somedude81 Posted January 18, 2012 Posted January 18, 2012 Aw I always thought I was the Somedude female version. I don't think I'm angry enough to be the female Wolf, or defeated enough to be the female FortyNineThousand. So, Iris, cage battle to decide the champion? (Also, fun new game! Who is your LS mirror?) LOL! And what is my defining trait? I find it hilarious that you think you're the female me. That's it, we have to hook up and have little someboy's and somegirl's. BTW we need to make it hot. Call me short and I'll call you ugly. Lets get dangerous.
kaylan Posted January 18, 2012 Posted January 18, 2012 (edited) It's so easy for people to throw this around, without knowing so many women individually and knowing why they might still be single. Some of us don't get approached when out, but have male friends end up falling in love with us. (attached friends who are supposed to be in love with their girlfriends.) Some of us had issues we were trying to work out, and also trying to avoid sociopathic men (after living with one as a child - I had recurring nightmares for years). I didn't really have a "youth" and rarely felt good about my looks; I may not have been a stunner, I knew my body was wanted and useful to anyone throwing out cat-calls (and I also dealt with curb crawlers when I was younger). A mother's boyfriend starting to get inappropriate, and he was stopped in his tracks. You get the idea. I knew my body would be useful, but haven't met anyone who was just plain good to me, wooed me as they would a beautiful girl. Now I'm 36, and nobody warns you about your mid-thirties. I was happier before, when I was happy enough in my own skin, and not focusing on attracting men. All this talk of things evening out, when it isn't so cut and dried in the first place. Makes me sick. I *am* picky, but not concerning the size of a man's wallet, or the circumference of his bicep. Dont pay attention to the bitter attitude that says the tables turn on women in their 30s. Its so hypocritical that dudes who say that stuff expect women to settle when they wont settle on their expectations themselves. Finding the right person gets harder for both men and women as you get older. The dating pool shrinks because people are getting paired off, and people are forced to change their opinions on deal breakers because of that. An attractive person of any age will not have many problems when it comes to dating though. The guys preaching comeuppance just have wishful thinking of revenge. One cannot jump to conclusions and assume all single women or men in their 30s are only single because they turned down good mates. Lets be real...would you rather them settle into a relationship with someone they dont feel strongly for and potentially leave them if they happen to finally meet the right person for them? Everyone should see the movie "500 Day of Summer". It gives a realistic portrayal of relationships and what happens when you go along with someone whos good enough but not right for you. The main character gets torn up inside when his "gf" breaks up with him...but she knew he wasnt the one and it was better to end it sooner rather than building some life together and crushing him later. She shouldnt of dated him to begin with, but he was persistent and was sure she was the one, even though she wanted things to move slowly. People need to stop being bitter about getting rejected. Just because a person rejects someone at 25 doesnt mean theyre going to be single at 35. And if they are, it could be for a whole slew of reasons. But people need to stop bitterly telling people that theye single because they pass up good mates. Those people they pass up arent right for them...so why start something which isnt right for you? Edited January 18, 2012 by kaylan
kaylan Posted January 18, 2012 Posted January 18, 2012 (edited) True, but they also have it much easier in court. My 22 yo friend just got nailed for child support by a girl with a 6 month old. He hasn't seen in 4 years, and she almost 1,000 miles away now. Best part is that HE has to prove that he isn't the father. California doesn't have any labs in our state that he can take the test at. He has to travel there 100% at his own expense. He is in the process of borrowing money. Plus in high school this girl cheated on him multiple times... and he just got a nice job that will pay for his college. They have it easier in court because there are more dads who skip out on their kids then moms. I would assume this happens because women get more bonded to the kids...plus if a dude has a child with a woman he doesnt care about they dont want anything to do with the whole situation. I find your friends case hard to believe, because any laws or situations I have seen, the man must agree that he is the father at time of birth, or the state and woman have to prove so. Either way, for every case like that where the dude gets screwed over by a chick, theres a bunch of single moms out there with a bf/husbands/guys they slept with, who bail on them when they find out shes pregnant. It works both ways.Well if you really think about it women being labeled as sluts and prostitutes are the most likely girls to get raped... not to mention men who have downgraded sex from something you have with some one you care about to just a money/oportunity thing are more likely to rape... My guess is with out prostitutes there would be a lot less rape and there for a lot less prostitutes... Youre kidding right? All kinds of women get raped. Doesnt matter what shes wearing, if an idiot dude picks her out as a target, shes his target. A girl whos labeled a slut is at no greater risk than good girl who never hooks up outside of a relationship. It really depends on if they end up in the wrong place at the wrong time usually. Or if they befriended an azzhole since in some cases women know their attacker. Actual prostitutes will be at a greater chance to get raped, if only because of their lifestyle. That kind of lifestyle doesnt attract the best kind of dudes. I realize its very patronizing to say girls don't have it hard. The thing is I mean it in the way that I would say the Doctor has it harder then the nurse... aka more responsibility more late nights and being woken up to go to the hospital etc.. but of course the Doctor makes more money and posibly has greater satisfaction... thats what I mean by men have it harder. And just because men have it harder I'm not saying we're better or more important then women. I think women in some ways are more important then men. What do I mean by that... well a loser girl who can reproduce is worth more then a bunch of loser guys who don't need to be reproducing... because one guy technically speaking could go around an impregnate infinite women. Only thing stopping him are other guys of his calibur. Now about this calibur talk I think a big part of what makes a man is his can do attitude. so as long as somedude doubts himself he is what he thinks. But the second he starts striving for greater he's already there even before he's done anything. Wow...you must have never met any nurses. I have known a couple and their jobs are hard as hell compared to the doctors they work with. They work long hours and do get called in for double shifts and what not. This happens to anyone in a hospital. Edited January 18, 2012 by kaylan
kaylan Posted January 18, 2012 Posted January 18, 2012 (edited) The smartest post in this whole thread. The average woman does not have met approaching them on a regular basis. I've met many, many women who could count the number of men who approach them on a monthly basis on one hand. A lot of dudes here admit they are lame with women. These are the dudes who perpetuate the myth women have it easier and meet way more men than women. This is a coping mechanism these guys use in order to deal with rejection. Win post is win.No. Rejection is a total shut down. No kiss, no sex, no nothing. What you are referring to I have faced as well. It might be scary to your point of view, but I have kissed or had sex with a woman and then she blows me off later, I consider that as a victory, not rejection. You sure about that? What if its someone you actually liked and saw potential with? I think most people here, man or woman, would consider it a big emotional defeat to have someone blow them off after sex if they liked the person. Well, Id at least expect those who arent hard up for sex to share this feeling. Edited January 18, 2012 by kaylan
thatone Posted January 18, 2012 Posted January 18, 2012 True, but they also have it much easier in court. My 22 yo friend just got nailed for child support by a girl with a 6 month old. He hasn't seen in 4 years, and she almost 1,000 miles away now. Best part is that HE has to prove that he isn't the father. California doesn't have any labs in our state that he can take the test at. He has to travel there 100% at his own expense. He is in the process of borrowing money. Plus in high school this girl cheated on him multiple times... and he just got a nice job that will pay for his college. ummm, sounds like his lawyer isn't very good. california can't serve him, they'd have to send a federal marshall. his lawyer could just as well send a statement to the court in california stating "i don't know who this girl is, never seen her before in my life" and he'd put the burden of proof on her to demonstrate that she had contact with him in the past.
Untouchable_Fire Posted January 18, 2012 Posted January 18, 2012 They have it easier in court because there are more dads who skip out on their kids then moms. I would assume this happens because women get more bonded to the kids...plus if a dude has a child with a woman he doesnt care about they dont want anything to do with the whole situation. I find your friends case hard to believe, because any laws or situations I have seen, the man must agree that he is the father at time of birth, or the state and woman have to prove so. Either way, for every case like that where the dude gets screwed over by a chick, theres a bunch of single moms out there with a bf/husbands/guys they slept with, who bail on them when they find out shes pregnant. It works both ways. I don't know how many dad's skip out... or even why, but it seems somewhat injust to judge someone in court based on what similar people do. I'm surprised you can invoke that logic regarding gender... Imagine if it were applied to race instead. Does that still sound reasonable? My friend has done some solid research on this law. The mother can name anybody she wants as the father and attempt to collect support. However, so long as he gets a negative paternity test it will get dropped without issue. I may be wrong but I think in all but 12 states courts automatically believe the woman which forces men to prove they are not the father. That makes some sense because women seem to know the father in about 99.7% of situations. ummm, sounds like his lawyer isn't very good. california can't serve him, they'd have to send a federal marshall. his lawyer could just as well send a statement to the court in california stating "i don't know who this girl is, never seen her before in my life" and he'd put the burden of proof on her to demonstrate that she had contact with him in the past. He can't afford a lawyer. He just got a job after being unemployed for nearly 2 years. Here is a link to California's paternity laws. I'm sure the answer is in there somewhere if you care to slog through it. My experience with the Child Support Agency is that they tend to let broke deadbeats slide and go after people with jobs and money like mobsters. http://info.sen.ca.gov/pub/03-04/bill/asm/ab_2351-2400/ab_2380_bill_20040219_introduced.html
thatone Posted January 18, 2012 Posted January 18, 2012 that's the thing, if he doesn't reside in california he can't be compelled to travel to california to appear unless a federal marshall serves him. a letter isn't gonna cut it. "can't afford a lawyer" doesn't cut it either. paying for a lawyer is better than paying for a plane ticket.
Meeks7 Posted January 18, 2012 Posted January 18, 2012 Women have it easier than men in some departments. Same could be said in reverse. There are pros and cons to both genders. Personally, I'm glad I'll never have to give "natural birth," worry about being raped, have my monthly period, make-up crap etc. Also, it's harder for women to lose weight than men. Life is what you make of it and what you do with it.
Els Posted January 18, 2012 Posted January 18, 2012 (edited) No LDR should be a given. The vast majority of people marry somebody who lives in the same town they do. Or at least within 20 miles. Long hair, yes shoulder length hair is a requirement but it's not exactly hard for a woman to meet. Big boobs:love: Such a fetish of mine. I would be ecstatic to date a girl who was thinish and D or larger. But it's not a requirement. I guess a B is fine. Beggars can't be choosers right It's perfectly fine to like what you like, SD. I was merely referring to your post that she just has to 'share your hobbies and not be overweight and nothing else'. Of course there's something else. There's plenty of something else's, not only for you, but for the vast majority of men who say, 'All I want is a girl who isn't overweight and has a job, is that so difficult???'. What they neglected to mention was all the -other- requirements or significant preferences they have, just like you did. 50% of people I know have had a LDR at some point of their life (though I come from a college that offers twinning degrees so that may be a factor). About 30% of girls I know have hair shorter than shoulder length. Probably 50% of girls I know are an A-cup, too (again, Asian, so different bias). My point is that those aren't 'givens', not in any shape or form. You don't need to change your preferences, but you DO need to acknowledge that you have them instead of constantly talking about how you have NO requirements and still can't get a girl, whereas women have soooo many requirements and still get guys, etc. Both untrue. I frankly think cerridwen's requirements are easier to meet than yours, especially since you don't mention stuff like 'interesting, fun to be with, loyal', etc, which I would assume you would consider as 'givens', too (because I don't see much long-term survival potential in a R without that). I'll answer your post with this one That's what's wrong with dating. The men trying to hold onto more than one woman at a time, and the women who allow it. Don't you think there are also women who have the attention of many men at a time, and men who allow it? Edited January 18, 2012 by Elswyth
aj22one Posted January 18, 2012 Posted January 18, 2012 I don't think this is really a gender thing so much as it is a "some people have it harder than others" thing. I do think there are some fundamental differences though, namely numerical. According to most studies I've read, approximately 3% of men have not had vaginal sex by age 25. I'd estimate that somewhere between a third and a half of those men are probably gay, so that leaves something like 1.5% of heterosexual men reaching age 25 as virgins. Considering that among young people the population skews 105 men per 100 women, and considering that men are more likely to be players and/or cheating on the woman they're dating or married to, this 1.5% of men have no corresponding single female. This of course is a generalization, if you go someplace where there are more women than men or the opposite, your experience varies. But in general this is just mathematics. I also don't like the double standard we have about men and women. I know I'm just whistling "Dixie" here but almost always when a woman on here writes about how she's a virgin or inexperienced and is worrying about it, everyone (mostly women) reassures her, telling her to take it slow and any reasonable decent man will respect her and not care about it. But then we see other threads where it's a man in that situation or a poster talking about a guy they're dating like that, everyone jumps in with accusations about him or how it's weird, etc. Nobody should be worried about a partner's sexual history unless we're talking about disease or some history of sexual assault. I'm sure if you're a 25 or 30 year old virgin you're not expecting your first time to be "special" with rose petals and scented candles. And there's the insinuations we get all the time about how "all men" like big breasts and blond hair. Sorry, no we don't. In fact for some of us it's down right unattractive. Some of us also don't care if our gf wears a copious amount of makeup or fancy clothes. I know it's hard to believe but it's true.
somedude81 Posted January 18, 2012 Posted January 18, 2012 (edited) I don't think this is really a gender thing so much as it is a "some people have it harder than others" thing. I do think there are some fundamental differences though, namely numerical. According to most studies I've read, approximately 3% of men have not had vaginal sex by age 25. That numbers seems really low. Also, I wonder how much of that includes prostitutes. IMO, if a man has only been with hookers, he's still a "virgin." He hasn't been able to accomplish sex naturally. An even more interesting stat would be how many men haven't had a relationship. Some men are able to find sex now and then, but for whatever reason, haven't been able to actually date a woman. That's the camp I'm in. considering that men are more likely to be players and/or cheating on the woman they're dating or married to, this 1.5% of men have no corresponding single female. This of course is a generalization,I think you're underestimating this. It would not surprise me if man that's a player is stringing along 5 or more girls and each of those girls is only limiting herself to him. That is what I consider to be the biggest problem with modern dating. That and single girls who'd rather be single. ---------- Why ladies? will he call? "I got up once at night, passed next to his iphone and saw that 3 girls had phoned him during our date. In the morning I asked him if he had fun and he said yes. I asked if he wanted to see me again, so he answered "of course" Never mind the fact that they had sex on their second date. And "date" two was at the guys house. Edited January 18, 2012 by somedude81
aj22one Posted January 18, 2012 Posted January 18, 2012 That numbers seems really low. Also, I wonder how much of that includes prostitutes. IMO, if a man has only been with hookers, he's still a "virgin." He hasn't been able to accomplish sex naturally. An even more interesting stat would be how many men haven't had a relationship. Some men are able to find sex now and then, but for whatever reason, haven't been able to actually date a woman. That's the camp I'm in. I think you're underestimating this. It would not surprise me if man that's a player is stringing along 5 or more girls and each of those girls is only limiting herself to him. That is what I consider to be the biggest problem with modern dating. That and single girls who'd rather be single. Well, part of it definitely depends on where you live. There are places where women outnumber men and others where men way outnumber women. And yeah 3% might be a little low but I wouldn't go over 8% to be honest. I have plenty of friends and I've never met one who was a virgin past 25. My friends are all average people of various backgrounds and body types, so it's not like they're top of the line in terms of attractiveness. And you're spot on about the players. They are stringing along plenty of women who are only interested in him. Unfortunately that's not going to change, because the player's shadiness is likely interpreted as an attractive "edge" to many women. It's not that they want a player, they just want a guy who acts like he's one.
Recommended Posts