Monday, July 28, 2014
I've never read a headline like that in the newspaper? Have you? I will admit to something. I'm a media junkie. I watch Youtube all the time, and the more provocative, especially when it comes to subjects like a lot of those discussed in this blog, the more I watch. I get caught up in these online battles. Feminists vs "Men's Rights Activists", Pickup Artists Vs Men's Right Activists, Radical Feminists vs PUA's and MRA's and MGTOW. Men Going Their Own Way (MGTOW), PUA, MRA, RADFEM, TOO MANY FUCKING ACRONYMS AND CLASSIFICATIONS! It get's one in a dizzying tizzy of perpetual confusion having to claw your way through all the bullshit. If one follows these debates and battles of these different ideologies and of ideologues, and takes them to represent the real world at all times, one could easily come to the conclusion given in the title of this post that an actual event like this can happen. That if a guy goes out there and tries to hit on a girl (in a non threatening and non harrassing type way) that not only will she slap you, but she'll castrate you for being some type of chauvinist pig. But this isn't tumblr or youtube or these weird online debates, this is the real world we're talking about. Infamous Feminist Andrea Dworkin won't come back from the grave and yell at you for hitting on a woman at a bar. You won't get "called out" for doing something as harmless as talking to a woman you're interested in. Sure if you follow these debates, and take them to heart, in that reality or world one can come to the paranoid conclusion that this type of stuff will happen. But it likely won't happen at some bar where guys and girls come to mingle. It may not even happen if you hit on some of these ideologues themselves. There's a lot of talk about what defines "street harrassment" or even "affirmative consent" nowadays, but as guys who are just trying to get more dates we needn't concern ourselves with these debates. They do nothing but muddy the waters of what we're trying to do. The biggest problem is that sometimes things such as the aforementioned concepts are not articulated enough in the right way by the people debating them, so a person will be lead to a conclusion that ANY hitting on a woman on the street is harrassment, or that you need a written contract to even hold hands with a girl. These are the logical conclusions that some people have within these debates, but what do they matter in the real world right now? I write this post because this was an actual concern of mine for awhile, since I get caught up in reading a lot of controversial debates on the internet (and have a fascination for them). I had to take a break from dating for various reasons and since I'm coming back to the fold, following some of these huge debates has been kind of detrimental. A lot of the time, also, people are huge hypocrites anyway. Some of the biggest online feminists do nudie calendars, or take the famous case of Kathleen Hanna, lead singer of one of the biggest "Riot GRRL" bands of all time, Bikini Kill, who married a guy from the Beastie Boys, a band who used to feature go-go dancers and very "sexist" lyrics. I'm sure from the other end, there are "MRA's" (just using a stereotype some people have about MRAs) who are total submissives in bed, the list goes on. Just because a person takes an ideological position doesn't mean they're totally consistent when it comes to the rest of their lives. So fuck it, the more you pay attention to something the more it matters. When I didn't know about all that stuff, I seemed to do better, so I would say as a point of advice, don't take the shit seriously. What people say they respond to, and what they actually do are often in conflict and contradictory anyway. So I choose to not make any apologies for wanting to get any better with dating, (though still respecting boundaries and personal choices), and neither should you!
I'm guilty as charged. I'm a sick weirdo pervert (probably to some). I didn't do anything illegal but to some it was immoral. To others it is probably no big deal, but to some it was a transgression that should be scorned. My last three dates were all 10 + years younger than me (24, 21 and 23 respectively). So I committed the evil sin of dipping below the (half your age + 7 years) acceptable "dating range" at least one of those times. Mind you, the last semi-casual semi-serious relationship I had with someone, the person was 31 years old. So is having a huge age difference bad? Is it detrimental to either person in the relationship, or is it just something to be judged by a case by case basis? A lot of times one will read a blog, or an article online, and read the comments. By reading the comments of certain articles one can get a sense of both trolls as well as opinions expressed by the masses. Let's say someone posts an article about some young actress or entertainer who starts seeing someone say, 15+ years older. A lot of the comments will be about how she's a golddigger (wait isn't she already rich herself?) or that he will "use her up and divorce her" and that he's a "pig" for dipping below society's expectations. I've also seen such ideas perpetuated even on such unlikely sources as "Millionaire Matchmaker" shows where the host says the choice the guy was making wasn't "age appropiate". Often though, cooler heads can prevail. Famous Sex Blogger/Vlogger Laci Green did an excellent video on age differences in dating where her conclusion is that YES, some people can have happy and fulfilling relationships with another person who is much younger (or older) than them. I don't always agree with what Laci has to say, and even in this video there are some points I partially disagree with, but to me she did an excellent and informed job at breaking down these ideas. Now that isn't to say there aren't situations that are outright creepy and weird with regards to age differences and dating. One obvious example of someone who was PROBABLY an actual golddigger was Anna Nicole Smith (RIP). Marrying a RICH 90 year old man in one's twenties, especially when they didn't seem to have much in common, rightfully can get the cynics yowling. Another example I would say, but just because I've read alleged accounts of what his sexual practices are with his young partners is Hugh Hefner. But in cases like Catherine Zeta Jones and her long time marriage to Michael Douglas, or even as far as a gender reversal, Ashton Kutcher and Demi Moore, the idea that there is always a cynical motivation for huge age spreads in relationships seems to (maybe) be the exception and not the rule. But let's bring it down a couple notches to the common person and not the celebrity. I've known couples who have 30 year differences who have been together for years, I've known people who's "soulmate" were 10-15 years older (or vice versa), I've known guys and women who date people much older and younger than them, and the earth's crust isn't falling apart as a result of this (seen by some) "terrible" thing. Now on to the point of the inclusion of this post in this blog. What can one expect if one is a guy and much older than the woman or women he's trying to date (the most common scenario for various reasons). One of the things I've found, is that when I was dating someone who was 22 when I was 33 for example, and also when seeing friends date women much younger (or in their early twenties) is that usually the women are in a much more transitory point in their life. One can't expect them to settle down immediately, especially if they're in college, and one can expect that its not going to be a super long term relationship. That's not to say there isn't a chance of that, but its just less likely. Remember, that this age range (early twenties) is a time for self-exploration, experimentation, and learning, so any expectation to marry someone of that age is very naive indeed. That's not to say that there isn't a sense of fun, not only that you're kind of "reliving" things you may not had experienced during the time you were that age (guilty as charged), but the woman might also get a thrill in dating a more "mature" and established man amongst the "man children" that she feels that guys in her age group are still in the category of lol. So one can expect that having a relationship, at least with someone in their late teens or early twenties anyway, may be only a casual one. I would also argue that a guy who may want a more serious relationship with someone much younger should at least treat it as more light hearted and casual at first anyway, and to give the much younger woman the freedom and choices that she wants (and deserves). This leaves the possibility open that things CAN get more serious down the line, but without the feeling from the woman that she is getting bogged down or restricted. This brings us to the next point that people try to make when discussing the "older man, younger female" dynamic, and that is "power dynamics". Its often said that these relationships have an unequal power dynamic, with the older guy exerting power over the younger female in an unequal way. Now unfortunately, I've seen some evidence of this in the past, even in my own life, where one of my ex girlfriends was swept up by a much older man who was controlling and abusive. However, I've also seen much younger women exert control over older men in different ways, so I would still treat this as a case by case basis. Power dynamics in relationships are always a tricky thing anyway, and if one expects any type of respectful and fun relationship, one should try to always make it equal as possible (without supplicating in a way that compromises your values or self worth anyway). So on to my own life again- Did I consciously choose that the last three women I went on dates with be in their early twenties? No. If we're talking about online dating anyway, I talk to a variety of women with a variety of ages. It just happens to be that I'm in a stage of my life where its more common for me to meet single women who are younger. Most of the women closer to or my age are married, or have children already, or are just not accessible in the ways that there would be an easy opportunity to meet them. I go after those I'm attracted to, so it just kind of works out that the women I date are younger, sometimes much so. I also desire kids down the line, and kids of my own, so it kind of is advantageous that I try to go after younger women since it is easier for them to have kids. Selfish and entitled thinking? I don't think so, as long as its in their benefit and desire to do so as well (which it seems to be at least in part if they're agreeing to dates). Now the early twenties are not even my ideal age range. I prefer women in their mid-late twenties, not because its a good "halfway point" but because my lifestyle, and where I am in my life right now is more similar to them than any other age range (for many reasons, some I won't go into here). The mid twenties women are not as immature and unsettled as the early twenties ones, but also if they want children down the road they can have them without much difficulty. They also are not completely settled in their lives and career, and still try to have that "twenties fun" that I feel I missed out on a lot of the time. They're looking to settle down, but maybe not right away. And they're not as weirded out by dating someone a bit older either so its a win/win situation for me and (hopefully) for them.
I'm going to address, in this blog post, something that has bothered me for a long time. On one of the first dates with one of my exes, we talked about Christian virgins that we both knew and how ridiculous the concept of remaining "pure before marriage" is. In this post (which is honestly a bit of a digression/departure from the stated purpose of this blog) I will delve into this issue. It's actually not as much of a digression when we get down to the brass tacks however. This is not going to be made out to be a debate on religious morality (per se) or to knock anyone's personal beliefs. However, it is going to be about the very practical real world implications that having such a belief can impact one's love life. Now on the the points I'm trying to make. In this conversation with the aforementioned ex, we had talked about buying a car. When you're buying a car, you have to make sure its comfortable, and that you enjoy driving it. You also try it out (especially if used) because you want to make sure it drives properly. When dating someone, having sex with them is the solidification of a relationship beyond "friendship". This is what the whole point of a "sexual relationship". Now I've heard it argued that there are other things one can do before marriage (according to some of these people's personal morality) that are sexual without the act itself. But really they are implying that the other party would actually be comfortable with this, and that by "teasing" the act itself that they have 100 percent faith that it "won't happen" anyway. To me this is just (if not more) ridiculous than just kissing before marriage. They (these people) don't understand how things work in relationships, because they've NEVER HAD ANY. Another very naive thing I've discovered about some of these types is when they idealize people not of their religion, or even seek out relationships with them, with the belief that these people may "Fall in line" with their morals. Say there's a Christian guy, he's a virgin, and he's trying to date a non-christian "normal" non virgin woman. The woman has probably had multiple sexual partners and relationships (same as "normal" guys) and the expectation is that eventually full on sex will happen when dating, not when COMMITTING TO THE CHRISTIAN VIRGIN BOYFRIEND FOR LIFE. I would never expect a person who's been through the whole thing to just bend to my will because my morals involve me having to be married to someone to have sex. It is utterly ridiculous and naive to expect this. Any woman or man with reasonable expectations who's already been through it all would either leave or say "let's just be friends". I just find it unreasonably naive to expect this. If a Christian guy or woman expects another Christian partner to follow their beliefs, that's a totally different story. However, there's no way to know that they have sexual compatibility, that they are truly in a fulfilling relationship with the other person unless they are in a full on sexual relationship with them. Also, without having multiple partners or multiple relationships, its kind of naive to assume that the first person you have sex with has to be the "one for life". Normal people go through this, and its not like they're some evil sinners that have committed total blasphemy for sex before marriage. The fulfillment that marriage may provide can be a result of having life experiences, dating multiple people, and settling down with someone who you find satisfies you and vice versa, and having the discretion and knowledge that can only be found through LIFE EXPERIENCE.
Saturday, July 26, 2014
I've known guys who didn't have jobs. Some of them actually physically stank, some of them lived in their parent's basement. Some of them abused chemicals, others were almost straight edge. I've seen all these guys have the ability to not only get women, but get hot women and keep them. However, I've also known guys with certain aspects who were abject failures with women. The advice time and time again is to "improve yourself" or to paraphrase the film Field of Dreams "build it and they will come". So which approach is right? Is it true that some guys have nothing going for them, not even some looks in some cases, can become successful with women. However on the opposite end, guys that have MORE going for them than these guys often are less successful. There are certain reasons for this. If you read my prior post on escalation (make a move, lose a friend) then you would know that sometimes these "nice" guys that have more stuff going on in life than these "losers" don't do what needs to be done as far as noticing queues, or trying to progress things physically forward (with consent of course). But as far as the question that this post postulates, its a complicated question with a complex answer. For years I was stuck in my ways, and my attitudes towards myself and the opposite sex. I was also stubborn about having to change myself, having to take actions that would make me more attractive. But the problems were directly related to the changes that I needed to make, and even as I continue to change, I see that in these situations, the problems that guys have outside of those "exceptions" I mentioned earlier are directly related to why they don't do well with girls. In essence, as a guy improves himself, the opportunities and advantages increase. The guys who are good as an "exception" are good often because of other factors, whether it'd be being more outgoing, funnier, more adventurous, daring, etc. They take more risks, but there's not denying that a guy that has his "shit together" would do even better if merging these two dichotomies as one. A guy that has the ability, but also has a well rounded life. In the cases where guys were bad because of aspects that only self-improvement would handle, the two and two go together. Become a happier person, you smile more, you get more indicators of interest from women, and you approach more. You're more physically attractive as a result of working out, or you go to more cool events or have more stuff to do, the same goes. You stop thinking about yourself and have the ability to focus, which decreases anxiety, and you notice your "peripherals" more (an upcoming post). So all in all, I think if you're bad with women, improving how you are as a person, can have so many effects on how you are its unimaginable. The improvements and advances can compound on themselves, and by this point its not about "just being yourself" but as Neil Strauss once said "being your best self".
We live in a looks and youth obsessed culture. Part of it could be social conditioning, but there are many studies by evolutionary biologists that state that we have certain preferences because of our genetic makeup and that its "preferred" because (for heterosexuals but one would argue other orientations as well) of procreative ability, health, etc. However, where does the conditioning begin and our natural inclinations begin? Well I'm here to state it doesn't matter, its all about what YOU want and WHAT YOUR PREFERENCES ARE! Some people like Mexican food, some prefer Thai. We all have our preferences based on our experiences, and our innate likes or dislikes. But when it comes to dating, there are forces that are out there that often malign the inexperienced as "shallow" or "superficial" once we state our preferences. Now the pendulum can swing the other way as well. If you're only attracted to women that look like some famous movie star, you're missing the point. The same goes for the idea that you're so picky that you follow these preferences like a religion and it causes you to actually be picky in situations where looking at even a rational point of view it would seem ridiculous. Of course there are guys that are NOT picky, and guys that are (an upcoming post I have written deals with two distinct types of men when it comes to dating/sleeping around). What we have to do, as men, is figure out what attracts us the most and go after it. Certain facial structures, body types, etc, may not be what the status quo likes at the time, or just part of what it likes at the time, but it should become evident to you that you're better off going after what completely and 100 percent is attractive to YOU. Your "10" could be someone else's "1" and vice versa. So its a balancing act. I think the people who gave me scorn when I used to mention my preferences were just misunderstanding what my preferences were. I wasn't stating that the women I dated had to look like some celebrity, but that there were certain features I found more appealing than others. There are some studies that say our preferences have to do with our genetic makeup as well. These studies should not be discounted as far as mate selection either. Science shouldn't excuse bad behaviors, but they should help justify why certain people are HAPPIER when making certain choices. One shouldn't have to apologize for preferring blondes if that's what comes natural to them. If they're saying it JUST because their friends are saying it- of course its nonsense. If someone is NATURALLY attracted to obese women, or blondes, or goths, or whatever, then they should own up to it. Its part of being a man with a distinct identity. It isn't shallow or superficial to feel good about the person you're with, regardless of the length of the relationship. Far too many people get into relationships with those who they either have no attraction to, or nothing that cements the relationship in an healthy way, whether it'd be common interests, traits that are complementary, etc. If one takes a look at the divorce rate, I'm sure that a huge percentage of divorces are because of this simple fact. One should go after what one wants. People may call you superficial if you don't articulate enough what you're trying to say, but there's only so much time in the world. Time in the world to not waste settling for what you don't want.
One of the most difficult concepts to wrap one's head around when trying to get better with dating is one of the idea of not learning new skills, but unlearning a lot of the bullshit, myths, misconceptions, and other things we were raised with. But this post is not about the ideas I have talked about in prior posts, but some of the things that we need to unlearn are traits that just plain put off people in general. For example, when I was young, I used to try to garner sympathy from people with my anxiety issues, use self-deprecating but clearly not funny humor, and just strut around like a miserable person in general. These types of self-defeating habits are obviously not conducive with success in dating, much less any type of relating with people. So in essence, we need to always look at what bad habits we have with people, and try best to eliminate them, just to improve ourselves in general. If you have bad hygeine and pick your nose in public, or make inappropiate jokes in public (without them being witty in any way), these are things we aren't always 100 % conscious of doing at all times. It takes a lot to look at these bad habits and try to cut down on them or quit them, but they're worth doing in general. One particular issue related to what I used to do is try to relate to girls with my problems and issues. While this may had been attractive to some, I felt it was detrimental in the long run to not only having healthy relationships and basing them on a more healthy foundation, but also sometimes attracted the wrong types, someone to wallow in my problems with. Also, in my youth, what I had found attractive in some ways, was this totally misguided idea of someone with the exact same problems as me, someone I could wallow in my problems with. With maturity and experience, I changed this belief, and that's the whole point of this post, that we need to unlearn some of these ideas that seem to us to be something that would serve what we think we want, but all in all, serve misplaced ideas and conceptions that only serve to harm us. Relating to women on the basis of problems we share may work in small quantities, and showing a little weakness is not bad, but it spells trouble when you being anything based around some type of negative aspect of your life.
Monday, July 21, 2014
So the prior post kind of delved into this subject a little bit, but this post will be a little bit different as I think this concept is a bit different. Another thing I want to state, is the intention of this blog isn't to be another blog in the "Seduction community" (look it up) as I will readily admit I've studied a lot of their ideas (and attraction in general) for a few years now. I also have read more "mainstream" dating advice. This blog as stated in the very first post, is supposed to be neither, but to fill a void that I see inherent in online dating advice in general and I am trying to go somewhere in between the two. For example, a "pickup artist blog" may say "go screw ten women" if one has a breakup, but a mainstream yahoo article may say "give yourself time to heal". I'd say, give yourself time to heal, but maybe try to date some people to make sure you're still getting yourself out there and giving yourself a chance to get over it by seeing that there are different people and plenty of fish in the sea! So as you can see, I am hoping this blog will be different that either side of this "dichotomy". Back to the subject: if I had never been rejected as many times as I have, I would have never had half the dating life I have had. I'll repeat that another way: If one gets "rejected" its usually a matter that they're on the right track. The more rejected you get, the more closer to success you are. Its common sense, one can compare it to sending resumes for job interviews or something like that but that is missing the point. Consider that you're honing your skills by meeting more women and getting rejected. You're building up resistance to various things that happen and (hopefully) changing your behavior to be more attractive. As time goes on, you get better and better. Its said often that the best hitters in baseball also get the most strikes. I'm no sports nut, but in reading the statstics about baseball, it seems to support this idea. So its a numbers game. The more women you approach, the more rejected you'll get, the more emails you send with online dating, its all the same. Its a numbers game, most of the guys who aren't really successful really never try or they display the behavior that I discussed in the previous posts. They resst on their laurels and settle for second best (second best to them personally, as each of us has a definition of what's best for us). But many guys also have this irrational paranoia about rejection- its almost like they believe in this secret communication between all women, that if they're rejected by one, they've been rejected by them all. Sometimes with breaks in dating, my mind also may go to this bad habit every once in awhile, as it was one that I had when I was less sucessful. Its like I'm reverting back to old habits. But as I start to get in a flow again, I easily dispel these myths within myself. Its basically, as a dating coach once said, one woman one vote. A person may have preferences, and ideas about what they like, and they may be really similar to the other person as far as a lot of things, but throw one or two things off as far as what their preferences are and they may be completely different. For example, a guy may hit on a girl because she's wearing a shirt of his favorite sports team, has blonde hair, and looks a certain way. She may totally reject him, but then he sees the exact same archetype, and gets the opposite response. I've seen this happen numerous times, and its happened to me as well. We don't know the motivations of why someone "rejects" us or why someone accepts us into their lives. But all we can do is risk taking the shot; if we miss, we shoot again and again and again and again until we get the ball in the basket!