Board index › Coping in life › Love and Dating

Growing up and done with bad boys

Page 9 of 13 [ 206 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

TM
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Feb 2012
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,122

19 Jun 2012, 6:13 pm

HisDivineMajesty wrote:

If you have a key that can open most locks, you have a pretty good key.
If you have a lock that can be opened by most keys, you have a pretty bad lock.


I like that analogy and I intend to steal it.



deltafunction
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jun 2012
Age: 33
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,094
Location: Lost

19 Jun 2012, 6:16 pm

Aw man, this is starting to seem like it's women vs men here.

It seems contradictory to me the one can idealise the women who date bad boy after bad boy, by saying they are attractive so men want to sleep with them, and then the next moment saying these women have loose morals, so you do not want to have a relationship with them. Make up your mind!


_________________
Your Aspie score: 93 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 109 of 200
You seem to have both Aspie and neurotypical traits


TM
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Feb 2012
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,122

19 Jun 2012, 6:19 pm

deltafunction wrote:
Aw man, this is starting to seem like it's women vs men here.

It seems contradictory to me the one can idealise the women who date bad boy after bad boy, by saying they are attractive so men want to sleep with them, and then the next moment saying these women have loose morals, so you do not want to have a relationship with them. Make up your mind!


Sleeping with someone is different from having a relationship with them. Also, I never said anything about loose morals, I just pointed out that it takes a lot less effort for a woman to reach lets say 50 sexual partners than it would take the equivalent male.



JanuaryMan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 1 Jan 2012
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,359

19 Jun 2012, 6:22 pm

deltafunction wrote:
Aw man, this is starting to seem like it's women vs men here.


This is why I stopped posting in the thread. The thread's goal was to say "I've changed, I am after this type of guy now...so come get me ;) "
It was a chance for the socially inept to get mingling and hook up but instead many took it as an opportunity to take out their frustrations with life on the person.

Yes, they weren't delicate with their words (perhaps an NT thing?) around the AS males. Yes, things might have come across different than intended. But they got a date in next to no time, and the angry bitter folk are still here picking away at things the OP said. So for what it's worth I'd like to think the person that can get a date with a nice guy has more validity in their statements, than a person claiming to be a nice guy that can't get a date. :lol:



mds_02
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Sep 2011
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,077
Location: Los Angeles

19 Jun 2012, 6:22 pm

Zinia wrote:
I don't know if the original double standard I suggested has to do with the woman lacking sexual skills? I was talking more along the lines of women who have more sexual partners being degraded as easy. Whereas men are rarely called easy, no matter how many sexual partners they have.

I don't really know if men get the same kind of criticism for having less sexual partners then other men, if they do then that also seems unfair.


First, no the word easy is not applied to men. There are other words like "player" used for men, and women will advise each other not to date them. Plenty of other ways in which promiscuous men are put down too. Ever hear anyone say how all men are dogs? If all you pay attention to are the words used, then you'll see that men get put down for sleeping around just as much. Only reason it doesn't seem as serious as when women are put down for it is because the men who those statements are directed at choose not to be so bothered by them.

And yes, men definitely are looked down upon for not having enough sexual partners. By both genders.


_________________
If life's not beautiful without the pain, 
well I'd just rather never ever even see beauty again. 
Well as life gets longer, awful feels softer. 
And it feels pretty soft to me. 

Modest Mouse - The View


deltafunction
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jun 2012
Age: 33
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,094
Location: Lost

19 Jun 2012, 6:26 pm

TM wrote:
deltafunction wrote:
Aw man, this is starting to seem like it's women vs men here.

It seems contradictory to me the one can idealise the women who date bad boy after bad boy, by saying they are attractive so men want to sleep with them, and then the next moment saying these women have loose morals, so you do not want to have a relationship with them. Make up your mind!


Sleeping with someone is different from having a relationship with them. Also, I never said anything about loose morals, I just pointed out that it takes a lot less effort for a woman to reach lets say 50 sexual partners than it would take the equivalent male.


Well, obviously she would have to be attractive enough to guys.

It just seems ridiculous to me that these are the kinds of women men usually go for. And when you guys say you want to attract good-looking women and so have to compete, all I think about is women who have had many partners.

But then these women who have so many partners are called easy, and so deemed unattractive. And yet there are nice, young, attractive but less out-spoken women out there, who don't get around as much, and they are called leftovers.

It's like women can't win here!


_________________
Your Aspie score: 93 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 109 of 200
You seem to have both Aspie and neurotypical traits


rabbittss
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 29 Dec 2011
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,348

19 Jun 2012, 6:27 pm

JanuaryMan wrote:
deltafunction wrote:
Aw man, this is starting to seem like it's women vs men here.


This is why I stopped posting in the thread. The thread's goal was to say "I've changed, I am after this type of guy now...so come get me ;) "
It was a chance for the socially inept to get mingling and hook up but instead many took it as an opportunity to take out their frustrations with life on the person.

Yes, they weren't delicate with their words (perhaps an NT thing?) around the AS males. Yes, things might have come across different than intended. But they got a date in next to no time, and the angry bitter folk are still here picking away at things the OP said. So for what it's worth I'd like to think the person that can get a date with a nice guy has more validity in their statements, than a person claiming to be a nice guy that can't get a date. :lol:


:roll:

Of course she had no trouble getting a date, she's female. Any female, no matter how ugly or fat, can get a date provided they are willing to put out.



JanuaryMan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 1 Jan 2012
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,359

19 Jun 2012, 6:29 pm

deltafunction wrote:
TM wrote:
deltafunction wrote:
Aw man, this is starting to seem like it's women vs men here.

It seems contradictory to me the one can idealise the women who date bad boy after bad boy, by saying they are attractive so men want to sleep with them, and then the next moment saying these women have loose morals, so you do not want to have a relationship with them. Make up your mind!


Sleeping with someone is different from having a relationship with them. Also, I never said anything about loose morals, I just pointed out that it takes a lot less effort for a woman to reach lets say 50 sexual partners than it would take the equivalent male.


Well, obviously she would have to be attractive enough to guys.

It just seems ridiculous to me that these are the kinds of women men usually go for. And when you guys say you want to attract good-looking women and so have to compete, all I think about is women who have had many partners.

But then these women who have so many partners are called easy, and so deemed unattractive. And yet there are nice, young, attractive but less out-spoken women out there, who don't get around as much, and they are called leftovers.

It's like women can't win here!


I'm pretty sure there's a rule in WP's love and dating house rules where women aren't allowed to win.
And probably another rule where men aren't allowed to be nice guys without testimonials. :wink:



Zinia
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 22 Sep 2011
Age: 41
Gender: Female
Posts: 344

19 Jun 2012, 6:29 pm

mds_02 wrote:
Zinia wrote:
I don't know if the original double standard I suggested has to do with the woman lacking sexual skills? I was talking more along the lines of women who have more sexual partners being degraded as easy. Whereas men are rarely called easy, no matter how many sexual partners they have.

I don't really know if men get the same kind of criticism for having less sexual partners then other men, if they do then that also seems unfair.


First, no the word easy is not applied to men. There are other words like "player" used for men, and women will advise each other not to date them. Plenty of other ways in which promiscuous men are put down too. Ever hear anyone say how all men are dogs? If all you pay attention to are the words used, then you'll see that men get put down for sleeping around just as much. Only reason it doesn't seem as serious as when women are put down for it is because the men who those statements are directed at choose not to be so bothered by them.

And yes, men definitely are looked down upon for not having enough sexual partners. By both genders.


I think another reason why it seems more serious when women are put down for being "easy" is because of history. I know some people think we should just let history go and move on, but I think its echos still shapes our society and psychology a bit.

You know, if men were banned from University, politics, and basic human rights for a few centuries (or a dozen) then I would be more up in arms about male bashing. Men aren't dogs. But some of the same ideas that suggest women are "easy" also suggest that men are mindless animals who can't control themselves, which isn't true. The idea that sex is about predator and prey corresponds to men being called "dogs" and women being the p*****s.



deltafunction
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jun 2012
Age: 33
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,094
Location: Lost

19 Jun 2012, 6:33 pm

JanuaryMan wrote:
deltafunction wrote:
TM wrote:
deltafunction wrote:
Aw man, this is starting to seem like it's women vs men here.

It seems contradictory to me the one can idealise the women who date bad boy after bad boy, by saying they are attractive so men want to sleep with them, and then the next moment saying these women have loose morals, so you do not want to have a relationship with them. Make up your mind!


Sleeping with someone is different from having a relationship with them. Also, I never said anything about loose morals, I just pointed out that it takes a lot less effort for a woman to reach lets say 50 sexual partners than it would take the equivalent male.


Well, obviously she would have to be attractive enough to guys.

It just seems ridiculous to me that these are the kinds of women men usually go for. And when you guys say you want to attract good-looking women and so have to compete, all I think about is women who have had many partners.

But then these women who have so many partners are called easy, and so deemed unattractive. And yet there are nice, young, attractive but less out-spoken women out there, who don't get around as much, and they are called leftovers.

It's like women can't win here!



I'm pretty sure there's a rule in WP's love and dating house rules where women aren't allowed to win.
And probably another rule where men aren't allowed to be nice guys without testimonials. :wink:


:lol:


_________________
Your Aspie score: 93 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 109 of 200
You seem to have both Aspie and neurotypical traits


mds_02
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Sep 2011
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,077
Location: Los Angeles

19 Jun 2012, 6:38 pm

deltafunction wrote:
Well, obviously she would have to be attractive enough to guys.

It just seems ridiculous to me that these are the kinds of women men usually go for. And when you guys say you want to attract good-looking women and so have to compete, all I think about is women who have had many partners.


it is entirely possible to be highly valued, and sought after, by many without having a bunch of partners.

Quote:
But then these women who have so many partners are called easy, and so deemed unattractive.


It is not the highly sought after women who are called easy. It is the ones who show low standards when choosing who to partner with. This is considered unappealing, when trying to form a relationship, because the guy then feels that he is nothing special, that she'd be just as happy with any other guy who might come along. This fear is not unreasonable.

Quote:
And yet there are nice, young, attractive but less out-spoken women out there, who don't get around as much, and they are called leftovers.

It's like women can't win here!


They are not the ones being called leftovers. It's the ones who have slept with a very large number of guys who are thought of as those guys' leftovers.


_________________
If life's not beautiful without the pain, 
well I'd just rather never ever even see beauty again. 
Well as life gets longer, awful feels softer. 
And it feels pretty soft to me. 

Modest Mouse - The View


mds_02
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Sep 2011
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,077
Location: Los Angeles

19 Jun 2012, 6:43 pm

Zinia wrote:
I think another reason why it seems more serious when women are put down for being "easy" is because of history. I know some people think we should just let history go and move on, but I think its echos still shapes our society and psychology a bit.

You know, if men were banned from University, politics, and basic human rights for a few centuries (or a dozen) then I would be more up in arms about male bashing. Men aren't dogs. But some of the same ideas that suggest women are "easy" also suggest that men are mindless animals who can't control themselves, which isn't true. The idea that sex is about predator and prey corresponds to men being called "dogs" and women being the p*****s.


All true, but it does have to be kept in mind that the men who are around today are not the ones that excluded women.

And the women of today are not the ones who had their rights denied.


_________________
If life's not beautiful without the pain, 
well I'd just rather never ever even see beauty again. 
Well as life gets longer, awful feels softer. 
And it feels pretty soft to me. 

Modest Mouse - The View


deltafunction
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jun 2012
Age: 33
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,094
Location: Lost

19 Jun 2012, 6:43 pm

mds_02 wrote:
It is not the highly sought after women who are called easy. It is the ones who show low standards when choosing who to partner with. This is considered unappealing, when trying to form a relationship, because the guy then feels that he is nothing special, that she'd be just as happy with any other guy who might come along. This fear is not unreasonable.


Alright, well that makes more sense. But see, if these women have high standards when choosing a mate, it doesn't make sense to me that men would wow her by being the epitome of the alpha male a-hole, and play the same game every other guy is doing. It makes more sense to me that these women would want a gentleman, and someone who won't cheat or go looking for another partner. Why would people give up their personality, when it is the one thing that makes them stand out?


_________________
Your Aspie score: 93 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 109 of 200
You seem to have both Aspie and neurotypical traits


BlueMax
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Aug 2007
Age: 50
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,285

19 Jun 2012, 6:49 pm

deltafunction wrote:
Love addicts and Avoidants form relationships that inevitably lead to unhealthy patterns of dependency, distance, chaos, and often abuse. Nevertheless, however unsatisfactory the relationship, 'love addicts hang on and on, because it is what they know'.[18] Familiarity is the central engine of their relationship. Each is attracted to the other specifically because of the familiar traits that the other exhibits, and although painful, come from childhood.


This is an excellent quote! I've seen so many people with unhealthy relationship patterns and this is 90% of it right here...

Something we ALL should look long and hard in the mirror and self-analyze. ;)



mds_02
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 9 Sep 2011
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,077
Location: Los Angeles

19 Jun 2012, 6:55 pm

deltafunction wrote:
Alright, well that makes more sense. But see, if these women have high standards when choosing a mate, it doesn't make sense to me that men would wow her by being the epitome of the alpha male a-hole, and play the same game every other guy is doing. It makes more sense to me that these women would want a gentleman, and someone who won't cheat or go looking for another partner. Why would people give up their personality, when it is the one thing that makes them stand out?


Having high standards does not necessarily mean knowing what is best for you. It means not being willing to settle for less than what you want, even if what you want is no good for you. I should have said strict versus relaxed standards, rather than high or low standards.

Either way, when a woman relaxes, or changes, her standards for logical rational reasons, any guy she ends up with in the future has to worry that she only chose him for those logical reasons and that she does not feel the same gut-level attraction to him that she used to feel for other guys.

Being able to have a happier healthier relationship with a genuinely nice guy is great. But no guy wants to feel like his partner was more turned-on by past as*holes than she is by him.


_________________
If life's not beautiful without the pain, 
well I'd just rather never ever even see beauty again. 
Well as life gets longer, awful feels softer. 
And it feels pretty soft to me. 

Modest Mouse - The View


HisDivineMajesty
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jan 2012
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,364
Location: Planet Earth

19 Jun 2012, 7:03 pm

deltafunction wrote:
Aw man, this is starting to seem like it's women vs men here.

It seems contradictory to me the one can idealise the women who date bad boy after bad boy, by saying they are attractive so men want to sleep with them, and then the next moment saying these women have loose morals, so you do not want to have a relationship with them. Make up your mind!


It's not contradictory. My line throughout this story has been that the type of women attracted to 'bad boys' are good for a short-term thing, but not a relationship, as I'd know too well what they're up to. Mainly, my problem is with the precedent they've set before trying to move on to something more stable. They've had ten, fifteen years of excitement and adventure, and then expect someone to fall in love with them in the long term as they become 'more mature', meaning their looks fade, they're having trouble getting laid twice a night and they'd look pathetic smoking pot or whatever they're doing these days with the bad boys.

I love hyperbole. However, the core of the issue is very true - I wouldn't date a woman who admitted feeling more attracted to any other men than to me. That would be a clear message to me - she's not able to get the men she really wants, and she just needs financial and emotional security. For me, and most men I've discussed that hypothetical situation with, that would be an invitation to hump and dump. The free ride is over, lady.



cron