Once I get it, I don't want it anymore..

[Feelsgoodman]

I truly don't think she is a manhater but in my life I have run into the attitude the other poster has. I have never in my life abused or even cheated on a woman yet when I was abused, betrayed and cheated on I was told I deserve it because it is my just desserts as a man. Sometimes I feel that if they hate me why not hate them right back? The sad thing is I used to be pro-feminist but why would any support something that hates him? Why would anybody support something like that?

 

I figure sometimes if I am the enemy no matter what then why even bother trying to make peace with women?

No, she is clearly a man hater. Just look at all the excuses she is making for Woman in Blue, who openly stated that she despises men. Do you think that if a man stated that abused women deserved everything their abusers dished out to the them, Mme Chaucer would give him a break and even jump to his defence by pointing out that "he did preface it with clearly stating that he was stating HIS OPINION"? I don't think so.

 

Women like Mme Chaucer are even worse than the likes of Woman in Blue, in my opinion. At least Woman in Blue is honest and admits that she hates men. Mme Chaucer would never openly admit that she hates men...yet, if you look at the totality of her posts on this board, a pretty clear and consistent picture emerges.

 

Being an apologist for misandrists is not really any better than being misandrist yourself. Since she likes comparing everyone to racists so much, Mme Chaucer to Woman in Blue is what a Vichy is to a Nazi.

[Mme. Chaucer]

Well, I will say it with complete sincerity:

 

I DO NOT BELIEVE THAT ANY INNOCENT PERSON, MAN OR WOMAN, SHOULD BE HURT OUT OF "REVENGE" TOWARDS THEIR ENTIRE GENDER. Or, for any reason, for that matter.

 

You know, Woggle, that many of the worst victimizers (for example, the majority of people imprisoned for violent crimes) were victims themselves as children.

 

This does NOT JUSTIFY anything. And, I am not trying in ANY way to justify who your mother is/was or what she did to you, but I would be very surprised if she were not on the receiving end of some abuse in her own younger life.

 

On the brighter side, there are many people who have suffered abuse who do NOT turn around and abuse other people.

 

Thank God.

[Mme. Chaucer]

You're even trying to justify the abuse Woggle took from his own mother. That's so wrong.

 

Hm. You like to respond to posts you haven't read (or maybe just haven't comprehended) too, just like your ... other head over there, hydra.

 

Certainly Woggle understands that by my conjecture that perhaps his mother had experienced some kind of abuse (like the majority of abusers have) I was not justifying anything. Just like whatever type of miserable upbringing you and your other "head" had does not justify the profound ignorance and bitter hatred you love to display here.

Edited September 4, 2011 by Mme. Chaucer

[mr.dream merchant]

I don't believe that your story is true. However, in the unlikely event that it is true, you obviously get cold because of how slutty those women are and you realize that a woman who is that slutty with you has almost certainly done similar things to lots of guys before you and that is not what most non-desperate guys are looking for.

 

What's so made up about it? It really happened lol. Although I am no longer seeing the woman who was getting clingy on me, I still need to work on getting cold after sex. I'm actually seeing a woman tonight, hopefully we have a good time without sex lol. I'm all sexed out.

 

Would you guys believe me if I told you I made that comment about the woman's outfit to spark an argument, therefore giving me an open window to leave out of? Hahaha....ah, I'm going straight to hell. Look, I saw what was happening and I needed a quick solution. Sparking an argument with a comment was the only way I saw fit.

[Mme. Chaucer]

MDM, this is the Internet. You don't need to manufacture stuff to get out of a discussion you don't want to be in. All you need to do is to step away from the computer.

 

Did I really need to tell you that?

[Woggle]

My maternal grandfather was a POS who abused everybody in his life but that still does not justify the abuse my mother dished out at me. All she did was become exactly what she hated and continue the vicious cycle. He sister left home at an early age and did take a while to get over it but today she is a healthy person with a happy marriage to a man. She broke the cycle unlike my mother who will probably die a hateful and miserable person just like her father.

[Mme. Chaucer]

My maternal grandfather was a POS who abused everybody in his life but that still does not justify the abuse my mother dished out at me. All she did was become exactly what she hated and continue the vicious cycle. He sister left home at an early age and did take a while to get over it but today she is a healthy person with a happy marriage to a man. She broke the cycle unlike my mother who will probably die a hateful and miserable person just like her father.

 

Yes, Woggle - it's up to those of US who

 

have been abused to break the cycle of abuse. Sadly, your mother (as well as my mother) did not.

 

I want to share something with you about my own mother, who was abusive to her children. She would use whatever would hurt the target of her abuse the most. She certainly was not a "feminist" and did not claim to be one, or to hate men or to have any issue with men (though I did discover that she was abused by her father and raped by her brother - so she probably did have some "men" issues, though I don't think she was conscious of them).

 

The point I want to make is that when she did abuse my brother, she in fact challenged his masculinity, etc. It did not stem from any notions of feminism - it stemmed from her uncanny knack to zero in on weakness.

 

And, my further point - abusers are abusers, and whatever kind of rhetorical b.s. they might claim is behind it (feminism, religion, whatever) is just that: BS.

 

For the record, I had quite a journey to come to the place where I could forgive my mother, but I did get there. I needed to - having the anger and feeling like a victim was infiltrating my life in many bad ways. I was completely free of anger towards her by the time my own daughter was about 6. Somehow, age mellowed my mom and she lost her rage. Ultimately, she died from Alzheimer's and I was happy to take care of her at the end of her life. She was a very sweet and benign Alzheimer's victim.

 

Even if your mother used your gender as a weapon against you, I truly doubt that feminism had anything to do with it at all. It was just a vehicle.

[Woggle]

Feminism certainly was a vehicle for her. She said it herself and she really became bad when she got involved with misandrist cult which is the best way to describe.

 

I have recently realized that not all Feminists are like this and hateful towards men just like not all Christians are like Warren Jeffs or the priests who molest children.

 

I seriously doubt she will ever lose her rage. She is already old and still as nasty and miserable as ever. She swears she is the victim as well.

[FitChick]

I think Groucho Marx summed up the OP's situation:

 

"Please accept my resignation. I don’t care to belong to any club that will have me as a member."

 

'Member' being the operative word.

[ThsAmericanLife]

Seemed to be appropriate for this thread.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vEpKZB-Qc3o

 

Chris Cornell's "No Such Thing", from the album "Carry On"

 

I saw the world, it was beautiful

But the rain got in and ruined it all

Then I tried to be invisible

It was impossible

Even for me

I laughed at love

It was a big mistake

In the absence of

I filled it with hate

 

Cause there's no such thing as nothing

Yeah there's no such thing as nothing at all

 

I had the brains not to think at all

But the rain got in

And I thought too hard

On the world, and as usual

I slumped too far into the void

I tried to make everything meaningless

But the rain got in and made it a mess

 

Cause there's no such thing as nothing

Yeah there's no such thing as nothing at all

Yeah there's no such thing as nothing

But my finger's on the trigger

And I'll turn off the world

 

So what gives me the right

To think that I could throw away a life?

Even mine

And what makes you believe

That you could get away with getting old?

Overlapping me

Maybe to lose or to save your soul

Is a choice of how you fill the hole

 

And the rain got in

 

Cause there's no such thing as nothing

Yeah there's no such thing as nothing at all

There's no such thing as nothing

But my finger's on the trigger

And I'll turn off the world

[betterdeal]

Would you guys believe me if I told you I made that comment about the woman's outfit to spark an argument, therefore giving me an open window to leave out of? Hahaha....ah, I'm going straight to hell. Look, I saw what was happening and I needed a quick solution. Sparking an argument with a comment was the only way I saw fit.

 

This reminds me of some of the stupid passive aggressive things I used to do, like go to a curry house when drunk and order a takeaway, then be loud and obnoxious in order to get them to spike the curry with extra chillies, which I loved.

 

I could, of course, have just asked for extra chillies.

[betterdeal]

Feminism certainly was a vehicle for her. She said it herself and she really became bad when she got involved with misandrist cult which is the best way to describe.

 

I have recently realized that not all Feminists are like this and hateful towards men just like not all Christians are like Warren Jeffs or the priests who molest children.

 

I seriously doubt she will ever lose her rage. She is already old and still as nasty and miserable as ever. She swears she is the victim as well.

 

She is, in a way. Hurting someone you love hurts you, doesn't it? Take a look at your own reaction over the past few days to these threads: you've upset some people you respect and like and have felt bad about that. By hurting someone you like, you've hurt yourself. Same goes for your mother.

 

If you can see her as a confused old woman and tell her "no, I won't be spoken to like that" rather like you would a screaming toddler, you'll have reached a turning point. At some point, children often need to do this, to stand up to their elders and take on the lead role in the family.

[dasein]

Translation:I don't care what double standards women have to deal with, all I care about are the double standards men have to deal with. Which is why, in a tread, dedicated to the poor treatment of women, I would rather discuss how men are treated and not say anything about how women can be treated.

 

Thanks for your input AO. We know where you stand when it comes to double standards. We also know that you don't give much a thought to the double standards that cause women harm, only the ones that cause men harm.

 

As usual, gigantic straw man, the point of bringing out that women apply double standards also in this thread is to emphasize that they aren't called "sociopaths," "wastes of skin," "dirty ass liars," "racists," "klansmen," "sons of whores," etc. here on LS when they do so. The point of bringing out that women apply many double standards is not to discount them, but to highlight the different treatment.

[dasein]

Omg this thread is hilarious. Calling the op an abuser is offensive to actual abuse victims

 

A great point that as expected, completely eludes the bashing contingent. When posters here start foaming at the mouth about a guy who freely has NSA sex with freely willing women, at work, on first dates, and then doesn't want to date them, it denigrates lots of people here who are really used and abused in dating.

[dasein]

I take a vocal stand WHENEVER I read a post and it strikes me as championing treating other people like crap.

 

No you don't... so transparent.

 

There is so much "convenient" avoidance of so much on threads such as these.

 

This I agree with, you are one of the main culprits. As stated before, if posters had limited their posts to advice or even calling him to task on his attitude, the thread would be long dead. It's the assumptions and complete conjecture about OP "abusing" women who have sex at work and on first dates with strangers, lying to them, using them that annoys and enflames. We have no idea that these women aren't using OP, that they wouldn't consider him for a relationship based on his promiscuity, that they aren't dissing him as a "good lay but only FWB potential" to their friends or on message boards they post to. We have no idea about how they treat men, whether they have a bad attitude, or whether they are just looking for some NSA leg. It's that the assumptions only go one way that is utterly hypocritical.

 

Why are we discussing how it's fine that the OP and his sexual partners are both enjoying NSA romps together? Has anyone disagreed that this would indeed be fine? Has ANYONE taken a stand here against consensual NSA sex? I don't think so (though there are those who believe it's wrong, and maybe I've missed a post or two).

 

Precisely because of the fact that most posters in the thread REFUSE to post honestly in response to the topic, preferring to go off on a bashing expedition of OP HARMING these women when there is no factual basis that he is harming them in any way whatsoever. If his attitude is causing harm, there is only evidence that it harms HIMSELF, yet few STICK TO THE FACTS.

 

What people are responding to here is the bragging and gloating about how the OP made her feel bad; how he enjoyed the crushed look on her face, her tears, and how he repeatedly calls her and other women who have sex with him names that are tinged with hate like "slut" and "whore."

 

Write better melodrama, the above is not at all convincing, nor reflective of the facts of the thread.

 

As far as what these TWO women in OP's life deserve, since one of them seeks to have sex at work, and OP is willing to provide it, then she DESERVES to have her reasonable desire for NSA sex met if OP is willing. The other one, the one who has first date sex from POF dates with strangers, if she desires to use a dating service to set up NSA sex, and OP is willing, then she DESERVES to get the NSA sex with near strangers that she is seeking.

 

Or are you arguing that women are infantile and incapable of choosing what they want in life, who couldn't possibly seek out and obtain NSA sex as a desire unless they are manipulated and harmed into it by a man? Because that is the gist of the entire premise of OP somehow harming or using these women, and the facts simply do not support it. Dislike his attitude, fine, make up a bunch of BS about women being used by OP based on the facts of the thread? Fantasy land.

[goldenboy7115]

What freakin' romance novel did he fall out of? I read his post..oh, poor shame, he's doing 2 women in one afternoon. How the heck? What do you do man? Are you a model or something? Women falling all over you? So many you have to brush them off? Many guys would like to have his problem. When you haven't had sex in 4 years..yeah, you start wishing. But ****, some people have real problems in life and real issues that take all your time and all your focus. I have to ask, what type of girls are these that will just drop to their knees in a storage closet? Wow...Shame on you for doing that, but hell, I must admit, I'm a bit jealous too Different strokes for different folks!

[mr.dream merchant]

Lol to be honest I have no clue what I do exactly. I just try to be different about their beauty, treat them normally. Am I a model? Hardly, but I do frequent the gym 5 times a week and have been considered by many, a handsome young man. Two things I always make sure to do is laugh and smile with them, women like laughing and nice smiles. There's really not much to it other than that. Just before I was rolling around 5 months with no play so its all a game of chance and numbers.

 

I have to give it up to dasein though, he's really sticking it to Mme.Chaucer and I've noticed her lack of responses to his accusations, more than enough evidence for all to see. Maybe when she's done being a biased sexist on a dating advice forum she'll come off of the ignore list.

[serial muse]

OK, if you want to talk about double standards, if you really want to make this all about gender - then looks talk about the 'paying for dates' double standard. You know, the one where men are often harshly judged for not meeting the criteria some women have regarding how much men should pay towards them on a date. You know, the one where men are called cheapskates and many other colourful names. The one where a mans ability to provide for a woman, therefore be a suitable partner for this woman is questioned to the point of being ruled out simply because they failed to live up to their standards/expectations of what men should bring to the table monetary wise on these dates. And all this, despite the fact that the women involved haven't paid a single cent towards the date. Now no one ever asks these women - OK if this guy is a cheapskate then what does that make you? No one ever asks that, no one ever questions her behavior.

 

The women in this situation along with the OP and many men like him - they are all making 'gender based' decisions. They are all judging/selecting potential partners within the gender they are interested in and not according to how they themselves behave in this situations. This is common place, this is what many of us do. But, when women do it, well, there's very little fuss about any of this. Whether it be the paying for dates situation or whether it be men being overlooked for lacking a certain amount of confidence or physical presence (despite possessing much more of both than those doing the overlooking) - the behavior of the women involved is rarely questioned. Flip-side the other way, men like the OP, men who make gender based decisions, well - just watch the shyt fly. Double standards, hypocrisy, user, abuser, you name it.

 

Bottom line is, many, many people of both sexes make decisions like the OP. Most aren't as crass or in your face like him, guaranteed, but it is common place. If the double standard tag or labels similar are to be applied, then their needs to be consistency, they need to be applied across the board and not just mostly towards the one gender.

 

 

.

Feel free to read my posts on the "who should pay" topic.

 

As it happens, I am totally consistent.

 

Are you?

[Elysian Powder]

A great point that as expected, completely eludes the bashing contingent. When posters here start foaming at the mouth about a guy who freely has NSA sex with freely willing women, at work, on first dates, and then doesn't want to date them, it denigrates lots of people here who are really used and abused in dating.

 

The women who are putting out for free and talked down by the other women, are made to appear as victims to ''predatory'' males because, when a woman puts out for free she's preventing another woman, somewhere, from inflating the price to access her vagina, hence making it a claim that the men who have free sex are using the women who put out without requiring the status of ''girlfriend'' or better than that; the wife title.

 

Vagina is the most profitable commodity on this planet. Our grandmothers knew about it and make the best of their product by binding a man to them, in a legal agreement that couldn't be destroyed.

 

Nowadays, women are putting out as fast and as freely as only a cad could hope for, in their teens and in their 20's. It's their strategy, it enables 'em to be filled by as much Alpha salami as they want.

 

The ''problem'' consists in the reality that they put a price tag on the vagina from the moment they turn 25 years old, and they increase the price each year from that 25th birthday onwards, only to whine on romantic forums that no man is interested in ''commitment'' aka, no man is interest in breaking bank for a worn out bus stop .

 

Guys. A 'cheapskate' or a whatever is a man that knows he's paying for nothing, while some other guy is probing that sweet hole for free.

Edited September 6, 2011 by Elysian Powder

[A O]

OK, if you want to talk about double standards, if you really want to make this all about gender - then looks talk about the 'paying for dates' double standard. You know, the one where men are often harshly judged for not meeting the criteria some women have regarding how much men should pay towards them on a date. You know, the one where men are called cheapskates and many other colourful names. The one where a mans ability to provide for a woman, therefore be a suitable partner for this woman is questioned to the point of being ruled out simply because they failed to live up to their standards/expectations of what men should bring to the table monetary wise on these dates. And all this, despite the fact that the women involved haven't paid a single cent towards the date. Now no one ever asks these women - OK if this guy is a cheapskate then what does that make you? No one ever asks that, no one ever questions her behavior.

The women in this situation along with the OP and many men like him - they are all making 'gender based' decisions. They are all judging/selecting potential partners within the gender they are interested in and not according to how they themselves behave in this situations. This is common place, this is what many of us do. But, when women do it, well, there's very little fuss about any of this. Whether it be the paying for dates situation or whether it be men being overlooked for lacking a certain amount of confidence or physical presence (despite possessing much more of both than those doing the overlooking) - the behavior of the women involved is rarely questioned. Flip-side the other way, men like the OP, men who make gender based decisions, well - just watch the shyt fly. Double standards, hypocrisy, user, abuser, you name it.

Bottom line is, many, many people of both sexes make decisions like the OP. Most aren't as crass or in your face like him, guaranteed, but it is common place. If the double standard tag or labels similar are to be applied, then their needs to be consistency, they need to be applied across the board and not just mostly towards the one gender.

Feel free to read my posts on the "who should pay" topic.

 

As it happens, I am totally consistent.

 

Are you?

From what I can see, you advocate paying for your own dates. That's fine, but that's not the point. The point is the negative behavior that this 'paying for dates' situation often engenders and whether that behavior is put under the same amount of scrutiny, is critiqued anywhere near to the same levels as the behavior that the OP has shown here. The simple answer to that is no.

 

But as I mentioned in my first response to you, this is not about any of that or whether double standards apply. This is about the (poor) behavior of one person - the OP. And yes, I have been both 'consistent' in my stance and in my critiquing of his behavior.

 

 

 

.

[serial muse]

From what I can see, you advocate paying for your own dates. That's fine, but that's not the point. The point is the negative behavior that this 'paying for dates' situation often engenders and whether that behavior is put under the same amount of scrutiny, is critiqued anywhere near to the same levels as the behavior that the OP has shown here. The simple answer to that is no.

 

But as I mentioned in my first response to you, this is not about any of that or whether double standards apply. This is about the (poor) behavior of one person - the OP. And yes, I have been both 'consistent' in my stance and in my critiquing of his behavior.

 

 

 

.

 

Based on these boards - which is what you are referring to, because it is also on these boards that the OP is being critiqued - your statement in bold is patently false. They most certainly are held to the same amount of scrutiny as the behavior the OP has shown here. In fact - there are FAR more threads on the subject of who should pay that vigorously chastise perceived golddiggers, feminists who are "hypocrites" on this topic, etc. etc. etc. it's been going on for years, actually, and probably averages a thread every 2-3 months on that topic. So, your argument doesn't really hold water.

Edited September 6, 2011 by serial muse

[mr.dream merchant]

Lol.

 

By ridicule I mean let people know when they're in the wrong instead of justifying it or saying it's their choice.

 

I've read bits of this thread, haven't really paid attention to be honest but I remember posting that the OP is at fault but if these women didn't let him take advantage, he wouldn't be able to take advantage.

 

The women who are putting out for free and talked down by the other women, are made to appear as victims to ''predatory'' males because, when a woman puts out for free she's preventing another woman, somewhere, from inflating the price to access her vagina, hence making it a claim that the men who have free sex are using the women who put out without requiring the status of ''girlfriend'' or better than that; the wife title.

 

Vagina is the most profitable commodity on this planet. Our grandmothers

knew about it and make the best of their product by binding a man to them, in a legal agreement that couldn't be destroyed.

 

Nowadays, women are putting out as fast and as freely as only a cad could hope for, in their teens and in their 20's. It's

their strategy, it enables 'em to be filled by as much Alpha salami as they want.

 

The ''problem'' consists in the reality that they put a price tag on the vagina from the moment they turn 25 years old, and they increase the price each year from that 25th birthday onwards, only to whine

on romantic forums that no man is interested in ''commitment'' aka, no man is interest in breaking bank for a worn out bus stop .

 

Guys. A 'cheapskate' or a whatever is a man that knows he's paying for nothing, while some other guy is probing that sweet hole for free.

 

Awesome post.

[A O]

Based on these boards - which is what you are referring to, because it is also on these boards that the OP is being critiqued - your statement in bold is patently false. They most certainly are held to the same amount of scrutiny as the behavior the OP has shown here. In fact - there are FAR more threads on the subject of who should pay that vigorously chastise perceived golddiggers, feminists who are "hypocrites" on this topic, etc. etc. etc. it's been going on for years, actually, and probably averages a thread every 2-3 months on that topic. So, your argument doesn't really hold water.

Gold digging is a well known concept - gold digging is universally despised by all. This differs greatly from your typical dating situation where one's character is often questioned, many times in a negative sense, according to their ability to fund the date. This situation, mirrors the character assassination that many women are put under when it comes to casual sex.

 

The big difference being, very, very, very little focus/scrutiny is ever put on the behavior of women in this dating setting. And its no wonder, people have a hard time seeing the difference between a gold digger, which is just someone out for a free ride, and someone making a judgment call based on someone's ability to pay or not. There's a world of difference, maybe even bigger than I even realized if some of the responses here are anything to go by.

 

Bottom line is, gender based decisions are made all the time, but some are put under far more scrutiny than others.

 

 

.

[mr.dream merchant]

Gold digging is a well known concept - gold digging is universally despised by all. This differs greatly from your typical dating situation where one's character is often questioned, many times in a negative sense, according to their ability to fund the date. This situation, mirrors the character assassination that many women are put under when it comes to casual sex.

 

The big difference being, very, very, very little focus/scrutiny is ever put on the behavior of women in this dating setting. And its no wonder, people have a hard time seeing the difference between a gold digger, which is just someone out for a free ride, and someone making a judgment call based on someone's ability to pay or not. There's a world of difference, maybe even bigger than I even realized if some of the responses here are anything to go by.

 

Bottom line is, gender based decisions are made all the time, but some are put under far more scrutiny than others.

 

 

.

 

Ok so I have a question then. I had a date planned with a lovely woman this past weekend. We planned it a week in advance for the movies. Cool, knew how much money to keep on the side. The day of, she changes her mind and says she wants to go a place more social. She wanted to go for drinks AND ice cream AND coffee AND dinner. What the **** trick? What did I do? Told her I couldn't come out to see her due to something popping up. She was cool about it, and she still talks to me..but the question here is, was I being cheap? I don't think so. What's the deal with women trying to see how much we will spend? I don't get it. They'll say "Money isn't important to me." but the second you don't want to spend an excessive amount of money on them they call you a cheapo.

[Woggle]

Some people have made good points. I don't condone the way he goes about it but why is it that some women will defend to the death their right to be sexually free and sleep around but then get angry when a man gives it to them? Unless a woman is lied to or abused most of them in these situations are very much willing participants.