O'Malley Posted December 17, 2010 Posted December 17, 2010 This needs to be answered: OP, do you multidate?
stillafool Posted December 17, 2010 Posted December 17, 2010 This needs to be answered: I agree. Also, how do you feel about men who multi-date?
tigressA Posted December 17, 2010 Posted December 17, 2010 This needs to be answered: From OP's "What Gives?" thread: Appreciate the feedback. Finally just leaving it alone. I have about 6 other options I'll be exploring, if you will, over my Winter Break from school. If for some reason she manages to get in contact with me, I will be responsive, but not too available. Will you be exploring those options one at a time? Or all at once?
zengirl Posted December 17, 2010 Posted December 17, 2010 From OP's "What Gives?" thread: Will you be exploring those options one at a time? Or all at once? Good question. Having orbiters (options you're stringing along and keeping on the shelf, so to speak) is way worse than multi-dating, in my opinion.
Author mr.dream merchant Posted December 17, 2010 Author Posted December 17, 2010 One at a time. Mind you these options aren't necessarily for dating..lol. But these options never arose until after my GF and I had a fallout. I don't string them along, I barely talk to them. They usually hit me up when they want to....hang out. A young guy's gotta have his needs met :>
Sarah1977 Posted December 17, 2010 Posted December 17, 2010 One at a time. Mind you these options aren't necessarily for dating..lol. But these options never arose until after my GF and I had a fallout. I don't string them along, I barely talk to them. They usually hit me up when they want to....hang out. A young guy's gotta have his needs met :> So....multi dating is bad. But "meeting your needs with multiple women" is totally classy. Oh, I get it.
loverofloveandstuff Posted December 17, 2010 Posted December 17, 2010 A young guy's gotta have his needs met :> Yeah, but a young girl shouldn't have her needs met without suffering consequences, am I right?
northern_sky Posted December 17, 2010 Posted December 17, 2010 One at a time. Mind you these options aren't necessarily for dating..lol. But these options never arose until after my GF and I had a fallout. I don't string them along, I barely talk to them. They usually hit me up when they want to....hang out. A young guy's gotta have his needs met :> :sick:..........
zengirl Posted December 17, 2010 Posted December 17, 2010 Yeah, but a young girl shouldn't have her needs met without suffering consequences, am I right? He's the same guy who started a big thread over the summer saying it's for men to sleep around, but women who sleep around aren't relationship material (and he called them quite a few less nice names too). Same ****, different day. Basically, it all just sounds like he's really threatened by any woman who maintains her own control in the early stages of the relationship.
Hi.P.O'Crit Posted December 17, 2010 Posted December 17, 2010 In the actual old days--- you know, actual real-life recorded history from the beginning of the dating phenomenon around 1910 to when it was largely replaced by hanging out and hooking up around 1980--- dating was never exclusive. It was always casual, and completely typical to date three different people in a week. Just ask your parents or grandparents. True, but it was also a mostly chaperoned event.
waynesworld Posted December 17, 2010 Posted December 17, 2010 Attractive women have lots of options. Guys are asking them out all the time. If you want to date these women, you just need to deal with it and get with the program. It's about meeting new people and finding the best match!
Hi.P.O'Crit Posted December 17, 2010 Posted December 17, 2010 I've had bad experiences with women I knew were multi-dating. They couldn't keep details of the different guys separated. It made me question if they knew who they were falling for or who they were jumping into bed with.
LexiB Posted December 17, 2010 Posted December 17, 2010 (edited) So....multi dating is bad. But "meeting your needs with multiple women" is totally classy. Oh, I get it. Yes! It all makes sense now! It's the actual dating and getting to know the other person that's the problem. If everyone stopped going on dates with "multiple" people and just started f*****g them all, everything wld be kosher. Awesome. Edited December 17, 2010 by LexiB
JustJoe Posted December 17, 2010 Posted December 17, 2010 Hey, this is exactly what I did in college!! Go to parties/bars pick up a girl , get wasted and screw. Who knew that I was doing it right , all along? Who wants to "get to know", somebody you are only going to be with for one night? I apparently was way ahead of my time>:D
sally4sara Posted December 17, 2010 Posted December 17, 2010 Meh, its just a simple matter of timing. Sometimes when you're single, you meet two or three interesting people right around the same time. Sometimes at the same event! You go out on a few "just getting to know you" dates. Three gets whittled down to 2 gets whittled down to whichever one seems to most compatible. It really should be taken personally since it doesn't make sense to want to be with someone who would rather be somewhere else with someone else. And you can't know that without a bit of "getting to know you". But it isn't for everyone. If you're dealing with some internal issues; feeling a bit over sensitive or insecure. Multi dating would be rougher on you and could just make you feel even worse. So if that is you, it is probably best to not date someone who is multi dating. Not a big deal or a mark against you; who hasn't felt sensitive or insecure at times? All in all though, I don't see the point in insulting, ascribing a bunch of negative guessing and judgments about their character just to avoid saying it would bother you and you'd rather not date them. Doing that is the same thing they might do after a couple of dates with you only they are doing so based on information while you do it based on assumption with no information to back it up.
Chicago_Guy Posted December 17, 2010 Posted December 17, 2010 I think you have to make some distinctions -- there are people who multi-date purposefully (they feel insecure if their calendar is not fill and actively fill it up) and people who multidate when they happen to meet multiple people their interested in --- generally, during the early stages. The latter just seems normal to me; I don't know if the former is a dealbreaker for me, but it would strike me as odd, sure. There are people who sleep with multiple people at a time, which strikes me as unsafe and a bit gross, particularly if all the partners don't know about it. That's not the same as grabbing coffee with several men/women in a week. So, there are different kinds of multi-dating. And there are some that use it as leverage, rather than simply information gathering. I find that unappealing, personally. I think that is what turns off a lot of guys, as many guys know of some women who multi-date and behave like that. Also, the last thing most guys would want to do is take a girl out on a date, spend money and exert effort, only to have her go hook up/sleep with with some other guy she is also dating right after the date ends.
sally4sara Posted December 17, 2010 Posted December 17, 2010 I think that is what turns off a lot of guys, as many guys know of some women who multi-date and behave like that. Also, the last thing most guys would want to do is take a girl out on a date, spend money and exert effort, only to have her go hook up/sleep with with some other guy she is also dating right after the date ends. Multi daters should go dutch. Any other way leads to resentment and an unfair playing field.
Hi.P.O'Crit Posted December 17, 2010 Posted December 17, 2010 Multi daters should go dutch. Any other way leads to resentment and an unfair playing field. I agree. But it goes against the very popular saying "the person who asks for the date pays for the date."
zengirl Posted December 17, 2010 Posted December 17, 2010 Multi daters should go dutch. Any other way leads to resentment and an unfair playing field. Yeah, and I generally offer to pay my share anyway, especially early on, but if a guy insists, I'm never going to say, "Well, I'm dating other people, so I'd really feel bad if you did," and sometimes it gets awkward. The more important thing is to keep early dates cheap and casual, I think. At any rate, I cannot imagine quality men fussing about this. It's not that I think they like to be rejected or used -- of course not; who does? -- but they just don't fret about it so much. My current boyfriend would never think to try to figure out if a girl was dating around. He asserted that he wanted to be exclusive -- by then I felt the same and wasn't dating around anyway, and he never dated anyone since we started dating -- and I said yes. If you want someone to be exclusive, I think you have to be exclusive first --- give what you're asking for freely --- and clearly ask for what you want. If someone says, "No, I'm not ready for that," and that's a dealbreaker for you, then fine, fair enough. But it's not about casting aspersions on their character or worrying about being used or whatnot. Don't approach it from fear. Approach it from knowing what you want out of the relationship and being able to -- kindly and clearly -- walk away when the relationship is not healthy for you and not making you happy.
sally4sara Posted December 17, 2010 Posted December 17, 2010 Yeah, and I generally offer to pay my share anyway, especially early on, but if a guy insists, I'm never going to say, "Well, I'm dating other people, so I'd really feel bad if you did," and sometimes it gets awkward. The more important thing is to keep early dates cheap and casual, I think. At any rate, I cannot imagine quality men fussing about this. It's not that I think they like to be rejected or used -- of course not; who does? -- but they just don't fret about it so much. My current boyfriend would never think to try to figure out if a girl was dating around. He asserted that he wanted to be exclusive -- by then I felt the same and wasn't dating around anyway, and he never dated anyone since we started dating -- and I said yes. If you want someone to be exclusive, I think you have to be exclusive first --- give what you're asking for freely --- and clearly ask for what you want. If someone says, "No, I'm not ready for that," and that's a dealbreaker for you, then fine, fair enough. But it's not about casting aspersions on their character or worrying about being used or whatnot. Don't approach it from fear. Approach it from knowing what you want out of the relationship and being able to -- kindly and clearly -- walk away when the relationship is not healthy for you and not making you happy. Mmmmm, I found the only guys who really insisted on paying for me wanted to do so because they relied on money to impress women and didn't have enough really impressive qualities to do without spending money. Think about it, what could happen due to not paying for my meal too that paying would prevent if I'm not all about them buying my meal? I can't think of a single thing. But I don't think its fair to say that only men who are not quality men would be bothered by someone multi dating. Going through a period of being sensitive or insecure isn't something that makes a person low quality. We've all felt that way at times. It is such a temporary circumstance. I think calling people who would prefer to not date someone who is multi dating "low quality" is the same as the one's in this thread suggesting people who do multi date are low quality for whatever reason. Both style will have you meeting people who are just not your cup of tea. No shame in that either way.
zengirl Posted December 17, 2010 Posted December 17, 2010 Mmmmm, I found the only guys who really insisted on paying for me wanted to do so because they relied on money to impress women and didn't have enough really impressive qualities to do without spending money. Think about it, what could happen due to not paying for my meal too that paying would prevent if I'm not all about them buying my meal? I can't think of a single thing. But I don't think its fair to say that only men who are not quality men would be bothered by someone multi dating. Going through a period of being sensitive or insecure isn't something that makes a person low quality. We've all felt that way at times. It is such a temporary circumstance. I think calling people who would prefer to not date someone who is multi dating "low quality" is the same as the one's in this thread suggesting people who do multi date are low quality for whatever reason. Both style will have you meeting people who are just not your cup of tea. No shame in that either way. I am not saying quality men would just accept it, but they wouldn't complain or cast aspersions. They'd just quietly move on and accept that person wasn't for them. I find marriage-minded men tend to take pleasure in paying for dates. (This might be because I live in the South.) Perhaps this is in part because it's clear I'm not rich -- I'm a teacher -- and they love doing things for me. My boyfriend is like this too, and he doesn't give two figs about money. I don't like men who try to 'buy' my affections, but I encounter many men who just like the idea of being a caretaker, and one of the ways they do that, tends to be paying for dates. They aren't aggressive about it, but if he grabs the bill and says, "I got it," I'm not going to be aggressive about going dutch either. Being aggressive in general = not sexy.
sally4sara Posted December 17, 2010 Posted December 17, 2010 I am not saying quality men would just accept it, but they wouldn't complain or cast aspersions. They'd just quietly move on and accept that person wasn't for them. I find marriage-minded men tend to take pleasure in paying for dates. (This might be because I live in the South.) Perhaps this is in part because it's clear I'm not rich -- I'm a teacher -- and they love doing things for me. My boyfriend is like this too, and he doesn't give two figs about money. I don't like men who try to 'buy' my affections, but I encounter many men who just like the idea of being a caretaker, and one of the ways they do that, tends to be paying for dates. They aren't aggressive about it, but if he grabs the bill and says, "I got it," I'm not going to be aggressive about going dutch either. Being aggressive in general = not sexy. I always liked going dutch because marriage or no, male or female, a good relationship requires both to feel comfortable in the role of caretaker because both are going to have to care for each other and any children that might come of it. So it is just as important that women try to find comfort in that role prior to a commitment. Plus, you never know what life might bring. And I like resourceful guys who can operate in a way that impresses me be they rich or poor. If you can't find their company awesome cheaply, the relationship won't stand a chance should you two experience a financial downfall later. One of my friends dated a guy who always insisted on paying. Then he lost his job and had to work freelance. It all fell apart even though it didn't matter to her one way or the other because HE was so bothered by the circumstances HE'D set up in wooing her. What he believed had her sticking around was his spending on her so he got all pissy and disappeared, calling her a gold digger! But yeah, I'm not going to arm wrestle over the check. I just asked for separate checks before ordering. I only had a few guys get puffed up over it and those - I just didn't go out with again because like you said - being aggressive in general is not sexy.
Chicago_Guy Posted December 17, 2010 Posted December 17, 2010 I am not saying quality men would just accept it, but they wouldn't complain or cast aspersions. They'd just quietly move on and accept that person wasn't for them. I find marriage-minded men tend to take pleasure in paying for dates. (This might be because I live in the South.) Perhaps this is in part because it's clear I'm not rich -- I'm a teacher -- and they love doing things for me. My boyfriend is like this too, and he doesn't give two figs about money. I don't like men who try to 'buy' my affections, but I encounter many men who just like the idea of being a caretaker, and one of the ways they do that, tends to be paying for dates. They aren't aggressive about it, but if he grabs the bill and says, "I got it," I'm not going to be aggressive about going dutch either. Being aggressive in general = not sexy. I make good money myself, but I don't know any guy that "takes pleasure" in spending his money on someone. Guys do this because they feel it is required or the right thing to do, but I don't see how the mere act of spending money could possibly be construed as a fun thing to do.
fishtaco Posted December 17, 2010 Posted December 17, 2010 So people that don't multi-date are insecure losers, and people that multi date are immoral *******s. Got it. In other words, the world is filled with losers and *******s. Actually that sounds about right. Also, is it a geographic thing? Dating culture DO differ from place to place. My theory is, if you have a several million people or more within a 15 minute drive, chances are you'll do the multi dating. If you live in a small town of several thousand people, you probably don't multi-date. Also, how's the game playing? In Southern California, we have world class game playing going on, people are superficial and disposable. So multi-date is a way to counter these games and it makes a lot of sense, even if just for self protection. Someone mentioned in an unrelated thread how in NYC, it's a big city, but the women there are awesome, I assume when they're not mugging you, and because they don't play games. I don't know, never tried to date there. So maybe instead of big city/small town, it's the culturally standard amount of game playing that determines if multi-dating is the norm? My world view is skewed, since I only know Southern California dating. Maybe other people can chime in so see if my theory is right or crap. So I'll start... if people are interested in this data collection attempt. Fishtaco - multi dater, Southern California, high population density, world famous for game playing
sally4sara Posted December 17, 2010 Posted December 17, 2010 So people that don't multi-date are insecure losers, and people that multi date are immoral *******s. Got it. In other words, the world is filled with losers and *******s. Actually that sounds about right. Also, is it a geographic thing? Dating culture DO differ from place to place. My theory is, if you have a several million people or more within a 15 minute drive, chances are you'll do the multi dating. If you live in a small town of several thousand people, you probably don't multi-date. Also, how's the game playing? In Southern California, we have world class game playing going on, people are superficial and disposable. So multi-date is a way to counter these games and it makes a lot of sense, even if just for self protection. Someone mentioned in an unrelated thread how in NYC, it's a big city, but the women there are awesome, I assume when they're not mugging you, and because they don't play games. I don't know, never tried to date there. So maybe instead of big city/small town, it's the culturally standard amount of game playing that determines if multi-dating is the norm? My world view is skewed, since I only know Southern California dating. Maybe other people can chime in so see if my theory is right or crap. So I'll start... if people are interested in this data collection attempt. Fishtaco - multi dater, Southern California, high population density, world famous for game playing Being a loser requires more than just being a bit insecure. I could still see how dating a multi dater when you're feeling a bit insecure could just exacerbate one's insecurities. Being immoral requires more than just accepting a few dates from a few people while you're single. I could still see how someone could be immoral in how they go about multi daing. But believing such blankets statements either way could mean you just don't like to think very hard when passing judgment on others.
Recommended Posts