casual Dating (which includes sex)
  
• Friends with Benefits
  
• Relationship
  

I realize I was just picking bad women, but I just wanted to clear this up.

 

My point remains the same though.

 

Somedude81 seems to think that having a lot of options/dates shouldn't be frustrating.

I didn't mean to put you on the spot or anything. Your situation simply supports our premise that quantity =\= quality.

[elaine567]

I believe you're referring to me in this post. To be clear, I was disappointed because none of these women had any sexual interest in me, not because none of them ended up as a serious relationship. I was also disappointed by the amount of money I spent.

 

They all wanted to be my friend. Their definition of a friend:

• I still take them out (do all of the driving)
  
• I still pay for things
  
• I still do them favors
  
• I still deal with their emotional baggage
  
• Sex is off the table
  

I would have been happy with any of the following outcomes:

• Casual Dating (which includes sex)
  
• Friends with Benefits
  
• Relationship
  

I realize I was just picking bad women, but I just wanted to clear this up.

 

What comes across here is that sex is very important to you, casual sex and FWB comes before a relationship and perhaps that is why you have been relegated to the friend zone.

I would guess women pick up on this and do not want to get involved with you, because you are all about sex and they know that.

Why are women who don't want to have sex with you "bad" women?

[elaine567]

If a product being offered is not acceptable to the demographic targeted then the product needs changed to fit the market better.

The buying public are NOT in the wrong, the product is.

 

If men are not finding their "product" is acceptable to women then they need to look closer at what they are offering and NOT blame the women for being picky or unresponsive.

[ltjg45]

Why are women who don't want to have sex with you "bad" women?

 

While they may not be "bad women" as he said it was, I do find that not willing to have sex does lead to low interest and is not worth keeping, especially in this culture.

 

In the age where casual sex is promoted, most people have done it at least once or more, and where most women is willing to have sex with a guy they are highly attracted to very quickly, I do feel that if a woman isn't willing to sleep with him after being in a relationship for 2-3 months, there is either no or little interest and it is best to end it.

 

Even "normal" relationships tend to have sex at least once every 2 weeks (and that is being generous) if not much more.

 

Huge red flag if I ever seen one.

 

If a product being offered is not acceptable to the demographic targeted then the product needs changed to fit the market better.

The buying public are NOT in the wrong, the product is.

 

If men are not finding their "product" is acceptable to women then they need to look closer at what they are offering and NOT blame the women for being picky or unresponsive.

 

How ironic. That can easily be switched to women as well.

 

I have seen so many women that is just flat out unattractive to a huge number of reasons, I am starting to wonder if there is a dating pool left for me to go into.

 

At this point, I have to go higher than my current league because none within my league is worth the trouble.

[Ninjainpajamas]

If a product being offered is not acceptable to the demographic targeted then the product needs changed to fit the market better.

The buying public are NOT in the wrong, the product is.

 

If men are not finding their "product" is acceptable to women then they need to look closer at what they are offering and NOT blame the women for being picky or unresponsive.

 

So what you're saying is if men are not finding the "product" desirable enough to purchase as well, then there is something wrong with what that woman has to offer?

[sillyanswer]

So what you're saying is if men are not finding the "product" desirable enough to purchase as well, then there is something wrong with what that woman has to offer?

 

Makes sense! Nobody has to be a purchaser of these products if they don't like them, and those struggling with the selling side of things may either have to be content with having no buyers (which is fine for many people) or wait until an interested buyer comes along, or do something to improve the product being sold.

[elaine567]

At this point, I have to go higher than my current league because none within my league is worth the trouble.

 

What is your "league"?

Is your "product" of sufficient quality to attract those of a "higher" league?

 

I do find that not willing to have sex does lead to low interest and is not worth keeping

Does a willingness to have casual sex, promote or demote a woman?

From what you say it appears it promotes a women, yet elsewhere on this thread, women who are very sexually available, are valueless.

[elaine567]

So what you're saying is if men are not finding the "product" desirable enough to purchase as well, then there is something wrong with what that woman has to offer?

 

 

Of course, but the recent subject of this thread seems to be about men finding women are not replying, interacting or wanting to go on dates with them.

If anyones "product" is not attractive to who they want to attract, man or woman, then they need to take a long hard look at their product or pitch to a different market.

[ltjg45]

What is your "league"?

Is your "product" of sufficient quality to attract those of a "higher" league?

 

Good question.

 

The problem is that I don't have an answer. I have yet to successfully approach a woman because I can't find any woman I like enough to bother approaching. I will say that a lot of people did consider me as "handsome" but that may not even account for much to begin with. All I know is that people is willing to look at me without being disgusted, which is a start.

 

I only approached 2 women at the most this year along and they was both co-workers at the time.

 

Every other woman is either attached, is a smoker, or there is a part of their personality that is considered a deal breaker to me.

 

The only woman that I had some interest in who is also interested in me is a 35-year old foreign woman that I tried to date. Needless to say, that didn't work at all and I regretted doing that to my lack of judgment during that time.

 

So I am not counting that outside of the harsh lessons I learned from it due to my stupidity. My current self would have grabbed my past self and ram him into the wall for being such an idiot.

 

Does a willingness to have casual sex, promote or demote a woman?

From what you say it appears it promotes a women, yet elsewhere on this thread, women who are very sexually available, are valueless.

 

To me, it slightly demotes a woman in my eyes. I do agree that it is harder to bond fully with another person for a long-term relationship when said person is willing to sleep around constantly.

 

With that said, I am not saying that it isn't possible. I have seen cases where my theory is completely false.....but if I were to get into a relationship and, prior to breaking up, she has a history of casual partners, while I may not know the reasons why it has taken place, it is a possible symptom.

 

If I had such a history myself, I can see me having a more difficult time bonding with just one woman as well.

 

However, it is just my opinion and nothing more.

 

Lastly, I am a virgin at the age of 28 and I am currently content if not slightly happy with my current status. A little disappointed that I am in my later 20s with no sexual experience but I am quite happy I do not have any kids or any drama from my ex's as well.

Edited December 15, 2014 by ltjg45

[Shining One]

What comes across here is that sex is very important to you, casual sex and FWB comes before a relationship and perhaps that is why you have been relegated to the friend zone.

The order in which I listed them is not my order of preference. I was looking for a relationship and eventually found one, but I would have been happy with the other two options. Yes, sex is important to me. It was the only aspect of female companionship that was lacking in my life. I am not lacking in female friends.

 

 

Why are women who don't want to have sex with you "bad" women?

I thought this was pretty clear. These specific women were the "bad" ones because they were not interested in me, but they still expected me to do the following: Take them out, pay for things, do them favors, and deal with their emotional baggage.

 

 

I've been on dates with several woman who decided we're not compatible, paid their half of the bill, and either walked out of my life or offered me friendship. One of them is a close friend of six years now. I consider her a "good" woman, even though we never have and never will sleep together.

[Shining One]

Somedude81 seems to think that having a lot of options/dates shouldn't be frustrating.

I didn't mean to put you on the spot or anything. Your situation simply supports our premise that quantity =\= quality.

I'll leave it to Somedude81 to correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe his point was this: It's better to have lots of options (even if the vast majority of them are bad) than to have little to no options.

Example: A woman receives 50 messages, but 45 of them are deemed unsuitable. She has 5 options remaining. A man sends out 50 messages and he gets 2 responses. 5 is greater than 2. (For the record, a 4% response rate is much higher than my actual response rate)

 

 

I don't mind you using my case as an example. We are all here to share and learn.

 

 

I do want to point out that having greater options would have helped me in my situation. I would have dropped each of those women much earlier and moved on to other women if other options had been available.

[xxoo]

I'll leave it to Somedude81 to correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe his point was this: It's better to have lots of options (even if the vast majority of them are bad) than to have little to no options.

Example: A woman receives 50 messages, but 45 of them are deemed unsuitable. She has 5 options remaining. A man sends out 50 messages and he gets 2 responses. 5 is greater than 2. (For the record, a 4% response rate is much higher than my actual response rate)

 

 

Worst case scenario for both men and women:

 

Guy sends out tons of messages and gets few/no responses On the plus side, any responses he gets are from women he contacted because he's interested.

 

Woman gets tons of useless messages, none are suitable. She sends out a few messages, and those men respond enthusiastically, but only because they think she's a sure thing for casual sex

 

Best case scenario for both men and women:

 

Among all the uselessness and silence, there is ONE mutual interest and connection. Both he and she consider the other a catch. Both he and she want to impress the other person, and are excited about this budding relationship. And the rest is history.

 

For a lot of people, this only happens once in a lifetime. That's why it's often referred to as "the one" (although not literally true).

[sillyanswer]

Makes sense! Nobody has to be a purchaser of these products if they don't like them, and those struggling with the selling side of things may either have to be content with having no buyers (which is fine for many people) or wait until an interested buyer comes along, or do something to improve the product being sold.

 

I suppose I could've mentioned that some combinations of not-quite-buyers and not-quite-sellers might negotiate various forms of short-term leasing deals, but this may be the point at which the analogy starts to break down.

[xxoo]

I suppose I could've mentioned that some combinations of not-quite-buyers and not-quite-sellers might negotiate various forms of short-term leasing deals, but this may be the point at which the analogy starts to break down.

 

Don't forget rentals and timeshares!

 

And the age-old pay-by-the hour joints.