Feminism in dating (Updated)

[SwordofFlame]

Because one is inherently personal and sexual, and the other isn't or shouldn't be (with a few notable exceptions).

 

The law and employment should do its best to treat everyone the same, be they man, woman, transgender, gay, straight, etc. When choosing a romantic partner this does not have to apply. It's not about feminism anymore, it's about personal preference.

 

For instance, employers and lawmakers should be expected to enforce equal treatment and employment of heterosexuals and homosexuals (and everyone in between), but that doesn't mean that individuals are required to date heterosexuals and homosexuals equally, it depends on what their own sexual preferences are. Same goes with appearance, weight, age, height... and yes, gender roles. It's totally fine to not want to date an obese person, not fine to not hire someone just because they're obese. Totally fine for a 20-yo to not want to date a 50-yo, but not fine for said 20-yo to not hire the 50-yo due to his age. And similarly, it's totally fine to want to date a person who adheres to traditional gender roles, not fine to pay or employ someone differently due to their gender.

 

This is an unpopular concept here, but romantic/sexual preferences are not intended to be treated the same as legal/employment rights.

I don't disagree. But for those women out there that aren't getting approached from men they're interested in and often ask how can I get him to pursue me? Wouldn't a better approach be to let me pursue him instead?

[RedRobin]

I don't disagree. But for those women out there that aren't getting approached from men they're interested in and often ask how can I get him to pursue me? Wouldn't a better approach be to let me pursue him instead?

 

 

There is a certain segment of the population who prefer a relationship dynamic where the man initiates. It is believed (not sure why) that if he initiates, that he will be a 'strong, take charge guy'. Maybe those women prefer being dominated. Funny, some of those women are the most domineering once in a relationship... but ask a guy out? oh, HELL no.

 

 

My preference for a relationship is for balance where we both initiate and we both follow at times. Me personally, I've seen no difference whatsoever in how much a man does or does not initiate or 'take charge' ONCE IN A RELATIONSHIP based on who initiated (me or him). I've seen no difference in long or short term interest based on who initiated. OTOH, I don't have sex early with a guy... so no matter who initiated, I have other ways of determining his sincere romantic interest no matter who initiated first.

 

 

I HAVE seen a difference in one thing... if a guy isn't asking me out, and I'm getting signals he is interested, its because he's already involved with someone else. If anything, that's the biggest reason I don't initiate often anymore. Not because I'm afraid of rejection, but because I know how to read a guy. *shrug* I'm also not one to facilitate cheating/monkey branching, so I cut off the flirty stuff as soon as I find out he's taken. I've initiated with those guys in the past, only to be approached later on (after I found out they were attached) for an affair or something casual. Me no likey.

Edited December 7, 2015 by RedRobin

[basil67]

The better is why don't women reject men who have these sexual values? They can do themselves a lot of favors by not falling for these type of men.

 

I have no idea why women accept and play along with this hypocritical attitude in men. Mind you, I also have no idea why men date women who won't take turns paying.

[Robert Z]

I wonder if the guys who object to paying are the same ones who reject a girl because her sexual values are the same as his.

 

The last thing a man should want is a woman with no sex drive. And a woman with a strong sex drive is very unlikely to be a virgin or inexperienced.

 

I would rather marry an escort than some woman who has to be madly in love to have sex. The honeymoon eventually ends. And so does the sex life.

[ltjg45]

It's funny though.

 

When I tell other guys that I am more than willing to be a stay-at-home father or that I prefer a woman that makes more money than me (not because I want her money but because I prefer a woman that is independent and has no need for my finances), I get mocked endlessly.

 

After all, I am not a traditional man. I have no interest supporting myself, my woman, and any offspring I may have all on my income alone. I need additional help if any relationship with me works out.

 

And despite that, everyone keeps reminding me why I am dateless up to this point in my life. As far as I am concerned, I will remain dateless if the local women really only wants guys with money. That automatically removes me from the dating pool........and I am OK with that. I simply look elsewhere.

[basil67]

It's funny though.

 

When I tell other guys that I am more than willing to be a stay-at-home father or that I prefer a woman that makes more money than me (not because I want her money but because I prefer a woman that is independent and has no need for my finances), I get mocked endlessly.

 

After all, I am not a traditional man. I have no interest supporting myself, my woman, and any offspring I may have all on my income alone. I need additional help if any relationship with me works out.

 

And despite that, everyone keeps reminding me why I am dateless up to this point in my life. As far as I am concerned, I will remain dateless if the local women really only wants guys with money. That automatically removes me from the dating pool........and I am OK with that. I simply look elsewhere.

 

Ah, well at least we've finally got a point for equality. I can't see any reasonable person being OK with a woman saying this either. Actually I saw a female poster get slammed by other women for having this attitude just the other day. She does have a boyfriend, but the general consensus was the he's just as damaged as she is.

[Els]

I don't disagree. But for those women out there that aren't getting approached from men they're interested in and often ask how can I get him to pursue me? Wouldn't a better approach be to let me pursue him instead?

 

I'm all for women asking men out if that is what they WANT to do. However, if a woman strongly desires and is attracted to a man who asks her out, it would be 'settling' for her to put up with the opposite, and not really fair to the guy either. I think that most women who place importance on the guy asking them out genuinely lose interest in guys who don't - it isn't like they're pining away for those guys for years and years and just not asking them out out of fear of societal judgement. If they are, well, I think they absolutely should get over it and pursue the guy, even though it will be more difficult for them than for men (societal judgement is a powerful force).

 

I'm also curious how this is such a sore point on LS. Most guys whom I've talked to about this IRL have expressed that they're actually glad that society encourages them to ask girls out, and that they're sorry that women have to fight societal norms when they ask men out.

[Els]

It's funny though.

 

When I tell other guys that I am more than willing to be a stay-at-home father or that I prefer a woman that makes more money than me (not because I want her money but because I prefer a woman that is independent and has no need for my finances), I get mocked endlessly.

 

After all, I am not a traditional man. I have no interest supporting myself, my woman, and any offspring I may have all on my income alone. I need additional help if any relationship with me works out.

 

And despite that, everyone keeps reminding me why I am dateless up to this point in my life. As far as I am concerned, I will remain dateless if the local women really only wants guys with money. That automatically removes me from the dating pool........and I am OK with that. I simply look elsewhere.

 

I agree with you, this is generally not preferred by both sexes in equal proportions. On the flip side of the coin though, it's incredibly difficult for career-oriented women to find a man who is willing to be the house husband and supporter the way many SAHMs are. So while your preference may be the minority, YOU are also the minority.

 

That being said - do you keep a clean house, are you a decent cook, are you willing to relocate for your spouse whenever her career requires it and accompany her to her social functions? Pretty much every SAHM I know (and one SAHD) does all of the above. Being the supporter is not as easy as it sounds.

[Lois_Griffin]

When I tell other guys that I am more than willing to be a stay-at-home father or that I prefer a woman that makes more money than me (not because I want her money but because I prefer a woman that is independent and has no need for my finances), I get mocked endlessly.

Call me a Fundamentalist like RedRobin said upthread.

 

There's just nothing less appealing to me than a guy who wants his wife to support him while he stays home like a 1950's housewife and raises kids. Just....ugh.

[2.50 a gallon]

From what I have read, the stay at home dad, generally does not work out.

Eventually the wife sees him as something less than the man she married, and less so than her male co-workers, who will in turn demean him in hopes to get in her pants.

That is part of the reason my marriage fell apart. I was a journeyman in my trade, making enough money to afford a race car, a fast motorcycle, a classic El Camino, a medium to small motor home, and half interest in a very fast outboard ski boat. Nikon cameras, lens, etc. And a large savings account.

We married shortly after she graduated from college, she received a great job offer from a Fortune 100 company in Silicon Valley. Living near San Francisco seemed like a fun place to begin a new life.

When we moved, I immediately found work in my skill and way more than I was making at home, and way more than she was making. However, all the job offers as is common in my skill were for night work. And her being only 22, and living in a brand new much larger city, she was afraid to have me at work during the nights.

So I took a day job at half what I was making back home, making her the big bread winner. She being the first woman to work in her department, plus being extremely good looking, fold out material, it was not long before I was facing a small army of OM co-workers. And one of the things they pointed out to her was that I was living off of her salary.

[Rejected Rosebud]

But I can guarantee you that this is an experience that many men are running into a lot, the picking and choosing of equality based on the phase of the moon, zodiac horoscopes or sun-spots.

 

Whether men run into it alot or not doesn't make it about feminism.

 

I don't think you have a very good grasp on the concept of equality. Equality is about equal opportunities in work, education, pay; sovereignty over ones own body and possessions.

 

DATING is about finding somebody that is compatible with you for whatever you are looking for whether it is casual sex or a relationship. At any time one can recognize that it's not happening and move on.

 

If you think a woman has unfair expectations of you, or wants you to do things for her that you hate to do - then just DON'T.

 

If you want traditional gender roles, there are women who do as well. If you find women who don't, just move on.

 

 

As far as what a "good relationship" is, that's up to the people involved and NOONE else. The best way to poison a relationship is to have a 3rd party tell you when something is 50-50.

Of course. Where did you get the idea that anybody around here believes differently? What grown up person would have a 3rd party tell them what to do??:confused:

[WomenWubber]

People who stay at home (men or women) are generally not well respected in my experience.

[Rejected Rosebud]

People who stay at home (men or women) are generally not well respected in my experience.

I have noticed this too. Well not in my real life (thank goodness) but here on LS for example there are often posts by men who are outraged about the wife who stays home supposedly "mooching" off of the man's labor ... taking care of the kids, etc. I'm sure there are some women OR men who actually are mooching off the income of the one working outside the home but usually it's a mutual decision. If two people decided to work it that way then I HOPE they maintain mutual respect!

[sambolini]

I don't date feminists. Not every feminist falls into this category, but if she can't cook, can't clean, and can't treat me to a night out once in a while, then she has nothing to offer.

 

I don't mind splitting chores. In fact, I enjoy cooking and don't mind cooking the majority of the time.

 

But she can do the laundry while I'm cooking the family a nice three course meal. If she feels that's "beneath her", then she ain't the one for me.

[Oregon_Dude]

Modern feminism is NOT about gender equality.

 

It's about women being able to do whatever they choose, whenever they choose, and men just need to "deal".

 

Ever notice that a feminist still wants you to pay for the date?

 

That's some real progress there, sweetie.

[sambolini]

Modern feminism is NOT about gender equality.

 

It's about women being able to do whatever they choose, whenever they choose, and men just need to "deal".

 

Ever notice that a feminist still wants you to pay for the date?

 

That's some real progress there, sweetie.

 

This has been my experience as well. Again, I will state that not every feminist falls into this category. But since the overwhelming majority of them do, it's enough to make me avoid the entire demographic.

[loveflower]

I don't date feminists. Not every feminist falls into this category, but if she can't cook, can't clean, and can't treat me to a night out once in a while, then she has nothing to offer.

 

I don't mind splitting chores. In fact, I enjoy cooking and don't mind cooking the majority of the time.

 

But she can do the laundry while I'm cooking the family a nice three course meal. If she feels that's "beneath her", then she ain't the one for me.

 

what? such women exist? if so, they are considered themselves queens not feminists. they just use feminism to their advantage. they give feminism a bad name. nothing wrong with equality and feminism per se.

[loveflower]

I would rather marry an escort than some woman who has to be madly in love to have sex. The honeymoon eventually ends. And so does the sex life.

 

well, if you had no fear of STD. It's rampant I heard. Charlie Sheen?

[sambolini]

they just use feminism to their advantage. they give feminism a bad name. nothing wrong with equality and feminism per se.

 

I do not equate feminism with equality. I equate feminism with female privilege.

 

I have never met a feminist who cares about men's issues. They are always minimized to be less important, or less "bad", than women's issues.

 

Virtually all feminists "use feminism to their advantage". That's why it exists.

[Oregon_Dude]

I do not equate feminism with equality. I equate feminism with female privilege.

 

I have never met a feminist who cares about men's issues. They are always minimized to be less important, or less "bad", than women's issues.

 

Virtually all feminists "use feminism to their advantage". That's why it exists.

Completely agree with this.

 

However, I get the feeling - though I do not personally KNOW any - that there are "good" feminists out there who desire gender equality and harmony for both sexes.

 

Unfortunately though, right now feminism is viewed as militant and scary by men. Personally if someone puts "feminist" in their OLD profile, I avoid like the plague because of its aggressive connotation.

[ltjg45]

Call me a Fundamentalist like RedRobin said upthread.

 

There's just nothing less appealing to me than a guy who wants his wife to support him while he stays home like a 1950's housewife and raises kids. Just....ugh.

 

Yeah, more assumptions. I sure get a lot of them these days.

 

I never said that. I have no issues keeping my own job. All I am asking is that my woman is capable of keeping her own job and make her own money.

 

When I start looking for my possible career paths, I will do so on the basis of what is really interesting to me, even if it doesn't pay well. I refuse to chase the dollar bill. If it pays well, that is a bonus....but if it is enough to keep myself afloat, that is all I need.

 

In exchange, I am more than willing to take up other duties to compensate for that if necessary such as cooking, cleaning, and other typically feminine activites.

 

If there is one thing I refuse to do, that is to completely rely on another person for anything outside of sex. I rather commit suicide than do that.

[loveflower]

that there are "good" feminists out there who desire gender equality and harmony for both sexes.

 

 

Then what name should we give to those who desire gender equality and harmony for both sexes?

[ltjg45]

I agree with you, this is generally not preferred by both sexes in equal proportions. On the flip side of the coin though, it's incredibly difficult for career-oriented women to find a man who is willing to be the house husband and supporter the way many SAHMs are. So while your preference may be the minority, YOU are also the minority.

 

That being said - do you keep a clean house, are you a decent cook, are you willing to relocate for your spouse whenever her career requires it and accompany her to her social functions? Pretty much every SAHM I know (and one SAHD) does all of the above. Being the supporter is not as easy as it sounds.

 

I can't say that I can keep a house clean however since I am living with a bunch of messy family members, I do aspire to be far better than my current living situation.

 

As for cooking, I will need to work on that once I finally go solo. However, that depends on how she feels about that and what she expects of me.

 

Lastly, for relocation, that isn't any issue with me at all. Honestly, I will be glad to move out of Jacksonville the first chance I get. If I have to leave the United States, that would be fine too. It would give me a whole different perspective on how the world works in my eyes.

[Oregon_Dude]

Then what name should we give to those who desire gender equality and harmony for both sexes?

Genderists.

[loveflower]

Genderists.

 

NO. I looked up the web, that's not the definition.