Being a player: positives and negatives?

[C-i-C-u]

How can anyone say men act this way because women taught them to be this way with a straight face?

See I was right about one of the benefits of women. They will make up whatever excuse as to why you are a player and it willl never be a bad thing because the women will still like you.

[stillafool]

Not all cheaters are players, but all players misrepresent their investment level in the multiple individuals they're playing, thus keeping them on a string, to be used or disposed of, at will.

 

This is not true. Some of them tell people that they don't want to settle down and are dating others. At first people don't seem to mind until they fall in love and then there's the problem.

[sumdude]

 

Men have always cheated. They cheated when women cow towed to them and waited on them hand and foot, they cheated when women were forced to depend on them for survival; it is no surprise men still cheat. But take notice that now, when women behave just as selfish, male behavior is the fault of women and not simple mirroring of the behavior men have always been afforded.

 

PEOPLE have always cheated. Both men and women. The oldest literature out there is full of stories and plays about unfaithful women and men. Human nature didn't suddenly change in a few decades.

 

The difference now is that if a woman wants to find a new lover she can actually leave her husband and support herself instead of staying married to the breadwinner while having the washing machine repairman on the side.

 

Any idea that somehow at one point women were more faithful than men is a fabrication. I think the women were just quieter and smarter about it to be honest.

 

So everybody get off the high horse and the us vs. them attitude already.

[Woggle]

So now (that women do it as much) its a problem? How nice of women to do so and create a flimsy justification for men to act the way they always have.

 

Men have always cheated. They cheated when women cow towed to them and waited on them hand and foot, they cheated when women were forced to depend on them for survival; it is no surprise men still cheat. But take notice that now, when women behave just as selfish, male behavior is the fault of women and not simple mirroring of the behavior men have always been afforded.

 

How can anyone say men act this way because women taught them to be this way with a straight face? When women had no rights, no vote, no earnings, no voice, Women had to accept and respond favorably to predatory men. It wasn't simply because that is what women like. Now if anything, these horrible women you want to pin the blame on, are acting this way because it is what they learned - from men. Be a virgin till marriage, push out babies, keep a house clean and dinner on the table and your husband would still feel justified to have a side piece. What did that suggest if not that there was zero benefit in being a faithful loving wife and mother? So who taught who to be a player first?

If women are now cheating just as much, do you really think it is because they don't like nice guys or could it possibly be they've learned men don't like or appreciate "nice girls"?

 

We're having a chicken or egg debate here if I ever saw one........ Next someone is going to come along and say Klan members were taught by slaves to hate and discriminate against black folks.

 

Everybody gets on me about my misogyny but nobody gets on S4S about her misandry. I wonder what you would think if your son was one of these men you think deserve to get cheated on.

[threebyfate]

This is not true. Some of them tell people that they don't want to settle down and are dating others. At first people don't seem to mind until they fall in love and then there's the problem.

As far as I'm concerned, they're not players. It's the misrepresentation, whether outright lying or lying by omission, that to me, indicates a player.

 

Being upfront gives the other person the opportunity to walk. If they don't, the onus is on the other person to stop being stupid. Fairplay.

[sally4sara]

Everybody gets on me about my misogyny but nobody gets on S4S about her misandry. I wonder what you would think if your son was one of these men you think deserve to get cheated on.

 

Being able to talk about slavery doesn't make me a slave owner.

 

Women were property. It is fact. Perhaps when we were still grunting and slouching, everyone rutted on everyone else regardless of gender, but I'm speaking more of our still resonant "civilized" past, but women did not have the liberty to cat around even if they wanted to. I do not feel the reflexive behavior it reaped is the best way to go about finding a level field, but it is the easy natural way to handle it. It is the way children step towards adulthood; by watching the adults around them and mimicking what they do. It is the way YOU handle it. I can speak your language Woggle, but it doesn't mean it is my native tongue.

[TheLoneSock]

PEOPLE have always cheated. Both men and women. The oldest literature out there is full of stories and plays about unfaithful women and men. Human nature didn't suddenly change in a few decades.

 

The difference now is that if a woman wants to find a new lover she can actually leave her husband and support herself instead of staying married to the breadwinner while having the washing machine repairman on the side.

 

Any idea that somehow at one point women were more faithful than men is a fabrication. I think the women were just quieter and smarter about it to be honest.

 

So everybody get off the high horse and the us vs. them attitude already.

 

I think other people skipped over this post. I hear you, and I agree.

 

From before ancient greece to present day, there has always been plenty cheating on both sides of the coin. We just weren't there in those times to experience it, but that doesn't mean it didn't exist until present day.

 

Anyone who thinks women were actually perfect, loving, innocent virgins who were then betrayed by their evil male counterpart is just playing a 'woe is my gender' card. Get real, and stop underestimating women of the past. They got their cake too.

[Woggle]

Being able to talk about slavery doesn't make me a slave owner.

 

Women were property. It is fact. Perhaps when we were still grunting and slouching, everyone rutted on everyone else regardless of gender, but I'm speaking more of our still resonant "civilized" past, but women did not have the liberty to cat around even if they wanted to. I do not feel the reflexive behavior it reaped is the best way to go about finding a level field, but it is the easy natural way to handle it. It is the way children step towards adulthood; by watching the adults around them and mimicking what they do. It is the way YOU handle it. I can speak your language Woggle, but it doesn't mean it is my native tongue.

 

Since you feel that men deserve to get mistreated because it is payback time do I get some credit for the horror I experienced as a child? Did that help pay off some of my man dues or do I still have to pay for what your father did to your mother?

[sally4sara]

Since you feel that men deserve to get mistreated because it is payback time do I get some credit for the horror I experienced as a child? Did that help pay off some of my man dues or do I still have to pay for what your father did to your mother?

 

Where did I say this?

 

Feeling reactionary again Woggle?

[Woggle]

Where did I say this?

 

Feeling reactionary again Woggle?

 

You did not say it in those exact words but your basic gist is that it is payback time so men need to shut up and take it.

[Johnny M]

I do not feel the reflexive behavior it reaped is the best way to go about finding a level field, but it is the easy natural way to handle it. It is the way children step towards adulthood; by watching the adults around them and mimicking what they do. It is the way YOU handle it. I can speak your language Woggle, but it doesn't mean it is my native tongue.

So you're saying that intellectually, women are comparable to children and just mimic whatever men do? Monkey see, monkey do, right? I wonder if that belief is part of the postmodern feminist theory?

 

Another interesting point that you raised is how the terrible men have always cheapted on women left and right, while the poor virtuous women of yesteryear (who are now apparently being forced to ape male behavior) were faithful wives who couldn't even consider cheating because they were their husband's property. From the standpoint of simple logic, this is a rather peculiar proposition. If we accept your suggestion that the men of past generations were cheating while the women were not, and if we further assume that the men you are referring to were not gay, it begs the question: who exactly were those men cheating with?

Edited December 10, 2009 by Johnny M

[TheLoneSock]

Where did I say this?

 

Feeling reactionary again Woggle?

 

She's just being inciteful Woggle. Don't let her jade you.

 

I agree that you shouldn't put words in people's mouth, but I understand the vibe you got from her.

[Awesome Username]

What makes me angry is that regardless of the past, women RIGHT NOW have a choice whether to look for red flags, get into FWBs, date a guy that treats his exes like garbage and badmouths them, has a list of lovers a mile long and a woman doesn't feel worthy enough to know that she deserves to be treated better.

 

Though that goes both ways, and even within same-sex relationships. I guess I wish that people were a little more old-fashioned in their selection.

[Sam Spade]

So now (that women do it as much) its a problem? How nice of women to do so and create a flimsy justification for men to act the way they always have.

 

Men have always cheated. They cheated when women cow towed to them and waited on them hand and foot, they cheated when women were forced to depend on them for survival; it is no surprise men still cheat. But take notice that now, when women behave just as selfish, male behavior is the fault of women and not simple mirroring of the behavior men have always been afforded.

 

How can anyone say men act this way because women taught them to be this way with a straight face? When women had no rights, no vote, no earnings, no voice, Women had to accept and respond favorably to predatory men. It wasn't simply because that is what women like. Now if anything, these horrible women you want to pin the blame on, are acting this way because it is what they learned - from men. Be a virgin till marriage, push out babies, keep a house clean and dinner on the table and your husband would still feel justified to have a side piece. What did that suggest if not that there was zero benefit in being a faithful loving wife and mother? So who taught who to be a player first?

If women are now cheating just as much, do you really think it is because they don't like nice guys or could it possibly be they've learned men don't like or appreciate "nice girls"?

 

We're having a chicken or egg debate here if I ever saw one........ Next someone is going to come along and say Klan members were taught by slaves to hate and discriminate against black folks.

 

hee, hee, hee. I'm sure you and your sisters in arms are proud of yourselves .

[Sam Spade]

, it begs the question: who exactly were those men cheating with?

 

I'd like to know too .

[TheLoneSock]

If we accept your suggestion that the men of past generations were cheating while the women were not, and if we further assume that the men you are referring to were not gay, it begs the question: who exactly were those men cheating with?

 

I as well am waiting for an answer to this.

[sally4sara]

So you're saying that intellectually, women are comparable to children and just mimic whatever men do? Monkey see, monkey do, right? I wonder if that belief is part of the postmodern feminist theory?

 

Another interesting point that you raised is how the terrible men have always cheapted on women left and right, while the poor virtuous women of yesteryear (who are now apparently being forced to ape male behavior) were faithful wives who couldn't even consider cheating because they were their husband's property. From the standpoint of simple logic, this is a rather peculiar proposition. If we accept your suggestion that the men of past generations were cheating while the women were not, and if we further assume that the men you are referring to were not gay, it begs the question: who exactly were those men cheating with?

 

They were property and some kept or left uneducated, so yes they were for all practical purpose, children. They had as many rights as children. Please don't pretend you don't see the correlations.

 

Who did these men cheat with? Their other slaves, servants, concubines, prostitutes and the unwilling poor were easily raped with little consequence.

 

Men were slaves too, but not sexual slaves.

[Johnny M]

They were property and some kept or left uneducated, so yes they were for all practical purpose, children. They had as many rights as children. Please don't pretend you don't see the correlations.

Except you were talking about modern women who are apparently aping the behavior of medieval men.

 

Who did these men cheat with? Their other slaves, servants, concubines, prostitutes and the unwilling poor were easily raped with little consequence.

The men who owned slaves and concubines were the social elite that comprised at most 2-3% of the total population (and even that figure is probably generous). As for 'raping the unwilling poor', rape has always been a crime, if not against the woman than against her husband. Only the very rich could get away with rape unpunished, as they were above the law. The vast majority of men in living antiquity and the middle ages did not own slaves or concubines nor were they prowling the streets raping poor people.

 

Your "feminist narrative" is just oh so typical; it sounds good if your turn your brain off but falls apart completely when you start applying facts and logic to it.

[TheLoneSock]

They were property and some kept or left uneducated, so yes they were for all practical purpose, children. They had as many rights as children. Please don't pretend you don't see the correlations.

 

Who did these men cheat with? Their other slaves, servants, concubines, prostitutes and the unwilling poor were easily raped with little consequence.

 

Men were slaves too, but not sexual slaves.

 

Lol, you have an answer for everything, don't you? Even if it's rediculous and fabricated.

 

According to you, most men were slave owners, cheaters, or rapists.

 

Your single minded approach shows the colors of your motive, and it's an ugly sight. This isn't a discussion, this is you stamping your foot over and over.

[sally4sara]

Except you were talking about modern women who are apparently aping the behavior of medieval men.

 

 

The men who owned slaves and concubines were the social elite that comprised at most 2-3% of the total population (and even that figure is probably generous). As for 'raping the unwilling poor', rape has always been a crime, if not against the woman than against her husband. Only the very rich could get away with rape unpunished, as they were above the law. The vast majority of men in living antiquity and the middle ages did not own slaves or concubines nor were they prowling the streets raping poor people.

 

Your "feminist narrative" is just oh so typical; it sounds good if your turn your brain off but falls apart completely when you start applying facts and logic to it.

 

Mr. Johnny M,

 

If you would care to be this upset, perhaps you will go and see that my first post in this thread was in response to the male posters suggesting that men become vindictive players because women only like them when they are so. That women don't go for men who treat them well so women are to blame for men being players. They become bored with men who treat them well and cheat on them so it is only logical for men to become players with how women are.

 

I make a post in response saying if anything the teaching went the other way...........and the ensuing result of these same men reading their own brand of logic has turned into a uproar where in I invented subscribe to this mindset. Some of you are so lost you can't even see the hypocrisy in your reactions to my posts. I use your own arguments in reverse and you grow indignant; not even once with a hint of irony.

 

Whatever boys......whatever soothes you on your way to your classless dating tactics and leaves you believing your "not such a bad guy under it all". I'm just glad some men don't bother with the front and fuss. Since I don't deal with any IRL enough to identify them, I'll assume they are all here on LS.

[rateyes]

Mr. Johnny M,

 

If you would care to be this upset, perhaps you will go and see that my first post in this thread was in response to the male posters suggesting that men become vindictive players because women only like them when they are so. That women don't go for men who treat them well so women are to blame for men being players. They become bored with men who treat them well and cheat on them so it is only logical for men to become players with how women are.

 

I make a post in response saying if anything the teaching went the other way...........and the ensuing result of these same men reading their own brand of logic has turned into a uproar where in I invented subscribe to this mindset. Some of you are so lost you can't even see the hypocrisy in your reactions to my posts. I use your own arguments in reverse and you grow indignant; not even once with a hint of irony.

 

Whatever boys......whatever soothes you on your way to your classless dating tactics and leaves you believing your "not such a bad guy under it all". I'm just glad some men don't bother with the front and fuss. Since I don't deal with any IRL enough to identify them, I'll assume they are all here on LS.

 

oh in that case, women hold all the power nowadays anyway, doesnt matter what the past was.

[Johnny M]

Mr. Johnny M,

 

If you would care to be this upset, perhaps you will go and see that my first post in this thread was in response to the male posters suggesting that men become vindictive players because women only like them when they are so. That women don't go for men who treat them well so women are to blame for men being players. They become bored with men who treat them well and cheat on them so it is only logical for men to become players with how women are.

 

I make a post in response saying if anything the teaching went the other way...........and the ensuing result of these same men reading their own brand of logic has turned into a uproar where in I invented subscribe to this mindset. Some of you are so lost you can't even see the hypocrisy in your reactions to my posts. I use your own arguments in reverse and you grow indignant; not even once with a hint of irony.

 

Whatever boys......whatever soothes you on your way to your classless dating tactics and leaves you believing your "not such a bad guy under it all". I'm just glad some men don't bother with the front and fuss. Since I don't deal with any IRL enough to identify them, I'll assume they are all here on LS.

Coles Notes version of the above post:

 

"I have absolutely nothing intelligent to say in response to Johnny M's post, so I'm gonna go off tangent and write something totally random and unrelated."

[TheLoneSock]

Coles Notes version of the above post:

 

"I have absolutely nothing intelligent to say in response to Johnny M's post, so I'm gonna go off tangent and write something totally random and unrelated."

 

Wait, you forgot to add: "I'll also use personal attacks, make an effort to undermine their self esteem, and then wrap it up with a hypocritical statement about being on LS before exiting with a fake laugh."

[sally4sara]

She's just being inciteful Woggle. Don't let her jade you.

 

I agree that you shouldn't put words in people's mouth, but I understand the vibe you got from her.

 

Oh certainly, cause its not like he wasn't jaded when he landed here.

 

Is it all the wimmin's fault again?

[sally4sara]

oh in that case, women hold all the power nowadays anyway, doesnt matter what the past was.

 

That works both ways too. Whatever reasoning to you use to try and believe a player is a player because women done him wrong, women can also do the same. Its all about which past makes you seem more righteous, right boys?

 

It doesn't matter what approach folks have tried with the lot of you cry babies who winge on about western women and their evil ways, now you'll just poo poo and decide it doesn't count when your own logic is held up to you.

Why doesn't it count?

 

Because - no other reason. Smooooth.