Dating now vs. late 80's early 90's

[BlueJeanTangerine]

Haha my mom tells me the same thing (she's a boomer and got married in the late 70s).

 

Her advice was always "Just get her flowers and be nice to her". I took that advice up to age 14 or so.

 

It's true I feel like I just got dropped onto another planet. I am going to have to educate myself on this new culture - wish there was a manual.

 

Hah! While a nice gesture, flowers are a waste of money and die!! If you really like her plant a tree.

[TheGuard13]

So basically it's always been like this, with the exception of some technological changes and relaxed social norms, and there were no "good old days".

[StanMusial]

You make it seem like he asked her and she reluctantly agreed.

 

In my experience, women want sex just as much, if not more, than men. Women are supposed to be the gatekeepers. If they have give it up too soon, it's logical to believe that she's done that many times before and will do the same many times after you.

 

Yeah, the understanding used to be the guy is supposed to try for it and the girl is supposed to deny. Which ties back into my previous post, where I used a blatant example, but the point being women these days are just as likely to say "Ah screw it" and go ahead and jump in the sack. It is what it is, the disconnect is when the same women then start to gripe they can't find a bf.

[Pompeii]

Dating has always been a game of chess, but now the stakes are higher, and the pieces can cut. Technology such as texting, Facebook, etc, have changed the game immensely. Women are getting more agency in their jobs and are less dependent on men to provide them resources (food, money, shelter) than in the past. This means the can date for longer.

 

The game playing revolves around technology and there's a certain way to text a girl to keep her interested. One of my friends kept a girl dangling on a rope for 6 MONTHS through texting. He was able to puff himself up to be some guy that he wasn't and he ended up having sex with her. She dumped him soon thereafter. If you aren't technologically savvy and you are trying to get a girl, you are pretty much finished.

 

Men with unscrupulous character traits are rewarded more often and more highly in dating. Men with Machiavellian tendencies have always been unconsciously sought after by the female species but men now have little incentives to be "good men" as compared to the past. In the past, men had little options for sexual fulfillment with the exceptions of prostitutes and very loose women. Now, men see other men being rewarded sexually by women for bad behavior. A man used to get a job, be a good man to get a wife. Now women no longer care about "good men". If you don't turn her on (which bad boys) often do, you aren't getting anywhere.

 

That's pretty much it but I'm sure I'm missing something.

[Pompeii]

I feel like there's no such thing as "dating" anymore.

 

At least in my area (NYC) most dudes are looking for casual hook-ups. So they'll be interested for a few weeks, to a couple months TOPS and then they'll pull the "ghost" move where they just completely disappear from your life never to hear from them again.

 

I don't know what happened between past generations and now, but it seems like the respect for dating and honoring the woman has just been lost.

 

Now it's blatantly all about getting laid as soon as possible... there are tons of websites out there that say, "If she doesn't put out by date 3 move on to the next."

 

Everyone has an agenda these days. Very rare is it to find someone truly genuine and honest and open about their situation. Lying is rampant, guys dating multiple women and having sex with multiple women at once is common.

 

Dating is really disgusting. I wouldn't even call it dating. I don't even know what it is lol.

 

Guys don't come up and act respectful, they come up and make comments about a woman's tits or a.ss. They call out from the car as they drive past... like you really think that's going to get you a date?!

 

 

You act as if women do nothing to encourage this behavior.

 

If women didn't provide the incentives, this wouldn't be happening.

[BlueJeanTangerine]

So basically it's always been like this, with the exception of some technological changes and relaxed social norms, and there were no "good old days".

 

Thank you for your response I do appreciate it but I do not see that at all. I think social norms were much more relaxed then for a number of reasons. There was not an awareness in society overall about the HIV pandemic, so dating and sex was much more relaxed then as opposed to now. Men and women seemed to be more in-tune with each other and not as divided and judgmental about the opposite sex as we are today. We were much "cooler" with each other, more trusting and didn't ponder ulterior motives as much as we do today. Some technological changes??? I see many and from then until now probably one of the most historically. I didn't have a cell phone, email, internet. You actually had to go out and socialize face to face in order to meet someone. For me personally, I think these forms of communication have had a negative impact on dating and also on maintaining familial relationships and friendships. I'm not against technological advances but in this regard I'm not a huge fan.

 

I may be not be right but these are my thoughts. Perhaps, I should just get out there like I did then, seems more challenging which I prefer. For me those were the "good old days".

[TB Rhine]

Back then men and women seemed to like each other for the most part. These days the hostility is so thick you can cut it with a knife.

 

I blame feminism.

 

Seriously, though... just as relaxed social norms have led to ambiguity in situations between men and women; and just as new screening technologies in communication have led to more rudeness, ghosting, and just general disregard for all traditional standards of politeness and decency; feminism has led to men having to constantly be on guard against the accusation of mistreating or "oppressing" women, or taking part in perpetuating a social order that mistreats them, or what have you. If it wasn't before, male-female interaction has definitely become an adversarial prospect at this point.

 

We live in a patriarchal society, and there are definitely still remnants of that in the present day. But in a world where, say, many men don't find it any easier to get a job (or gain advancement) than a woman would, or where they find themselves being mistreated or disrespected by women in many of the same ways women often complain about being mistreated by men - when you've got it hard yourself, you don't especially like hearing about how someone else has it so much harder than you do. It stops ringing true after a while, even to the most liberal among us (and I am a tried and true, lifetime bleeding heart). And a lot of resentment and bitterness can flow from that.

 

In addition, women complain about not being able to find a guy who treats them right, then reject men who go out of their way to do so ('cause God forbid he should put in a little effort, am I right?). Such a guy is a wuss, and doesn't know how to be a REAL man. They want equality in the social and workplace spheres, but expect to be treated with exaggerated politeness and special consideration in the dating arena. Just as men are resentful of the demands (and criticisms) placed upon them by feminism, women themselves, as a class, are deeply conflicted in their acceptance of those ideals, which makes it even harder for a man to make the grade - because the same behavior that'll get him fired or reprimanded at work is exactly what is called for, and what he'll in fact be socially penalized (in the form of NO SEX) for NOT doing, in the dating arena.

 

The long and short is, until women decide what they want, and are able to give men a consistent message about that, men will keep either treating women like cads (which will get them laid like a rug, but condemned as bastards afterwards - if only they gave a sh*t), or trying to treat them like gentlemen (which will get them decried as wussy 'nice guys,' even as women decry the lack of gentlemanly behavior in the world at large).

[hotpotato]

You make it seem like he asked her and she reluctantly agreed.

 

In my experience, women want sex just as much, if not more, than men. Women are supposed to be the gatekeepers.

 

Maybe Easyheart is different from most guys, but many guys are asking for sex under false pretenses. The dates, the phones calls, everything seems like he wants to date, then poof! Guy leaves (this is the penalty) because she did what she asked. He's go to have the chase even if has to add some dishonesty to the mix. I've even had guys try to tell me how much they wanted to date, how much they liked me, just so they could get a piece. At this point, i'm too old to fall for those parlor tricks though!

 

Or maybe she should wait a couple months to have sex with him, and get the commitment first. However, most men are not trying to wait that long.

 

 

In my experience, men want it more with more people and are also less discriminate about sexual partners.

 

Women are the gatekeepers for sex. Some could argue that men are the gatekeepers for commitment.

 

If they have give it up too soon, it's logical to believe that she's done that many times before and will do the same many times after you.

 

And so what if she has? As long as she's not cheating on him, is it really his business how many men she has sex with? Why care who she sleeps with after you? At that point, it's not your conern anyway.

 

*he asked for sex

*he's not an angel either if he's pushing for it

It's fine for him to be "fast" but she can't be "fast." He is demonstrating his willingness to be promiscuous but he doesn't see himself as such, or he does but in a positive light. He's just being a dude. It's normal behavior for a guy, but for women she's a sloot. Men want more traditional standards for women than what they expect from themselves, apparently.

 

So basically, when a woman says yes too much, she isn't pure enough for a man. She is presumed to have slept with many guys. She has been used up by too many dudes.

 

Thank god for my alternative community. We just do think like this there!

[hotpotato]

Yeah, the understanding used to be the guy is supposed to try for it and the girl is supposed to deny. Which ties back into my previous post, where I used a blatant example, but the point being women these days are just as likely to say "Ah screw it" and go ahead and jump in the sack. It is what it is, the disconnect is when the same women then start to gripe they can't find a bf.

 

Not this one. If a man tries that bull with me, I'm out the door. And fast. I'm done with games. Either a man wants to date me and get to know me or he doesn't.

[Pompeii]

I blame feminism.

 

Seriously, though... just as relaxed social norms have led to ambiguity in situations between men and women; and just as new screening technologies in communication have led to more rudeness, ghosting, and just general disregard for all traditional standards of politeness and decency; feminism has led to men having to constantly be on guard against the accusation of mistreating or "oppressing" women, or taking part in perpetuating a social order that mistreats them, or what have you. If it wasn't before, male-female interaction has definitely become an adversarial prospect at this point.

 

We live in a patriarchal society, and there are definitely still remnants of that in the present day. But in a world where, say, many men don't find it any easier to get a job (or gain advancement) than a woman would, or where they find themselves being mistreated or disrespected by women in many of the same ways women often complain about being mistreated by men - when you've got it hard yourself, you don't especially like hearing about how someone else has it so much harder than you do. It stops ringing true after a while, even to the most liberal among us (and I am a tried and true, lifetime bleeding heart). And a lot of resentment and bitterness can flow from that.

 

In addition, women complain about not being able to find a guy who treats them right, then reject men who go out of their way to do so ('cause God forbid he should put in a little effort, am I right?). Such a guy is a wuss, and doesn't know how to be a REAL man. They want equality in the social and workplace spheres, but expect to be treated with exaggerated politeness and special consideration in the dating arena. Just as men are resentful of the demands (and criticisms) placed upon them by feminism, women themselves, as a class, are deeply conflicted in their acceptance of those ideals, which makes it even harder for a man to make the grade - because the same behavior that'll get him fired or reprimanded at work is exactly what is called for, and what he'll in fact be socially penalized (in the form of NO SEX) for NOT doing, in the dating arena.

 

The long and short is, until women decide what they want, and are able to give men a consistent message about that, men will keep either treating women like cads (which will get them laid like a rug, but condemned as bastards afterwards - if only they gave a sh*t), or trying to treat them like gentlemen (which will get them decried as wussy 'nice guys,' even as women decry the lack of gentlemanly behavior in the world at large).

 

 

The problem with a lot of men today is that many of them just simply don't know how to be men. I'm reading this book called The Way of Men by Jack Donovan and he breaks down masculinity into four core "virtues". Strength, honor, courage, and mastery. These may seem like simple things, but they do not mean what they mean in the current day terminology. Masculinity is virtually tied to strength. Notice how it is unacceptable for a man to be weak but if a woman is weak, that's ok? It is less important to have physical strength in our current environment with all kinds of police protection, but physical strength makes one's life better and makes one able to assert his will in a more effective way.

 

Masculinity has always been self-serving and has laid the foundation for civilization. Without masculinity, civilization would simply not exist. Feminists can cry and wail about it as much as they want but it's true. Even Camille Paglia one of the most popular feminists of her day admitted that if "civilization had been left in female hands, we'd still be living in grass huts".

 

In essence, he says masculinity is independent, not dependent, able to assert it's own will when necessary, strives towards mastery, and is able to take risks when there is immediate threat of self harm.

 

So masculinity is not defined by how many girls you ****, it's not defined by how many mountain dews you can down, or how many guys you get into fights with. Though, a case can be made the more masculine you are, the higher chance you will have sex with more women.

 

He also makes a case saying that being a "good man" and being "good at being a man" are not the same thing. They never have. Never will be.

 

I recommend all men to read this book. Certainly confirmed a lot of things I knew to be true.

[Pompeii]

Women are the gatekeepers for sex. Some could argue that men are the gatekeepers for commitment.

 

This is true. Women have a higher desire for commitment than sex and men visa-versa.

[FitChick]

Men in their late 80s and early 90s have it made since most of their competition are dead.

 

(Can't believe no one made this joke already)

[xxoo]

It's fine for him to be "fast" but she can't be "fast." He is demonstrating his willingness to be promiscuous but he doesn't see himself as such, or he does but in a positive light. He's just being a dude. It's normal behavior for a guy, but for women she's a sloot. Men want more traditional standards for women than what they expect from themselves, apparently.

 

It may be this.

 

Or, it may be that he would be just fine with a woman who has been fast in some situations (as he has), but simply loses interest after early sex. Maybe he expects that she would lose interest, too, just as women sometimes seem to expect that men will bond through sex and want a relationship (not typically).

 

There is a dance to seduction, and it goes both ways. His challenge is to assure that she is sexually attracted. Her challenge is to assure that he is interested in her beyond sex.

[hotpotato]

It may be this.

 

Or, it may be that he would be just fine with a woman who has been fast in some situations (as he has), but simply loses interest after early sex. Maybe he expects that she would lose interest, too, just as women sometimes seem to expect that men will bond through sex and want a relationship (not typically).

 

There is a dance to seduction, and it goes both ways. His challenge is to assure that she is sexually attracted. Her challenge is to assure that he is interested in her beyond sex.

 

And this could be solved with honesty.

 

She could tell him she may become attached if they have sex, if that is the case.

 

He can just tell her he wants to tap dat real fast but will probably lose interest.

 

Or maybe most people arent introspective enough for that.

 

I've had guys come up to me and say they just want to tap dat. I'm cool with that. I'd rather a man do that than wine and dine me, call me, etc when he just wanted a booty call. The former is being honest about his desires and skipping the dating stuff as he should.

 

Like I said, im so glad my alternative community is so much more progessive.

[xxoo]

I do think their is a general lack of introspection, and a failure to be honest (both men and women). People have sex before they trust the person enough to have an honest conversation about their hopes and fears. The cart is before the horse.

 

I've heard it said that women think straighter before sex, and men think straighter after sex. Before sex, men's reasoning is clouded, and after sex, women's reasoning is clouded.

 

So men may honestly believe they'll be interested after sex, and then when the hormones come down a notch....they just lose motivation.

[Woggle]

This is true. Women have a higher desire for commitment than sex and men visa-versa.

 

I don't believe this is true. Why do you have so many men on here heartbroken after a split or see so many men blindsided by a wife who wanted a divorce?

[camillalev]

It was exactly the same in the 80s and 90s. Exactly. I could have written your post word-for-word in 1987.

 

The big difference I see nowadays (and admittedly, I'm looking at it as an outsider now) is that women seem way more gullible. Back then, women called us on our bull****. We then faced the decision of sticking around and becoming boyfriends or moving on to look for easier prey. The 3-date rule evolved because that told us what kind of woman we were with: If she slept with you in the first 3 or so dates, she was "easy" (our word back then) and we would screw her for a few weeks (and push her to do more unusual sexual activities) until we got bored or we found someone else. But if a woman said no to sex, that meant she was girlfriend material and expected us to behave like boyfriends. So we did.

 

I don't think it's qualitatively different now. Most of the people in healthy relationships will read my description and say "That's how it still is today, moron!" I think the difference is quantitative: that more (most?) women today don't demand that men treat them with respect. And they usually justify it with some ludicrous rationalization like, "Well, I have to do whatever a guy wants me to do or else he'll just find someone who will." WHY THE HELL WOULD YOU WANT TO DATE SOMEONE WHO TREATS YOU LIKE CRAP??? I honestly don't get it.

 

Women are always in control of love/romance/sex/whatever you want to call it. A guy will do whatever you let him get away with. If a man doesn't treat you well, DON'T DATE HIM! It's not terribly complicated.

 

Despite the explosion of information on dating/relationships in books, magazines, TV, internet (there was no such thing as a relationship book when I was in my 20s) young people seem more clueless than ever. I suspect it's because most of the information out there is really disinformation. Until women get a clue, men will keep treating them as badly as they let us.

 

 

I think women may think this way because of the way media portrays women, honestly. Let's not forget the explosion of porn and the internet. I watch porn and all, but i'm not going to pretend it doesnt effect cultural attitude towards women in general. And I think women internalize these attitudes.

[camillalev]

I've heard it said that women think straighter before sex, and men think straighter after sex. Before sex, men's reasoning is clouded, and after sex, women's reasoning is clouded.

 

Don't know if i'm a weirdo but sex has never made me more attached to a guy. I can have regular sex with a guy but if I dont have/develop deep feelings for him or who he is sex wont make me attached.

[HoneyBadgerDontCare]

Maybe Easyheart is different from most guys, but many guys are asking for sex under false pretenses. The dates, the phones calls, everything seems like he wants to date, then poof! Guy leaves (this is the penalty) because she did what she asked. He's go to have the chase even if has to add some dishonesty to the mix. I've even had guys try to tell me how much they wanted to date, how much they liked me, just so they could get a piece. At this point, i'm too old to fall for those parlor tricks though!

 

Or maybe she should wait a couple months to have sex with him , and get the commitment first. However, most men are not trying to wait that long.

 

Bingo! Yahtzee! Bob, tell her what she's won!

 

In all seriousness, this is exactly what women that are looking for a relationship should do. If the guy is "not trying to wait that long", then that's okay. Find a guy that is trying to wait that long. They do exist and they are not all that rare.

 

I'm an example of one. I have the reputation of a player, but my current girlfriend made me wait 3 months for sex. Eventually all other girls dropped out of my life, I became monogamous with her, and we had sex. Now, I barely even look at other girls.

 

 

In my experience, men want it more with more people and are also less discriminate about sexual partners.

 

Women are the gatekeepers for sex. Some could argue that men are the gatekeepers for commitment.

 

These are the traditional gender roles. The script has been flipped as of late, to some degree.

 

From my observations, women are the gatekeepers of sex. SOME men are the gatekeepers of relationships. Many other men are the gatekeepers of nothing and want relationships, but are unable to obtain them (hence the growing need for PUA and things like that).

 

 

And so what if she has? As long as she's not cheating on him, is it really his business how many men she has sex with? Why care who she sleeps with after you?

 

When I said "after", I was referring to cheating (as AFTER they are in a relationship together).

 

*he asked for sex

*he's not an angel either if he's pushing for it

It's fine for him to be "fast" but she can't be "fast." He is demonstrating his willingness to be promiscuous but he doesn't see himself as such, or he does but in a positive light. He's just being a dude. It's normal behavior for a guy, but for women she's a sloot. Men want more traditional standards for women than what they expect from themselves, apparently.

 

So basically, when a woman says yes too much, she isn't pure enough for a man. She is presumed to have slept with many guys. She has been used up by too many dudes.

 

Thank god for my alternative community. We just do think like this there!

 

I personally cannot be exclusive with a woman that has a promiscuous past, despite the fact that I have a promiscuous past. I realize that this is a double standard and this may make me sexist. I'm okay with that, as it is my personal opinion and feelings on the matter. There are many men out there that don't feel that way about it. So I will let them address this aspect of your response.

[Pompeii]

I don't believe this is true. Why do you have so many men on here heartbroken after a split or see so many men blindsided by a wife who wanted a divorce?

 

Women only want a commitment with men they desire to tie down. You know, the men they can't have. The charlatans, the bad boys, the Machiavellis. Once they get those men, it's over. They no longer desire the commitment. A woman wants commitment in the dating process, but once it has been fulfilled, it's over. Men are generally the gatekeepers of commitment. In most cases, a man does not want to commit unless he sees that woman as "high value" in his eyes. I am talking about the men who have some degree of options here, not desperate loners.

[Pompeii]

These are the traditional gender roles. The script has been flipped as of late, to some degree.

 

From my observations, women are the gatekeepers of sex. SOME men are the gatekeepers of relationships. Many other men are the gatekeepers of nothing and want relationships, but are unable to obtain them (hence the growing need for PUA and things like that).

 

I am inclined to agree with this. A growing number of men find themselves locked out of the dating market with women they want to date. Many men are becoming "invisible" for lack of a better word.

 

 

 

I personally cannot be exclusive with a woman that has a promiscuous past, despite the fact that I have a promiscuous past. I realize that this is a double standard and this may make me sexist. I'm okay with that, as it is my personal opinion and feelings on the matter. There are many men out there that don't feel that way about it. So I will let them address this aspect of your response.

 

You know, that this can be fabricated, right? I know many women who are very discreet when it comes to that. I ascribe to the school of thought that if a woman isn't in a relationship, she's having horizontal tango with many other men in between those relationships. I know there are some women who do not do this but there are too many women that do for me to believe otherwise.

[HoneyBadgerDontCare]

 

 

You know, that this can be fabricated, right? I know many women who are very discreet when it comes to that. I ascribe to the school of thought that if a woman isn't in a relationship, she's having horizontal tango with many other men in between those relationships. I know there are some women who do not do this but there are too many women that do for me to believe otherwise.

 

Yes, of course. But I've found that if a woman lies about her number, it will generally be somewhere in the vicinity of her actual number. A safe margin of error is to multiply the number a woman gives by 3.

 

Some may be telling the truth, some may be lying. But the margin of error calculation should do the trick.

 

Of course, unless the girl is a VERY good actor, you should also be able to tell by her body language, ability to keep her story straight for a long period of time (women are worse liars than people give them credit for), and how often she tells the truth about other things in her life.

[Els]

Fhe is pushing early, I will assume he has no respect for me.

 

I guess my issue is the double standard that wont go away.

 

Well, yes, there is undeniably a double standard, but in the end, the woman still has the final say on whether or not she allows sex to happen. Basically, you can choose to allow the double standard in YOUR bedroom, or not to.

 

And guys not being upfront. If you just want sex, man up, and say so from the beginning.

 

Instead guys go through the motion of courtship. He has wasted both our time and his money. He could have taken the same $$$ and gone to a strip club or escort.

 

Have these guys actually told you that they desire a relationship and not just casual sex, or are you just assuming it because he asked you out and paid?

 

 

Ill just put some money on the table and leave in the middle of the meal. No need in wasting any more time. Hot tater dont play.

 

I think most of us are encouraging you to do this, yes....

[hotpotato]

Well, yes, there is undeniably a double standard, but in the end, the woman still has the final say on whether or not she allows sex to happen. Basically, you can choose to allow the double standard in YOUR bedroom, or not to.

And I'm saying, no. Honestly, I dont have this problem anymore because I dont date and I'm older.

 

 

Have these guys actually told you that they desire a relationship and not just casual sex, or are you just assuming it because he asked you out and paid?

 

Actually, yes. I've had several guys flat out lie to me. Telling me how much they like me and want to date. In the end they wanted a piece. These are men in their 20s-40s, not teenagers. There are men who are flat out dishonest, and it's not that rare either.

 

Men are destroying the possibility that a relationship can flourish by introducing sex so soon. I can assume they just dont care.

 

 

 

 

 

I think most of us are encouraging you to do this, yes....

Something we can agree on.

[hotpotato]

Bingo! Yahtzee! Bob, tell her what she's won!

 

In all seriousness, this is exactly what women that are looking for a relationship should do. If the guy is "not trying to wait that long", then that's okay. Find a guy that is trying to wait that long. They do exist and they are not all that rare.

 

In my experience, guys wanting to wait are very rare. It's gimme gimme right now, instant gratification. I've been on very few dates in which a man wanted to wait. Usually its," We've known each other for a whole two hours. Let's go to my place and get it on!"

I could go on 100 dates, and maybe 4 guys would want to wait. The chances of compatibility with a whopping 4 guys is slim.

If it happens it happens, but I'm done trying to kiss a bunch of frogs.

Before anyone says anything, I dont dress provacatively or talk provocatively. My OLD profile does not mention sex nor do I have sex pictures posted.

 

 

 

 

 

 

These are the traditional gender roles. The script has been flipped as of late, to some degree.

 

From my observations, women are the gatekeepers of sex. SOME men are the gatekeepers of relationships. Many other men are the gatekeepers of nothing and want relationships, but are unable to obtain them (hence the growing need for PUA and things like that).

 

 

 

 

When I said "after", I was referring to cheating (as AFTER they are in a relationship together)

 

 

I personally cannot be exclusive with a woman that has a promiscuous past, despite the fact that I have a promiscuous past. I realize that this is a double standard and this may make me sexist. I'm okay with that, as it is my personal opinion and feelings on the matter. There are many men out there that don't feel that way about it. So I will let them address this aspect of your response.

 

I hope you are not implying a woman who has had plenty of sex can't be faithful.

 

You are hypocritical, but at least you are honest.