Men see the lost cause of dating (girls don't like men) will it actully cause society to fall apart? - Page 9 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political issues and parties in the USA and Canada.

Moderator: PoFo North America Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#15200321
@tomskunk There has always been "games" when you go out dating, but that's why you sort out the people who want to have games, if you are looking for more. You find out pretty quickly, too. You don't need to date someone weeks to find out if you like them, or not.

There's tons of dating apps out there where you can find a person to meet, but in the end you have to go out and meet them, in person, to really figure out who they are.

It's not any more complicated than it's always been.
#15200330
Unthinking Majority wrote:Maybe the problem isn't women, maybe the problem is you. Maybe women don't want to date you because they don't like you because you don't brush your teeth or you're a douche or something, I dunno. But if you're not attractive to women in general the problem isn't women.


Is the 'you' there a 3rd person you? Or, did you intend it to mean me?

The video advanced a theory backed by data. It referred you to 2 books. It was not based on anecdotal evidence.

If you meant me, personally, I'm married and 75 yo. I don't date.

In a reply to Crantag, I made my case. Women want a provider. Because of 40 years of declining real wages (if the proper CPI had been used) a majority of men do not earn a family wage. They are not seen as a good provider. Women don't need to date and get married. They can hook-up easily. When they do, they can pick from the top 10% of men. They can use toys. They can play with women. They have other options than marriage.
In fact many men couldn't find any job that paid a living wage before covid. Now, many men have dropped out of the labor market, because there are no decent jobs available. Some earn some on-line in some way. Many moved back home.

Just like the Olympic Games where it is impossible for most athletes to win a medal, the rules in the current economy make it impossible for most men to earn a decent family wage. There are not enough of those job to go around. And women don't need to settle for the best they can find. They can be happily single.

Therefore, the problem is the system, and not the individual.
.
#15200331
@Steve_American

That argument seems to assume that women only marry for money.

If that were the case, I would not have been married either time.

Perhaps the solution is for men to be attractive to women for a reason other than having enough money to attain a certain standard.
#15200334
Pants-of-dog wrote:@Steve_American

That argument seems to assume that women only marry for money.

If that were the case, I would not have been married either time.

Perhaps the solution is for men to be attractive to women for a reason other than having enough money to attain a certain standard.


PoD, I only said that women want a provider, and that women don't NEED to settle.

You took that to mean that women ONLY marry for money.

You made the non-total statements into assertions that "all women do _____________".

Your anecdotal experiences do not disprove that women want to marry a provider.
Were you a non-provider? That would help your case, but would still not prove your "all women aren't ________" claim.

It is a question of numbers in the mass of people. The video askes that 'if very many men quit trying to get ahead and settle for a life of minimum consumption and work to support society', then will the economy collapse? It asserts that men do most of the critical work, and women do mostly non-critical work. That women's work is massively non-critical may not be true, BTW. As the society ages and the numbers in later generations fall, having many young men stop working would, at a minimum, be a bad thing for the health of the society.
.
#15200335
@Steve_American @Igor Antunov @Godstud @snapdragon @Unthinking Majority

If I were single today and dating, I would only take all women I dated out for coffee only and pay for her coffee. I have no way of knowing if the woman I decide to date is like an ultra-feminist who insists that she pay her half all the time or who assumes that most men pay for a meal just to get sex. Given that is the case, only a cup of coffee and just meet her at a coffee shop. Do the man thing and pay for her coffee and just get to know each other and if one or the other or both decide they don't like each other, no big deal, it's just a cup of coffee (not that a meal should be a big deal either, but sometimes that can turn into a big deal when deciding if the guy should pay for everything or the check should be split, so to solve that problem just take her out for a cup of coffee only).

Now, if the woman has a problem with a guy paying for a cup of coffee and thinks that the guy expects to get sex over a cup of coffee in return, then, that's probably not somebody a guy wants to get to know further because she probably has mental issues. There are crazy women out there and you really have to watch out who you hook up with. Not every woman is crazy, but you have no way of knowing who they are.

So, I think because the idea of if a check gets split or not can turn into an issue, then I would simply solve that problem and only take women out for a small cup of coffee if I were in the dating pool. That way nobody feels pressured and everybody is happy and the woman shouldn't have a problem with a guy paying for her cup of coffee. It costs what, like a dollar? I mean, it's just a cup of coffee. It's not going to break anybody's bank and it's so small that nobody should expect anything in return or feel obligated to give anything in return over just a cup of coffee. And if the woman thinks she might want to get to know you better, she shouldn't insist on anything above coffee for the first 4 or 5 dates if it ever even goes that far.
Last edited by tomskunk on 30 Nov 2021 04:16, edited 3 times in total.
#15200338
Steve_American wrote:Is the 'you' there a 3rd person you? Or, did you intend it to mean me?

The video advanced a theory backed by data. It referred you to 2 books. It was not based on anecdotal evidence.

If you meant me, personally, I'm married and 75 yo. I don't date.

In a reply to Crantag, I made my case. Women want a provider. Because of 40 years of declining real wages (if the proper CPI had been used) a majority of men do not earn a family wage. They are not seen as a good provider. Women don't need to date and get married. They can hook-up easily. When they do, they can pick from the top 10% of men. They can use toys. They can play with women. They have other options than marriage.
In fact many men couldn't find any job that paid a living wage before covid. Now, many men have dropped out of the labor market, because there are no decent jobs available. Some earn some on-line in some way. Many moved back home.

Just like the Olympic Games where it is impossible for most athletes to win a medal, the rules in the current economy make it impossible for most men to earn a decent family wage. There are not enough of those job to go around. And women don't need to settle for the best they can find. They can be happily single.

Therefore, the problem is the system, and not the individual.
.


In my experience the vast, vast majority of women are looking for committed relationships and not looking to hook up. There's tons of women out there wanting to date and get married etc or at least be in a committed relationship. The guy in the video in the OP is a weirdo.

So again, if a guy can't get a woman at all there's probably something wrong with him.
#15200339
tomskunk wrote:@Steve_American @Igor Antunov @Godstud @snapdragon @Unthinking Majority

If I were single today and dating, I would only take all women I dated out for coffee only and pay for her coffee. I have no way of knowing if the woman I decide to date is like an ultra-feminist who insists that she pay her half all the time or who assumes that most men pay for a meal just to get sex. Given that is the case, only a cup of coffee and just meet her at a coffee shop. Do the man thing and pay for her coffee and just get to know each other and if one or the other or both decide they don't like each other, no big deal, it's just a cup of coffee (not that a meal should be a big deal either, but sometimes that can turn into a big deal when deciding if the guy should pay for everything or the check should be split, so to solve that problem just take her out for a cup of coffee only).

Now, if the woman has a problem with a guy paying for a cup of coffee and thinks that the guy expects to get sex over a cup of coffee in return, then, that's probably not somebody a guy wants to get to know further because she probably has mental issues. There are crazy women out there and you really have to watch out who you hook up with. Not every woman is crazy, but you have no way of knowing who they are.

So, I think because the idea of if a check gets split or not can turn into an issue, then I would simply solve that problem and only take women out for a small cup of coffee. That way nobody feels pressured and everybody is happy and the woman shouldn't have a problem with a guy paying for her cup of coffee. I mean, it's just a cup of coffee. It's not going to break anybody's bank and it's so small that nobody should expect anything in return or feel obligated to give anything in return. And if the woman thinks she might want to get to know you better, she shouldn't insist on anything above coffee for the first 4 or 5 dates if it ever even goes that far.


I've been on several dates with women who have no issue letting me pay for a meal or movie on a first or 2nd or 3rd date and don't offer to pay whatsoever. Even after 3 or 4 dates this happened, once I dated a girl for a year and she offered occasionally but was happy to let me pay, so I finally had enough and we had an argument about it. There's nothing that irks me more than that.

I'm all for female equality but you don't get to pick and choose what equality you want and what old fashioned things you still want just because they happen to benefit you. If the woman has a full-time job we're going to split everything roughly 50/50.

Your idea about the coffee 1st date is a great idea.
#15200342
@Unthinking Majority

Yeah, like after I have been dating a woman a while and she has a full-time job, I don't mind if she pays for the meal or date once in and while. But initially, it's just customary for the guy to pay for dates. But since that can be an issue with some women, I think guys these days need to refrain from taking women out to movies or a meal and just settle for taking them out for coffee the first 4 or 5 times until they really decide that they do indeed like each other and want to take the relationship to the next level. That way, it doesn't create conflict and unnecessary power struggles between the two. At least, not initially when they are first getting to know each other. Because I am not going to be dominated either. I don't mind equality but I am not going to be ruled over by a woman I date either. She is going to have to respect me, otherwise, we would just need to part ways.
#15200343
I'm pretty sure one of my posts was deleted, I don't think it was necessary to delete it.

It was my post about how one time I let a girl crash on my bed and offered to crash on the floor, and she wanted sex, and so I obliged.

And that another time, I let a girl crash on my bed, and she didn't want sex, so I didn't oblige.
#15200344
Anyway, it's fine for the dude to pay, and a nice gesture. There are also a lot of broke dudes about. My ex girlfriend made more money than me. She usually paid for meals and shit. I was working, but she made like twice as much as me. Not like it stroked my ego too well or anything, but sometimes it's like that.
#15200356
Unthinking Majority wrote:Incels need to realize that the male-female ratio on dating apps is like 20:1, so if they're average looking (which most are) the only people they'll match with are fat chicks with kids who are 5+ years older than them because the top 20% of guys in terms of looks are getting 80% the girls, lying to them that they want a "real relationship" just to have sex with them, and then throwing them to the curb in order to repeat the process.

Is that the hook up sites your talking about? Just googling around I came across the claim that match.com is 51% women, elite singles 56% women, plenty of fish 40% women and that even tinder is 50/50. Are a lot of the female profiles fake?

Godstud wrote:Your knowledge of Thailand is limited to what you read on 4chan blogs,

:lol: I'm, not sure I've ever been on 4chan, I certainly don't get my ideas from there. Its very possible that 4chan is circulating memes that in part originate from myself. Take the issue of the black death. Now of course historians before me realised that the Black Death led to an increase in wages a reduction in social inequality and social liberalisation. But as far I can make out I was the first one to politically weaponise this evidence into the immigration debate. I'm pro abortion, but I heard an anti abortion US senator saying something that was so close to something I had said on PoFo but in a different context that i can only think that i was the originator.
#15200362
Steve_American wrote:PoD, I only said that women want a provider, and that women don't NEED to settle.

You took that to mean that women ONLY marry for money.

You made the non-total statements into assertions that "all women do _____________".

Your anecdotal experiences do not disprove that women want to marry a provider.
Were you a non-provider? That would help your case, but would still not prove your "all women aren't ________" claim.


So if we agree that women do not just marry for money, then men should be able to date and marry and have a family even if they do not have high paying jobs.

And if that is the case, then the argument presented in the OP does not make sense.

It is a question of numbers in the mass of people. The video askes that 'if very many men quit trying to get ahead and settle for a life of minimum consumption and work to support society', then will the economy collapse? It asserts that men do most of the critical work, and women do mostly non-critical work. That women's work is massively non-critical may not be true, BTW. As the society ages and the numbers in later generations fall, having many young men stop working would, at a minimum, be a bad thing for the health of the society.
.


Women do the vast majority of child raising and taking care if the family. Since the family is the fundamental unit of society and its backbone, it would seem that women do most of the work when it comes to the health of the society.
#15200376
@Rich You're still clueless and oblivious with your constant harping on about Thailand, and things you know nothing about, while making baseless accusations. FOAD.

Pants-of-dog wrote:So if we agree that women do not just marry for money, then men should be able to date and marry and have a family even if they do not have high paying jobs.
QFT. That's the reality.
#15200377
Do you know how to fail at dating? Or even if successful in dating then fail at marriage? Here is how.

Start by worrying about your rights in the relationship. Forget that romance bullshit, this is about equality. Maybe develop a schedule for who gets on top if the merger gets that far. Don't think your woman/man is special under any circumstances. Just realize that this is a pair-bonding outside of the ancient love/desire paradigm. Understand that you both have sexual desires and figure out a way to quantify that. When it comes to money make sure that neither of you pay more than the other because, you know, the patriarchy.

My generation fucked up the climate for sure. You people are fucking up love (if that is not a pejorative word I will be banned for.)

There is a lot of talk in this thread about mechanics but no talk about falling in love. Expressions of respect, interest and love are just remnants of the patriarchy. I guess that has fallen out of style. Enjoy your barren uninteresting lives with your co-equal domestic partners.
#15200381
Drlee wrote:
Do you know how to fail at dating? Or even if successful in dating then fail at marriage? Here is how.

Start by worrying about your rights in the relationship. Forget that romance bullshit, this is about equality. Maybe develop a schedule for who gets on top if the merger gets that far. Don't think your woman/man is special under any circumstances. Just realize that this is a pair-bonding outside of the ancient love/desire paradigm. Understand that you both have sexual desires and figure out a way to quantify that. When it comes to money make sure that neither of you pay more than the other because, you know, the patriarchy.

My generation fucked up the climate for sure. You people are fucking up love (if that is not a pejorative word I will be banned for.)

There is a lot of talk in this thread about mechanics but no talk about falling in love. Expressions of respect, interest and love are just remnants of the patriarchy. I guess that has fallen out of style. Enjoy your barren uninteresting lives with your co-equal domestic partners.



While you need morals, and customs, relationships are all about finding a modus vivendi.

That's a bottom up process, as opposed to doing things by one set of rules or another..

Or, as I said earlier in the thread, different strokes for different folks.
#15200385
@Drlee

You got to keep your guard up in this day and age. It isn't like the good ole 60s where things were simpler and easier to understand :lol: . Today, if you are a guy, your best bet is to play defense and only take a woman out for a cup of coffee the first 4 or 5 times before both deciding if they want to take things any further :lol: .
#15200388
tomskunk wrote:@snapdragon

What about a guy who doesn't show up on time? I did that to my current wife and she was not happy :lol: . Somehow, I still ended up marrying her. I should have justified myself to her by saying "don't be such a control freak!" I don't think that would have gone over too well with her though. I apologized to her at the time. But she wasn't happy about being kept waiting. I didn't do it intentionally, I just got caught up in my work at the time and forgot about the date!

This brings me to an interesting question. Let's say you are a single woman and you insisted on splitting the check. The guy agrees and you split the check. He tells you he honestly had a great time and would like to see you again. You agree, but then the second time you go out with him you are kept waiting but he does eventually show up and looks forward to going out with you again that night for the second date. He explains something unexpected happened or that his job unexpectedly had him working late. How do you react?


I’d say, don’t you have a bloody phone?

But seriously, if you couldn’t help being held up and perhaps couldn’t get a signal, then I’d have no problem forgiving you and moving on from it. It happens to everyone.
  • 1
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 15

Similarly, in science, Occam's razor is used as[…]

Boris Johnson is done

Seems like Boris might actually survive this. He[…]

@JohnRawls You're correct of course. He's incor[…]

Maybe the Libertarians will finally get their wish[…]