thatone Posted August 27, 2011 Posted August 27, 2011 OP says she is unattractive. If she is unattractive men won't want her to attract. It's not going to land her a bf. Like you would really go for an ugly or homely girl coming up to you? At best you will just feel sorry for her and laugh about it with your buddies. yeah but she posted pics, and she's not unattractive at all, she just insists that she is.
Feelsgoodman Posted August 27, 2011 Posted August 27, 2011 I'll give you the phone number of a few of my long term exes and you can talk to them about how short-term I was with them and how they pursued me. Ooooh, will you really? Please go ahead! I will gladly question them about their wooing efforts and report the details on this board
Disenchantedly Yours Posted August 27, 2011 Posted August 27, 2011 I think it's a myth that if you do the approaching, the guy is somehow passive throughout the relationship. It's possible for a man to be approached by a woman and not be passive throughout the relationship. However, it's also possible for a woman to approach a man and the man be more passive in the relationships. Either way, usually how we begin a relationship will set a tone. I have had a part in approaching most of the guys I've dated, and I wouldn't date a guy who was dead weight, or passive, in escalating the relationship. Passive doesn't mean dead weight. Really, the approach should be somewhat mutual and have a back-and-forth quality, if it's going to go anywhere, because BOTH parties should be interested in getting to know each other. I agree with this. However, this back and forth will look different to different people. At any rate, my BF is hardly passive in our relationship. He calls me and texts me all the time, plans loads of things, has had a role in escalating and deepening our relationship on most levels (physical, intellectual, emotional), and carries a good amount of the weight in the relationship. He'd carry more, or most of it, if I'd let him, but I don't see how that would be any fun for me. We're building something together, and I invest and choose to be active as well because I want to be a part of it. It sounds like you have a great relationship! I don't see how a relationship dynamic with a passive man OR a passive woman sounds terribly healthy. Shouldn't both be actively engaged in the relationship? Yes, both should be actively engaged in the relationship. Maybe passive isn't the best word. However, some people are more aggressive then others and there is nothing wrong with that. It doesn't mean they are giving less to the relationship either. If a woman is less aggressive then she might fit with a more aggressive man, and vice vs. However, making the statement that woman is "lazy" by not being the aggressor isn't fair.
Disenchantedly Yours Posted August 27, 2011 Posted August 27, 2011 Ooooh, will you really? Please go ahead! I will gladly question them about their wooing efforts and report the details on this board Really, how old are you?
Beachbaby2012 Posted August 27, 2011 Posted August 27, 2011 I met someone here http://www.millionairedreamdates.com/
carhill Posted August 27, 2011 Posted August 27, 2011 yeah but she posted pics, and she's not unattractive at all, she just insists that she is. Yeah, IIRC, she's had five sexual partners and three boyfriends, so evidently some people enjoy her company and can commit to her, whomever is approaching who.
zengirl Posted August 27, 2011 Posted August 27, 2011 It's possible for a man to be approached by a woman and not be passive throughout the relationship. However, it's also possible for a woman to approach a man and the man be more passive in the relationships. Either way, usually how we begin a relationship will set a tone. I don't think the initial approach, unless an extreme one (an outlier) in some way, really sets much of anything up. Most relationships start quite mundanely. I do think sometimes women tie themselves up in knots about approaching, and THAT sets a tone---i.e. she feels like she's doing all the work right from the beginning, because that's how she's chosen to view it, when all we're really talking about is going up to someone and saying, "Hi, my name is zengirl." Which is really a very low effort move. No matter who begins it, the approach takes very little effort, and who happened to see each other first really doesn't set much of a tone IME, if both parties are into it. I recommend NO ONE (male or female) chase after someone who doesn't seem to have reasonable reciprocated interest in them, but that's just me. I've never seen any of those dynamics work out well. Yes, both should be actively engaged in the relationship. Maybe passive isn't the best word. However, some people are more aggressive then others and there is nothing wrong with that. It doesn't mean they are giving less to the relationship either. If a woman is less aggressive then she might fit with a more aggressive man, and vice vs. However, making the statement that woman is "lazy" by not being the aggressor isn't fair. Oh, I don't think anyone ever HAS to do anything --- approach included. I just don't see the benefit of having a negative belief that approaching would hinder you and thus making yourself truly passive and likely frustrated because the guy you happen to want to approach probably isn't the most likely guy to approach, particularly without any kind of encouragement. I would say I think all people should be assertive, neither passive, nor aggressive (and really hopefully not passive-aggressive), in all things. But that's just me. I think whenever people are actually worried about these kind of dynamics, they're ultimately worried about power. And worrying about power is the quickest way to make your relationships dysfunctional I can think of. However, that doesn't mean there's anything wrong with staying true to whatever style you're most comfortable with if it works for you, assuming it's not out of some sort of worry like this. I know loads of women who'd just never think to approach, and I don't find that objectionable at all. It's just not their particular style.
Disenchantedly Yours Posted August 27, 2011 Posted August 27, 2011 I met someone here http://www.millionairedreamdates.com/ Apparently if you are a millioinaire, you don't have any pores either! Amazing.
Feelsgoodman Posted August 27, 2011 Posted August 27, 2011 Yeah, IIRC, she's had five sexual partners and three boyfriends, so evidently some people enjoy her company and can commit to her, whomever is approaching who. Yeah, I'm starting to think that she's complaining because she's not getting hit on by hot guys all the time (like some of her friends, evidently).
rafallus Posted August 27, 2011 Posted August 27, 2011 Yeah, IIRC, she's had five sexual partners and three boyfriends, so evidently some people enjoy her company and can commit to her, whomever is approaching who Goes to show beyond shadow of doubt, how relative misery and happiness can be.
carhill Posted August 27, 2011 Posted August 27, 2011 Perhaps, even while the outside appears at peace to the casual observer, struggles within rage on. For some, misery and happiness are close relatives. Unknown in this situation, IMO. I will say some aspects of the OP's dynamics, as shared here, have me a bit
rafallus Posted August 27, 2011 Posted August 27, 2011 (edited) I meant relative as in "depends on who you ask". Though, I'm not disagreeing. Edited August 27, 2011 by rafallus
AHardDaysNight Posted August 27, 2011 Posted August 27, 2011 Women are cowards. That's all it boils down to.
Disenchantedly Yours Posted August 27, 2011 Posted August 27, 2011 I do think sometimes women tie themselves up in knots about approaching, and THAT sets a tone---i.e. she feels like she's doing all the work right from the beginning, because that's how she's chosen to view it.... Aww, I see. It only sets the tone if the woman acts a certain way. And if she chooses to perceive something a certain way, it must be the wrong way. Because *she* is the problem. At least, that's basically what I got from your comment above. I think men and women tie themselves up in knots about all kind of relationship, dating and sex issues. Which is why you have so many embittered men that feel it neccessary to put down women who don't want to approach by calling them "lazy" or "cowards". There is nothing wrong with a person that doesn't want to approach. There is nothing wrong with a person that does. All this means is that these two different people need to find someone that is recepitive to their personal style. ...when all we're really talking about is going up to someone and saying, "Hi, my name is zengirl." Which is really a very low effort move. No matter who begins it, the approach takes very little effort, and who happened to see each other first really doesn't set much of a tone IME, if both parties are into it. I don't remember anyone qualifying in exact terms what the first step entitled. Is this what you consider pursuing or making the first step? You walking up to someone and just introducing yourself to them? What happens after that? Lets say the man doesn't ask for your number, but you have been having an easy conversation, do you offer it? Who happened to *see* who first might not set the tone but how we deal with each other during that time does. First meetings set the president in most cases. We teach people how to treat us. That's been my experience. Now a woman that is more aggressive *is* setting the tone. Does it mean that tone is bad? Nope. Not if it works for her. My issue is not that a woman can and does approach a man. My issue is calling women who don't "lazy" or "cowards" because they aren't that aggressive and don't want to be that aggressive. It's about finding the person that is good with your style. I just don't see the benefit of having a negative belief that approaching would hinder you and thus making yourself truly passive and likely frustrated because the guy you happen to want to approach probably isn't the most likely guy to approach, particularly without any kind of encouragement. I don't think it's a question of making yourself passive when you aren't or aggressive when you aren't. It's about being true to the type of person you are and the type of person you are searching for. You are fine with approaching. I am not. I am sure our styles work best for our personal lives individual to who we are, yes? I would say I think all people should be assertive, neither passive, nor aggressive (and really hopefully not passive-aggressive), in all things. Yes passive-aggressive is very bad. However, people should be true to themselves without fundementals about what makes them a better person. If you aren't that funny a person, you shouldn't try to be funny. Further, who you deem funny might not be who I deem funny. Who you deem assertive, I might deem aggressive, or vice versa. There are many shades of grey. At the end of the day, people should be true to who they are and not put other people down for doing that. Calling women "lazy" or "cowardly" if they do not want tobe the aggressers is wrong. I know loads of women who'd just never think to approach, and I don't find that objectionable at all. It's just not their particular style. Exactly. That's why I am turned off by some men calling women "lazy" or "cowards" or acting liek women are doing something wrong if they do not want to approach.
Author verhrzn Posted August 27, 2011 Author Posted August 27, 2011 Perhaps, even while the outside appears at peace to the casual observer, struggles within rage on. For some, misery and happiness are close relatives. Unknown in this situation, IMO. I will say some aspects of the OP's dynamics, as shared here, have me a bit What sort of dynamics do you see that seem out of sync? I have had boyfriends/sexual partners, but the boyfriends have been guys who dated me because there was nothing better at the time. In other words, I ended up with guys because those guys happened to have no standards and no better options (I was unaware of the dynamic at the time, and I was nuts about each of them. I am just really, really bad at telling when someone is just using me.) So now I'm trying to change the dynamic to end up with guys that actually, ya know, like me. But I have no idea how to go about getting one that does, thus my concern about 1) the success of me approaching and 2) if it sets a bad precedent of being used some more.
PJKino Posted August 27, 2011 Posted August 27, 2011 I I think this is one of those things in life that are not easily explainable to say the least. And that women just naturally enjoy being pursued, and naturally men get quite a rush pursuing! Plus, when you do, think about how much those women will respect you. It'll be quite high to say the least. lol at women respecting a man for pursuing automatically.Only if shes atrracted to you if not youll might be labeled a creep
Feelsgoodman Posted August 27, 2011 Posted August 27, 2011 What sort of dynamics do you see that seem out of sync? I have had boyfriends/sexual partners, but the boyfriends have been guys who dated me because there was nothing better at the time. In other words, I ended up with guys because those guys happened to have no standards and no better options (I was unaware of the dynamic at the time, and I was nuts about each of them. I am just really, really bad at telling when someone is just using me.) So now I'm trying to change the dynamic to end up with guys that actually, ya know, like me. But I have no idea how to go about getting one that does, thus my concern about 1) the success of me approaching and 2) if it sets a bad precedent of being used some more. Based on the above, it's quite obvious that you're trying to play out of your league. If you truly want to "change the dynamic", you need to start paying attention to guys that you realistically would have a chance with. Like, you know, average looking guys with average jobs.
Author verhrzn Posted August 28, 2011 Author Posted August 28, 2011 Based on the above, it's quite obvious that you're trying to play out of your league. If you truly want to "change the dynamic", you need to start paying attention to guys that you realistically would have a chance with. Like, you know, average looking guys with average jobs. The last guy I seriously dated was an entry level data entry drone who was 20 pounds overweight, about 5'6" and whose friends all joked he was "so far in the closet he was visiting Narnia." (And for the record, I liked him. We'd spend all afternoon listening to classical music and playing Zelda, it was awesome.) Still not average enough for you? So. Virgin and desperate or had more women than you can shake a stink at. It doesn't matter. If he likes you and you like him the rest is what we call history. Its become more and more acceptable for the gal to approch. So what are you waiting for? Yeah, actually, the virgin part wouldn't bother me at all, though I'd probably be curious as to why he is still one. (Religion? Circumstance?) It's more the "only have a chance with desperate guys" I was trying to clarify.
carhill Posted August 28, 2011 Posted August 28, 2011 What sort of dynamics do you see that seem out of sync? I have had boyfriends/sexual partners, but the boyfriends have been guys who dated me because there was nothing better at the time. 1. A number of threads about appearance, mainly negative assertions, where the preponderance of response, augmented by real men in your life wanting you and pursuing you for sex and relationships, refutes the assertions. The simple fact that you've apparently had three boyfriends (if I'm remembering your words right) in the five years from becoming sexually active at 20 to now (26) speaks volumes as to the dichotomy between your perceptions and reality. You're asserting in the quoted text that the guys dated you because there was nothing better at the time. How does that work? How do you have boyfriends, men you have relations with and sex with and who progress to the point of you being a girlfriend, simply because there was nothing better. IME, it doesn't work like that in the real world. Certainly, I've had my share of broken women who perhaps felt they couldn't 'do better' but here's a clue; they never became a girlfriend. Sure, they let me love them, but that's far different than becoming a mutually committed partner. Save for my exW, you've had the same number of mutually committed partners in six years that I've had in, whoa, 32, using 20 as the start point. Broken women? Dozens. From my perspective as someone your father's age, I see your stated experiences as pretty normal, but your perceptions of them differ markedly from how they are being perceived by myself and others you are seeking help and understanding and support from. Are we wrong? Unknown. Last tidbit, a lesson which took many years and mistakes to learn.... if something isn't working, try something else. You don't believe what you're doing is working, so now set off and try something else. I've read many suggestions from others. Implement some, try them, and see how it works out. Myself, I started traveling the world, expanding my horizons and meeting new cultures and the women of those cultures. That helped me. What will help you is unknown to us. Only hindsight will provide that information. Good luck.
Disenchantedly Yours Posted August 28, 2011 Posted August 28, 2011 Mr. Nate, I very much like your My Little Pony picture.
ThsAmericanLife Posted August 28, 2011 Posted August 28, 2011 I've often wondered about the aggressive woman and how receptive I'd be. I saw a friend of mine get hit on by an aggressive woman. To be honest, watching the whole interaction kind of turned me off. So I think I can safely say, I will still be (and enjoy being) the pursuer. I think this is one of those things in life that are not easily explainable to say the least. And that women just naturally enjoy being pursued, and naturally men get quite a rush pursuing! Plus, when you do, think about how much those women will respect you. It'll be quite high to say the least. naa... for me, it depends on the context. I'm perfectly fine being the one to 'open the door' as it were... but expect they will take the initiative too. I'm not attracted to men who need to be with submissive, coy, or demure women. There is nothing obedient or coy about me (in case people haven't noticed!!). It's not even about being feminine or masculine. Its all about knowing what you want and going for it. Noone needs or should need to have permission to do that. All things considered, people are individuals. Some are more forceful. Some less so. It has nothing to do with gender, IMHO.
ThsAmericanLife Posted August 28, 2011 Posted August 28, 2011 Few people in life assertively go after what they really want. ok, but according to your last post, only men are supposed to do that. Assertively go after what they want? Did I read you correctly? Women are supposed to sit back and bat their eyelashes frantically... doing their best to give off subtle vibes and WAIT for Mr. Assertive to do his 'thing'. Sorry... life is too short for that.
Disenchantedly Yours Posted August 28, 2011 Posted August 28, 2011 I love the way men are different from me. I enjoy the gender differences between men and women. I can't be the only one. And I will continue to celebrate that. Just because I like a man that is the pursuer, doesn't mean I am submissive or demure. I'm not. ... at least not in the dating context..perhaps a little submissive in the sexual context...but not in the real world.
ThsAmericanLife Posted August 28, 2011 Posted August 28, 2011 I love the way men are different from me. I enjoy the gender differences between men and women. I can't be the only one. And I will continue to celebrate that. Just because I like a man that is the pursuer, doesn't mean I am submissive or demure. I'm not. ... at least not in the dating context..perhaps a little submissive in the sexual context...but not in the real world. Well, we'll have to agree to disagree on so-called gender differences. I'm one of those who believe that these differences are mostly a function of social conditioning... not biology... and that we'd all be better off tossing them and just treating people as individuals.
Feelsgoodman Posted August 28, 2011 Posted August 28, 2011 The last guy I seriously dated was an entry level data entry drone who was 20 pounds overweight, about 5'6" and whose friends all joked he was "so far in the closet he was visiting Narnia." (And for the record, I liked him. We'd spend all afternoon listening to classical music and playing Zelda, it was awesome.) Still not average enough for you? No, that's not average - that's just plain weird. If playing Zelda while listening to classical music all afternoon is your idea of a good time, then, well...there's only a certain type of men that you'd have enough in common with to date (i.e. nerdy gamer types). I may be stereotyping, but most of these guys appear rather socially awkward (I've never seen a video game nerd with a girlfriend). Going back to your original post, it would definitely be a good idea to take the initiative with guys like that.
Recommended Posts