The Private Man

Attraction and dating information for all men

Getting The Date

A man and a woman meet up in real life. Perhaps it’s a coffee shop, a nice bar, even the grocery store. They have a nice conversation. The man, sadly clueless, screws up enough courage to ask the woman on a real date. Blue pill guys will probably do something like this:

“Um, er, well, would like you to have dinner sometime?” Strike one.

The woman responds yes, she would indeed like a date. Phone numbers are exchanged. Bear in mind that the blue pill schmuckling already has one strike against him.

Our hapless hero calls the woman on that very night. Strike two.

They have a nice conversation that last for an hour. Strike three.

Finally, he again screws up the courage to pitch the date idea. “Are you free Saturday?” Can there be a strike four? Crap, this analogy ain’t working.

The woman, despite her evolutionary hind-brain screaming at her “He’s a chump! He’s a chump!” says that yes, she is available.

The chump, ever so chumplike, asks “Where would you like to go?” Strike five?! I’ve totally ruined the baseball analogy but you get my drift.

You younger guys don’t do the dating thing. I know this. But for men over a certain age (about 35 or so), dating is what must happen because of work, kids, and complicated lives. Sure, it’s a vestige of a previous era but it lingers persistently, especially considering online dating.

A confident man with Charisma doesn’t ask. He states.

“We should go out for ice cream.”

Note the use of the conditional “should”. That takes away a bit of the overconfident pushiness.

Phone conversations? Keep ’em short. Use a timer if need be.

Welcome to dating 2.0.

Single Post Navigation

80 thoughts on “Getting The Date

  1. Si Quaeris on said:

    Yes. Men are too outcome dependent.

    But that’s not surprising. It’s natural to be outcome dependent when we are way too focused on the outcome.

    My fellow men: You should seriously stop worrying about women so much, and just make your own lives as awesome as possible for you. Once you can do that, women will complement your life, rather than be an end goal, and you will find that everything else comes naturally.

    • DC Phil on said:

      It seems that men are hard-wired to be outcome-dependent. It’s in our nature. Otherwise, we wouldn’t be able to plan ahead so well and consider alternatives. Women, in general, aren’t like this. They can live in the moment better than men can.

      “Dating” isn’t completely dead, but severely modified. I know that, after moving here to DC and starting to date, I was making several mistakes because I was unaware of Dating 2.0. Now, I don’t call (I text), I don’t schedule dinners or anything fancy (I prefer a walk in the park near my apartment), and, yes, I state. Actually, it’s stating with parameters, as in:

      “Okay, we should go out for ice cream sometime. How about this coming Wednesday night at 7 pm or next Sunday afternoon, around 3 pm? Works for you?”

      • P Ray on said:

        Men are outcome dependent.
        Yonks ago, a behavioural researcher made this comment:
        “You can predict male behaviour from previous female behaviour … but not the reverse”.

  2. I agree chatting on the phone for an hour isn’t good because what do you talk about the next night? But asking if she wants to go to dinner is good, and phoning her first night isn’t bad but it would be better to leave it a day, and asking if she’s free sat is good. Agree asking her where she wants to go is bad but only because this bloke is starting to indicate he’s unable to think for himself, and nobody (irrespective of gender) wants a doormat. Saying we ‘should’ do something would only work if I thought it was a suggestion rather than an order, in which case I’d run a mile. Agree totally that women should complement your life and not be an end goal. There’s someone who is right for you, as you are, you just haven’t met them yet so get out more and enjoy your life.

    • DC Phil on said:

      I never ask a woman go to do dinner, period . . . not unless I’ve been with her for a while and have been sleeping with her. My reason is that I’ve seen too many guy friends (and this happened to me, too) agree to take a woman out, spend the money (where she never offers to pay), and then get cast aside. If I, the guy, am expected to pay for the first date and possibly the second, but with little chance of a good return, then I’m going to do something that involves and activity and/or something that will cost me no more than $20-30, tops. That’s a rational strategy.

      Also, agreed . . . “should,” if not done correctly, can degenerate into ordering. The trick is to find the balance. Stating too much turns into the guy coming across as having control issues, while not stating and leaving everything up to her turns into the guy being wishy-washy and a chump. Not attractive to women. Women usually prefer the guy to take initiative and set the parameters, but allowing her the option of changing or modifying if they don’t like all of the parameters. If the woman is not full of herself, she can meet the guy halfway.

      • Agree but if you can’t afford dinner its ok to go for a walk or suggest something cheap. And the woman should at least offer to buy drinks on first date if you’re buying dinner. And if the woman won’t be you half way then don’t hang around

      • DC Phil on said:

        Yep, if she offers to pay, then that’s definitely a step in the right direction.

        I once had a date early last year where the girl (she was 26) met me for drinks. I paid for the drinks and then she said she was hungry and wanted to get something to eat at one of the restaurants up the street. As the date was going well, I said, “Sure, but you can get dinner, ok?” She agreed.

        Very unforced and go-with-the-flow. Too bad that it fizzled out on the second date, though.

      • I like your “strategy”. I’m not ready to date yet but I will suggest paying for drinks or dinner when I do. Thanks.

      • DC Phil on said:

        Extend the strategy to other things besides dinner and drinks. Offer to meet the guy halfway. If he refuses, then let him take the lead. But, the key word is OFFER.

    • There’s someone who is right for you, as you are, you just haven’t met them yet…

      Wrong. So wrong as to be criminal. This kind of advice leads to a man’s involuntary celibacy. If a man isn’t getting what he wants vis a vis dating and relationships, he’s got to fix the situation and that means fixing himself by making fundamental changes to his behavior and his attitude.

      This also applies to women just as much. Plankton’s mob (British broad’s blog) believes in emotional pornography and therefore it’s not beholden on women to fix themselves in order to be more attractive to men. They are invisible sexually and romantically because that is their choice through laziness and inertia.

      • I agree with everything you’ve said here. But pretending to be something you aren’t won’t work either and I’m assuming that you’re sane and nice. If you’re not, and a lot of women on plankton aren’t, then of course you need to address this. But if you’re an ok person, then don’t pretend to be something you’re not.

      • This is not a matter of pretending. This is a matter of changing one’s behavior and attutides in regards to being more attractive to the opposite sex. However, it’s tricky in that the changes a man must wrought should be done for his own sense of confidence without regard to the resulting outcome of being more attractive to women. It’s almost zen-like. I’ve got a couple of blog posts on the Confidence Sub-routine which describes this concept in more detail. As for women, they should be consciously working to be more attractive to men. The feminine attracts the masculine. People do have the capacity for change.

      • Because just maybe you’re going after the wrong type of women? I mean if you don’t like them, and they wouldn’t like you as you are (assuming you’re a nice bloke as well as having no mental health problems) then why would you want to be with them? I don’t know I find all these games too confusing. I either like someone and want to spend time with them or I don’t and I don’t. How long they speak to me on the phone for wouldn’t turn a like into a dislike or the other way round. And if someone I like doesn’t like me I just think fair enough you can’t please everybody all the time, and I just think that they’d seen the incompatibility before I had.

      • DC Phil on said:

        IMO, there shouldn’t be games-playing in “dating.” Period. “”Dating 2.0,” “combat dating,” or whatever term you want to apply to it usually boils down to a power struggle. Both sexes are guilty of creating and perpetuating this state of affairs, and both eventually lose out. “Nice” guys wonder why they don’t get the kind of female attention they want (and not just to fuck), and picky women wonder why they’re not getting the kind of male attention they want. Of course, as a male, I’m going to be biased and say that women started this when they started adopting an entitlement mentality, thinking that they could get whatever they wanted simply because they have a vagina.

        Also, “liking someone” is a bit relative. How do you know if you “like” someone? Is this based simply on a feeling, or is it something else? Think in terms of attraction. Attraction (largely) isn’t a choice. There are some people you’re attracted to, and most you’re not attracted to. Great. But, can you see below the surface? I believe many still can, but won’t. In men’s experience, it seems that women don’t want to express too much interest for fear that they’ll come across as “weak” or “submissive” or something else. Same for men, though the burden is more on men to make the first move and shoulder all the risk.

      • Ah well, now I’m older I don’t confuse liking someone with finding them attractive although when I was younger and immature I did. Now I know they can be 2 separate things and I look for someone to have both qualities. I can find someone attractive because I like them, but it’s never the other way round. I suppose if its just sex you’re after then it doesn’t matter whether you like them or not, nor does it matter if they like you. But if you want anything more than that then surely you have to like each other, and the only way to do that is just be yourself. Oh what do I know? I can only speak for sensible women ie not the ones who watch sex and the city or desperate housewives.

      • I completely agree — the “There’s someone who is right for you, as you are, you just haven’t met them yet!” is the flip side of “One Twue Wuv”, or Athol’s Oneitis. It puts the onus for your success or failure in a relationship on Fate, or the gods, or blind chance. It also assumes that “as you are” is actually worth a damn. In point of fact, if a dude was like likable and fuckable “as you are”, then he would be in a relationship already. It’s Blue Pill thinking to see relationship failure as merely a matter of missed chances and incompatibility.

        In other words, that’s a fine philosophy for a fourteen year old girl, but for a grown man, it stinks. The proper phrasing should be:

        “There is someone who has a vagina, right over there. She might be the mother of your future children, but probably not. If you present yourself ‘as you are’ then she’s going to see you as a Betachump and not fuck you. If she doesn’t fuck you, she has no chance of being the mother of your children. Therefore ‘as you are’ is an unproductive mating strategy, as is ‘there’s someone who is right for you’. Suck it up, learn Game, and collect enough vaginas to make an informed decision as to the mother of your children.”

        That’s the thing. If you suffer with the misconception that “there’s someone who is right for you” then you’re no better making good choices about mating than most women. Better to go for “she’ll do for the moment, but there’s always a newer make and model year” . . . and then if she happens to be worthy, it’s a happy surprise. But don’t count on fate and being yourself.

        And any woman who has spent more than $20 on cosmetics in the past year has no credibility when she says “pretending to be something you aren’t” won’t work. If that was true, then fake boobs, mascara, and Spanx wouldn’t be multi-million dollar industries. You want us to “be ourselves”? Show up on a date without makeup and dressed in gym clothes and see how far “being yourself” gets you. Just another tactic to encourage chumphood.

      • Nail, meet the hammer that is Ian.   A huge part of Dating 2.0 is understanding that relying on fate and destiny is the worst dating tactic imaginable. That is the stuff of fairytales and and other sundry emotional pornography. If a person wants to attract the opposite sex and is failing to do so, then that person must start a regime of change, not shake his/her fists at the Fates or simply blame the opposite sex and then go home and sulk.   Even middle-aged people can change if they truly want to. The “this is the way I’ve always been” excuse is an unspeakably lazy reason for accepting a shitty dating situation.   Guys, work on your looks and your positive masculine charisma. Ladies, work on your looks and your overall positive femininity.   It really is that simple.

      • Yes yes. Look good. Choose better women. Work out why you’re messing things up all the time if you are, but ignore this stuff about playing games such as advocated in the story above. And as for ‘collecting vaginas’ – if you don’t actually even like women (and you sound as though you don’t) then I doubt you’d find anyone who would want you to be the father of their children. Or only weird women who are also into game playing. Is that the sort of woman you WANT to have children with?

      • Those “games” are all about creating attraction and building comfort with women. Such tactics stimulate a far more primal part of a woman’s brain on an evolutionary level. Those charismatic skills used by men often do work despite the words of denial from women. However, without true inner confidence, such skills can easily come across as creepy. Another huge part of Dating 2.0 is that a man must pay far more attention to a woman’s actions and much less attention to her words. I rarely ask women about dating advice. For one, women usually don’t date other women (yes, exceptions apply, duh). For another, women tend to say what they are expected to say. This is where men usually get the “be nice, be yourself” type of advice. When I see a couple on a date, I observe what the woman is doing, not so much what she is saying.

      • P Ray on said:

        The idea of “Choose better women” fails with the very evident circumstance that:
        Women MAKE themselves better women (and this idea of better translates into more agreeable, more tolerant, more willing to see themselves as complementary and not adversarial) for men who subtly demonstrate they have other options.

        Those men may or may not have morals, but that’s not the point. They’ve demonstrated that they are what those women (and other women WANT).

        e.g. Elizabeth Edwards, Anastasia Gryshayeva

  3. Candide on said:

    It’s not that we young blokes are too cool for dating. It’s just that usually we need to hang out with the chick, get drunk together and fuck her first before we can successfully take her out on a date. That’s how young women roll these days.

    Even in that case, I agree with the general advice here: stop asking questions and use more “let’s do XYZ”.

  4. I like your writing and appreciate your candor, Private Man. I’m curious, though…you seem to focus on women over 40. Is there a reason you don’t flirt with younger, more attractive women?

    • Oh, I flirt with every woman I meet. But the 30-something bunch mostly have kids living in the house and I’m not dealing with that scenario for any kind serious dating. A soft-harem of single moms is not my goal.

      • P Ray on said:

        Plus it could get expensive being legally imputed as the father figure for multiple sets of kids.

      • Why not looking for women in their 20s? And plenty of the ones in their 30s don’t have kids (but then they may have babies rabies, oh well).

      • DC Phil on said:

        20-something women might be problematic. For one thing, depending on which side of 25 you’re talking about, the woman might be very immature and preoccupied with things like TV, her iPhone, videos, drinking/partying, etc. Sure, she might be the bombshell, but for a guy on the high side of 35, this can get quite annoying, especially if he’s sure of himself, experienced, and is a bit intellectual and likes to discuss such things. Or, if the woman is on the high side of 25, she could still have some of the characteristics of her younger sisters, but as 30 is coming up, she’s feeling the baby-rabies.

        Also, the 20-somethings might not want the older guy because he’s “too old” for her. I guess that depends on how she feels about it and whether she can make a decision apart from her friends, family, and society, which assuredly are telling her that it’s not kosher to be dating a guy who’s at least 15 years older than she is.

  5. Are you free Saturday for ice cream? This guy a pedophile? If you know this woman well enough to propose a date, well let’s have it by God!
    “I’d like to take you out>”
    “I’d like that.”
    “You free Satruday?”
    “I know a nice Italian restaraunt, small but capable. I’ll make reservations for 8:00.”
    ” I’ll look forward to it.”

    That is a date, or it was in my day, at last this was hoe Moses told it to me. She ahs agreed to accompany you , publicly, to dinner. The rest is in the hands of the gods.

    Where did this train leave the tracks?

    • This sounds perfect and would work for me.

    • DC Phil on said:

      Substitute “coffee” or “other foodstuff” for ice cream. Avoids the pedophile reference. (Personally, I’d say gelato since there many more of those around than simple ice cream joints here in DC. This is, after all, a center of pretentiousness . . . whoops! I meant “sophistication.” :))

      And, where did the train leave the tracks? When women started to demand that men pay for everything and they give nothing in return. Yeah, great that she would go to dinner with you. But, then she tells you that she has a boyfriend and then disappears? Uh, uh . . . no way. (Yes, this has happened to guys I know.)

      • Actually my sympathies are with men here. And I think there are a lot of horrible women with skewed values, who are self absorbed, selfish and self centred. I do think men here are simply responding to what they see. All I’m saying though is not ALL women are like that. Personally I don’t know anyone who is as I simply don’t make friends with them, and I’m suggesting that you shouldn’t believe they all are, and should seek out ones that aren’t. If they don’t like you as you are, find ones that do. If they won’t share the cost of dinner or expect you to spend a lot of money on them, avoid them. Or shag them. But don’t mess the nice ones around. And don’t expect the horrible ones to be the mothers of your children.

      • Not all women are like that… hehehehe.

        That’s called NAWALT and the Manosphere knows the NAWALT concept only too well. Here’s the deal, enough women are like that. Women with genuine femininity, with good character, and with good looks are as rare as hen’s teeth.

      • P Ray on said:

        Fi, maybe you’re not around the women most men consider attractive.
        Zing 🙂

        “But don’t mess the nice ones around. And don’t expect the horrible ones to be the mothers of your children.”

        A woman can be very nice to a man she is TERRIFIED of losing.
        The same woman can be very cold to a guy she has already written off.

        Horrible or not, whether she is the mother of your children she can say she is, and if the notice escapes your attention you become the father anyway.

        But nice try, we’ve heard that argument that “I don’t know those types of women. AT ALL” … umpteen times.

      • I see where you’re coming from. You’re pretty unsuccessful with the ladies then.

      • P Ray on said:

        There is no need to be succesful with fuglies. I have my standards, most ladies don’t meet ’em. 🙂
        You cannot call a man a loser … if he refuses to associate with women of your type 🙂

      • Of COURSE you do…:)

      • PM. Actually I thought it was going ok until comments got personal and there was no sense of perspective. At that point it ceased to be an interesting exchange of ideas to me and seemed to veer off down a route that seemed to a)be provocative for the sake of it and b ) started to just make silly generalisations . And this DESPITE the fact that I was actually agreeing with the majority of what was being said!
        Eg Not all women are like that… hehehehe.
        Women with genuine femininity, with good character, and with good looks are as rare as hen’s teeth.
        Fi, maybe you’re not around the women most men consider attractive. Zing

      • I don’t moderate the vast majority of comments so if a reader makes a comment that is personal, it will likely get through. That also includes comments that attack me personally, as well.   I stand by my assertion that “Women with genuine femininity, with good character, and with good looks are as rare as hen’s teeth.” For instance, both the US and the UK suffer from a huge obsiety epidemic. Fat is unattractive so this eliminates at least a third of women from the “good looks” category. Oh yes, fat looks bad on men, too. But this blog has a primarily male readership so I stick mostly to information relevant to men.

      • Ok. 🙂 maybe I over reacted? Never let it be said I can’t offer an apology where one’s due… I think DC Phil says the same things you (and other men here) do as you pointed out, but I think he gets away with it because he says ‘most’ as opposed to ‘all’ which makes him sound more balanced. And I find it interesting coming here and hearing what men say. I know a number of men I spend time with socially (not having sex with them) and we go to the pub or the movies (and we split the bill always) but they never talk like this about women. I don’t know why. Whether its because this is sort of men only talk and they wouldn’t want me to hear it, or whether they are too old and they don’t think like this. Its interesting to me anyway.

      • “they never talk like this about women. I don’t know why. Whether its because this is sort of men only talk and they wouldn’t want me to hear it, or whether they are too old and they don’t think like this.” Probably some of both. It’s been through the Internet and blogs/forums/web pages like this where men (usually younger than me) can be so honest. When a woman reads such honesty, it’s usually a shock and she quickly retreats in horror. A few women actually take what we say seriously (bbSezmore being an example) and go through some serious introspection. Once past the brutal honest, there is so much for a woman to learn about being more attractive to men.

      • P Ray on said:

        “they never talk like this about women. I don’t know why. Whether its because this is sort of men only talk and they wouldn’t want me to hear it, or whether they are too old and they don’t think like this.”

        If you hear this from men you don’t consider worth listening to, it is as if it was never said at all.
        The idea that you live in the UK and have never heard that the relations between genders are getting worse and women are partly to blame, is farcical to the extreme.
        You guys have the Jeremy Kyle show, nuff said.

      • DC Phil on said:


        Yes, as I mentioned in my one comment, I strike for a balanced approach. The problem, with NAWALT, as stated before here and elsewhere, is that it’s a cop-out. Of course not all women are like that. Neither are all men. Generalizations are virtually impossible because it’s how one is able to make decisions. For example, if I like going to Hooters in my city and in a 100 mile radius because I like the food, the service, and — surprise, surprise — like looking at the tits and ass on display, I’ll continue to go. But, if, over time, the food gets worse, the service even worse, and the girls are getting fatter and uglier with each passing month, I could do one of two things: (1) think it’s the particular restaurants in my area that are going to pot, or (2) just stop going because I’ve concluded that ALL Hooters have gone to pot.

        With (2), let’s say I go to Belgrade for a two-week vacation and go to Hooters there. Great food, service, and gorgeous girls who are friendly (and not pushy for tips like a lot of American Hooters girls are). Now, was (2) a fair conclusion? In the wider scheme of things, no, it isn’t, because I’ve just encountered a Hooters that refutes that generalization. On the other hand, this is Belgrade and not my home city. For many reasons, I can’t just pick up and go live in Belgrade. And, really, why would I want to relocate to Belgrade JUST because of the fact that the Hooters over there are so much better than in my home city?

        Now, let’s apply this to the state of Anglosphere women. Yes, NAWALT. We get this. However, as PM mentioned, there are more fatter and uglier women now than there seemed to be about 20 + years ago, those that aren’t have bad attitudes, and the really desirable ones might be already taken and off the market. So, what’s a guy to do? He tries and tries and tries, but these women don’t seem to meet him halfway. So, he’s at a loss. He’s not an asshole — he’s a “nice guy.” But, in his continual frustration, he’d rather just start making some generalizations about the state of Anglosphere women instead of dealing with continual rejection. Is it fair? Of course not. But, it’s a strategy.
        Men like strategy and we like it when our actions produce positive results, because they we keep doing what works. It’s hardwired into men to look at the outcome. Women, in contrast, seem to live more in the moment. Ergo, women don’t understand men — nor are they encouraged to. Worse is when the Anglosphere culture, as it has done in the past few decades, absolves and shields women from dumb mistakes and their consequences. This means infantilization and protracted adolescence, which carries over into adulthood because there’s no consequence to selfish actions. The same thing has been happening to men, unfortunately. So, we’re all losing.

        But, on this blog we talk about the men’s perspective. I’d wager that your guy friends either weren’t aware of this, couldn’t put two and two together, or did know and were afraid to say something in mixed company because you might get indignant and refuse to sleep with one of them because you got offended. 🙂

    • Candide on said:

      Ice cream makes them think of babies.

      Hot chocolate makes them think of sex.

      True story.

      • DC Phil on said:

        Duly noted. 🙂

      • Alex on said:

        “Hot chocolate makes them think of sex.

        True story.”

        At last , useful advice for a man from a woman!

      • P Ray on said:

        It makes up a terrifying mental image, when you have hot chocolate with an ice-cream lump in it.
        I’m guessing that way madness lies.

  6. P Ray on said:

    You can only reject a guy who asks you.
    If he doesn’t … you either do the asking, or be alone.
    Ain’t equality grand.

    • I have NO IDEA what point you are trying to make. However from reading this site, it seems to have 2 messages – firstly that 99.9 percent of women are manipulative and greedy and not worthy of any respect or consideration and should be treated as disposable when a better (looking) one comes along and secondly, what to do to get a woman. Not that you really want one of course because they aren’t worthy of you, but what to do, say and how to present yourselves to get one anyway. The men who haven’t got anything nice to say about women at all, who dismiss all women in such a negative way are obviously the ones who aren’t successful. That’s why they are so angry at them and paradoxically, it’s what prevents their future success with them too. All I said was that not all women are the way you describe them. If your response isn’t another over reaction I don’t know what is 🙂

      • P Ray on said:

        Says the woman who types so many lines to a response I took less than 1 minute to come up with.
        U mad?

      • P Ray on said:

        Ohh, what’s really going to bake your noodle later on is,
        Richard’s Rebuttal: “if women didn’t get into relationships with men who hated women:
        ALL domestic violence would be the fault of women.”

      • DC Phil on said:

        Some clarification is in order . . .

        Of course, NAWALT. Rationally speaking, this isn’t the case. We’re not tarring the vast swaths of women out there, around the world in all cultures, as the same. To do so would be ludicrous at best. Making sweeping generalities assumes that one thinks one knows everything, which is impossible.

        On the other hand, the women we’re talking about here on this blog are focused in the Anglosphere (the US, UK, Australia, and New Zealand), where this kind of behavior seems the most focused. Part of this is because of kooky feminism not kept in check over the past few decades, the corrosion of pop culture, the rise of the hookup culture, and protracted adolescence — among other things. I’m old enough to remember when women in the Anglosphere weren’t like what they are today. Back in the day, if these same women acted in the way they do today, they’d have been quickly called immature and few men would have wanted them. Now, they have precious few checks and balances — and we all know what happens when children are given free reign to do as they please.

        EVERYONE, men included, are greedy and manipulative to some extent. How much depends on the person’s personality, character (or lack thereof), upbringing, and the influence of the wider culture. Our complains about (mostly US and UK) women are that they say one thing and they do another. They say they want to be in a relationship, but then expect that the guy is going to pull most, if not all, of the weight. They pine for their wedding, but then find out that marriage takes a lot of work and then sour on the idea as soon as the honeymoon is over. Easy, no-fault divorce means that they have a quick out, and then absolve themselves of responsibility. They really don’t give a shit about guys, but use them.

        On the flip side, yes, there are men out there who really don’t give a shit about women. We here on this blog, I should think, do care about women to a certain degree. However, many of us are flabbergasted, distraught, and frustrated about what passes for “woman” out there anymore. We also don’t really like how dating has become transactional, where we have to sell ourselves constantly, but wind up with very little.

        So, if the women out there continue to be immature and unreasonable, we men bite the bullet and figure that we have to change our tactics in order to get what we want. If we want just sex, then we can either pay a hooker, remain celibate, or find ways to stimulate the primitive brains of these women so that we can get them into bed. If we want LTRs, then we can apply more or less the same attraction tactics with additional tactics, like investing in and working on the relationship so that it continues and flourishes. We have to find women who will meet us halfway here. If we can’t, then we drop her and find someone else. Unfortunately, it seems that there are so few women out there who are willing to meet us halfway.

        Finally, we men are talking among ourselves. As PM, said below, women enter here at their own risk. We don’t take what women say seriously because women aren’t men. Women tend to give bad advice when it comes to dating.

      • I’ll leave you to it. My mistake. I was lured in by what looked like an interesting male perspective on what’s gone wrong in male/female relationships before it veered down the line of simply insulting women because they are women.

      • Interesting, what DC Phil is saying overlaps quite a bit with what I am saying in regards to generalizations. What you consider an insult is really just constructive criticismthat isdelivered in masculine language. DC Phil is less blunt, that’s all.

      • Although you….DC Phil…….you seem like a very interesting bloke! 🙂

    • I’m afraid you’re not clever enough to even ruffle my composure. 🙂

  7. Honest criticism is not hatred. Knowledge (the expression thereof) of negative female characteristics is not hatred. Fi (Fiona) is simply unaccustomed to this and handles it as, well, most women. She gets angry and lashes out with insults. It’s quite predictable. Such anger also allows her rationalization hamster to keep on spinning without the need for sincere introspection oh her part.

    It’s the playground equivalent to “Well, you’re a do-do head!” when a child is confronted with an unpleasant but truthful concept.

    Fi hangs about a blog called “The Plankton” where it’s nothing but a validation echo chamber for women who have mostly given up because they simply don’t understand men and what they offer men.

    The Manosphere is one of the few places where women are not put on a pedestal but evaluated truthfully as human beings. The language here is masculine: blunt, direct, and unpleasant to the uninitiated… as it should be. This is an online men’s club and it continues to grow. Women enter at their own risk.

    • Generalising AGAIN !?!

      • Of course I’m generalizing. Human reproductive behavior is remarkably predictable given consistent inputs. To NOT generalize would be intellectually foolhardy and would ultimately result in epic dating and relationship fail. The rampant and stubborn political correctnessof “we’re all special snowflakes” is a ruinous approach to all this. For the most part, we’re not exceptions, we’re usually the rule. Part of the whole Red Pill experience is to understand painful truths and act accordingly based on those truths, not some pie in the sky ideals. I want men to fulfill their relationship goals, I don’t want to reinforce ridiculous social expectations that will only result in men being frustrated and unhappy. The Manosphere is becoming the perfect vehicle for men to share knowledge and wisdom about women, dating, and relationships. This is not a small place.This collectionof the blogs and websitesis yielding millions of page views and those numbers continue to grow. While the middle-aged crowd of men is mostly unaware of the Manosphere, there is a generation of younger men who have embraced “Game” and Red Pill wisdom. The social landscape is going to be very different, very soon.

      • P Ray on said:

        Fi: If everybody was an exception,
        the word “exception” would not exist.

  8. bmwk1200s on said:

    And as one that is starting to embrace the Red Pill, and getting unplugged, I can attest to game theory and how it ~is~ slowly starting to bear out results: increased interest, phone numbers, facebook emails, ect…The collection of blogs in the Manosphere that inform us readers on how fem-centricism and Blue Pill pervasiveness have contributed to the spousal-bubble (read 50% divorce), and the degradation of male female polarity/power, then the only path and competitive advantage is the Red Pill in 2.0. Keep up the great writing PM, more to build on,

  9. Leftatforty on said:

    I am hen’s teeth… and I am unwillingly single.

      • Leftatforty on said:

        I have PM. I do it everyday. All the time. Finding something nice in a man is not the problem.

      • I love men. I don’t mean I sleep with them. I just mean I love their company. I have a son, and male friends I’ve had for decades, and my brother and his friends I go out with. My film club which is all men. I like their different way of looking at things. Their straightforwardness. The way they say what they mean. The way they put their hand on my back to steer me out of a door. The way they open a door for me. Their kindness and sense of humour and quick wit. I love the way they forgot I’m there and start wittering on about man stuff.

      • Their loyalty to each other. The way they always try to help and fix things.

      • DC Phil on said:

        My female friends report the same problems, which leads me to believe that the men out there are part of the equation. Indeed, the storied “DC douchebag” is alive and well here and they even make ME cringe. I like to think that, certainly on the surface, I don’t fit this mold and come across as more “normal” than the rest. Maybe that’s what I got half matches on my first speed-dating event when I moved here to DC. 🙂

      • Well some of the women on plankton make me embarrassed to be a woman.

      • So, call them out. If they hate men, call ’em bigots. If they’re entitlement queens, tell them so. Frankly, Plankton needs to be able to find the good in men much more than she’s doing.

      • Some of them are totally normal. Of the ones I think aren’t, I don’t think they hate men. If anything, they hate other women who aren’t like them and don’t see the world in the same way. I think they are just bitter and disappointed and lonely and unhappy, and have unrealistic expectations of men and life. I am embarrassed by them because they reinforce the negative stereotype of women – bitchy, jealous, neurotic, needy, highly strung, inconsistent, illogical, irrational etc etc.

      • I think too that a lot of women expect men to be like them, but with a penis. To think, communicate and behave like women and value the same things. So instead of appreciating what men offer as they are, they complain about what they aren’t offering. I’d say to those women go and get that from your women friends.

      • DC Phil on said:

        1. If anything, they hate other women who aren’t like them and don’t see the world in the same way.

        I’ve always found it interesting how it’s usually women who are the most cruel to one another. It starts when they’re little girls and continues well into adulthood, unless there are some civilizing influences at work. Character assassination and ostracism are the two most common (and potent) weapons. Socially savvy women eventually realize that this is toxic and try to avoid it, if possible. Others, wallow in it.

        2. I think too that a lot of women expect men to be like them, but with a penis.

        Some would say that this is the “female imperative” at work. Anything that doesn’t conform to this imperative is suspect. More mildly speaking, those women who are either consciously or subconsciously operating under this imperative maybe tolerate men and like them to some degree, but don’t fully understand men and aren’t interested in understanding them. Doing so would mean giving up that worldview that women are somehow inherently superior to men, and all the advantages that come with that, supported by a compliant social system.

        Where I really feel the most sympathy is for boys growing up with single mothers. Not that I think that all mothers out there are purposely molding their sons to be quasi-women, to fit some imperative, but the mother and the son aren’t the same sex. His mother never grew up a man and has no clue as to what goes on with a boy as he grows into manhood — without the benefit of a strong male presence in his life.

      • Well I brought my son up as a single parent, but as his dad lived a mile down the road he had plenty of involvement. When he was 16 he moved in with his dad permanently and I became the parent he visited rather than lived with. It sounds bonkers but I felt my style of parenting wasn’t appropriate any more – he needed someone to make him take responsibility. Living with his dad actually made him grow up whereas I was too protective of him.

      • DC Phil on said:

        No, that doesn’t sound bonkers at all. It sounds very intelligent. As you said, you realized that, at a certain age, your son needed a male presence to teach him about being a man and taking responsibility because you couldn’t provide it as the mother. You realized the limits of your gender in the parenting dynamic. It’s too bad that there aren’t more women like this out there. In many cases, it’s because the father wasn’t there at all to step in when he was needed (possibly in jail or dead). In other cases, the mother chose to keep the father out, blaming him but, at the same, time, keeping him within earshot to fork over the cash for child support.

    • P Ray on said:

      You didn’t mention a father to your son in the exchanges above: It’s very hard for men to build relationships with women when they already have a “love great enough to have a child with” in their past.
      Plus, if a woman has had plenty of relationships in her past, it becomes harder for her to take any one relationship seriously.
      You might want to try Asia, the manosphere doesn’t seem to have caught up in most people there.
      Of course, if the person you’re seeing happens to be wealthy or politically connected, expect to compete against other women to be his mistress (the “stable family” of Asia among wealthy people is only so because the wife in the relationship knows how much she stands to lose if she goes public about marital infidelity … oh wait, that’s the same thing in the Europe/ the West/South America/Africa too).

      • To paraphrase Jane Austen, I think you’re in error in assuming that it is a truth universally acknowledged that a single woman must be in pursuit of a husband. 😀

      • P Ray on said:

        That’s true. But if you are neither helping other men meet good women or telling other women how to be good,
        and since you can buy companionship in the United Kingdom cheaply (the increase in university fees is surely a blessing towards that circumstance)…
        it’s a mystery why you say meeting men for the old zipless in-out is difficult.

      • I don’t say that. I think you just make things up!

  10. Some Guy on said:

    DC Phil and I seem to be in much the same boat. I’ve been in the DC area for just under three years and am just adjusting to the manly population of women here. Ways in which I have adjusted include picking up multiple younger women in the real world (they are 25-29, I am 37) and mining the 28-35 crowd in online dating, but shutting out the personality types I don’t like- the pushy lawyers, the entitlement princesses, etc.

    What I miss are the European women I knew who respond to a quietly assertive man and make me feel like a man.

    I also miss a good breakfast from them. While I cook better than most women in DC, they aren’t usually “meal worthy ”

    I still have hope that there are truly feminine and grounded women here.

    “My momma told me better shop around”

    • Well I think you both sound lovely. And American women sound scary to be honest. Hard, demanding and plastic. If only I was younger. 🙂

  11. Pingback: Linkage is Good for You: Week of March 11, 2012

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: