The Private Man

Attraction and dating information for the post-divorce crowd

Archive for the category “Dating/Online Dating”

Dating Demographics – Who’s In Charge?

[Note: There are many links in the post. Some of those links connect to more articles and essays about this subject. The subsequent reader comments in such articles are many and interesting. This is a swiftly developing rabbit hole but worth exploring and furthering the discussion often and widely.]

There have been some very recent public discussion on the ‘Net and in the mainstream media about the demographics of dating and how the impacts dating and mating behavior between the sexes. The release of the book, Date-onomics, is motivating the discussion. It’s no surprise that Evan Marc Katz, successful dating coach for professional women, published a blog post that has motivated over 180 comments from his readers. Those comments are worth reading because he attracts a thoughtful blog audience.

Other media content has also been produced in the past couple of weeks about Date-onomics including Time, the New York Post, Good Morning America, the Chicago Tribune, Glamour Magazine, Huffington Post, public radio and private radio station interviews with the author, John Birger (his blog). Naturally, the Manosphere has chimed in as well. This book and the subject it raises must be discussed often and everywhere, especially in big cities where the author accurately describes the realities of dating demographics. These realities are even more acute for the post-divorce crowd of singles.

There is a not-so-curious oversight of a key concept in all this coverage of dating demographics and the shortage of college-educated single men. Manosphere and Red Pill observers will immediately see hypergamy as the biggest hurdle that college-educated women face. This word, however, will seldom be used outside of the ‘sphere because such nomenclature acknowledges basic biological behavior that might work against the feminine imperative. The ideology of the human “blank slate” is still too strong for the mainstream media to accept, much less openly question it.

Hypergamy in women is so strong that otherwise intelligent and thoughtful single women will rationalize their inability to find men with whom to meet their relationship goal(s). The rationalizing results in some very predictable female responses to the stark reality of dating demographics and the dating market place:

1. Men are intimidated by my education and career.

2. There’s a man out there for me and I just have to wait and prince charming will show up.

3. I’m happy being single so I refuse to “settle”.

The reason for such strong rationalizing is that hypergamy is hard-wired into a woman’s DNA. Men rightfully raise an enormous hew and cry about women’s dating and relationship choices. We want women to make the first move. We want them to be willing to date or marry “down”. Jon Birger talks about “mixed collar” relationships. This will actually happen but such relationships will be the rare exception.

The mixed-collar relations will receive a huge and massively disproportionate amount of media attention, much like the stay at home dad phenomenon. The reality will be that the majority of women will quietly accept their hypergamous fate by being part of a man’s soft harem or filling their time with enthusiasms or an active social life with other single women. What will not happen is the reduction of a woman’s pickiness. Sorry guys, women would rather be unfulfilled in their relationship goals than accept anything less than they feel they deserve. Their biological need for security – emotional, physical, and financial – prevents the eradication of hypergamy through social expectations. Social expectations simply can’t erase this through facts and shame. Women have too much emotional investment in their perception of their own desirability.

As has been pointed out in many of the dating demographic articles and essays, online dating completely distorts the dating market place for women. The wide “availability” of men doing online dating means that a woman can easily reject a guy because there’s another incoming message from sexually or relationally thirsty guy who’s cranking out the messages. What women ignore, however, is that only the most physically attractive women are getting the online attention. This is especially true for the over-40 female demographic. Women quietly drop out of the online dating marketplace when the men they desire aren’t messaging them or, worse, the messages the women send out to desirable men are simply ignored. It’s easier to stop trying than work on one’s self to be more attractive to men.

There is also a variation in dating demographics based on geography. Jon Birgen points this out in his book. New York City is a terrible place for college-educated, career-focused single women looking for a relationship. That also holds for here in South Florida. In Fort Lauderdale, for every 100 college-educated single men there are 171 college-educated single women. But out West, things are a better for single women. Birgen mentions Silicon Valley as a particular geography where there are more single, college-educated men. But would a woman move there to date nerds? I don’t see it. The lure of Manhattan or Fort Lauderdale is simply too great despite the shortage of suitable men.

With all this attention being focused on dating demographics, this question becomes very important: For college-educated, post-divorce singles, who is in charge of the dating market place, men or women? Demographically speaking for the large metropolitan areas, men are in charge. After all, men are the gatekeepers to commitment. We do the asking and the proposing. However, there is one huge caveat to this, it’s only the most attractive men who call the shots in the post-divorce dating market place. The majority of essentially invisible men aren’t in charge of anything related to dating, they are the leftovers for women, unworthy of even a “hello” and only worth a quick “no way!” when displayed as an online dating profile.

Hypergamy will continue to be the order of day for women and men must deal with it realistically. Hypergamy is the oxygen in the air of the dating market place. It frustrates, depresses, but ultimately motivates women. Without it, women wouldn’t constantly looking for the bigger, better deal in a man. For guys in the top 20% or the ones actively bettering themselves to become part of that 20%, hypergamy keeps women sexually and relationally active. Men must adapt or lose out of the dating and relationship game.

An Online Phenomenon In Search Of A Name

There is a common misperception that women have some sort of magical intuition that grants them some sort of super powers of ESP. According to the stereotype, women can read all sorts of psychic signals that emanate from a man’s mind. This is mostly bullshit. Most men are simply not particularly subtle and send off all sorts of blatantly obvious and easily perceived signals through words and body language. It’s sort of like a person who walks outside, gets soaked in a thunderstorm and makes the genious-like observation that it’s raining.

One of the central tenets of pick-up artistry (PUA) is that a man should maintain a degree of mystery about himself when dealing with the opposite sex. This short-circuits a woman’s “intuition” and makes the man inscrutable and piques her feminine curiosity and attraction to him. Not a lot of men can pull this off. It takes lots of practice along with serious and verbal restraint.

I did say a woman’s intuition is mostly bullshit. However, there is a unique phenomenon that many men have noticed it, have given it a name and described it quite well. I have experienced this phenomenon and have read how other men have also experienced in. It’s the phenomenon of women knowing that a man is attractive only because other women are giving him positive attention.

In a real life (meetspace) situation, this is rather obvious. A man shows up at a social space with a woman – and if she’s attractive – most other notice the man and part of their psyches are drawn towards him. The PUAs call this a form of “preselection”. It’s very effective in motivating women to notice a man. This phenomenon is the very reason that the “wingwoman” concept works well in certain social situations. For some guys, it’s even worth hiring a wingwoman to act as proof of preselection and to provide safe and comfortable social interactions.

But this phenomenon of preselection extends onward, outward, and right into cyberspace. By way of an illustration of this, here is an account I recently read from one of my motorcycle peers:

…today I got three solid hits on PoF [Plenty of Fish online dating website].
Two good and one I was kind of meh about.
The two started texting me at the same time. I had a nice banter going, but after a short time I realized they were asking the same questions at almost the same time.
It got really weird when the both asked how long I had been divorced within a minute of each other.
As luck would have it, the better looking of the two was the most engaged, and volunteered her phone number and hinted that she wanted to meet.
Date is Thursday.
The other likely isn’t far behind if I decide to go there.
Not five min after I had said good night to the second one, the third one started messaging me. About five messages in, she asked for my phone number.

It’s vital to understand that this all happened online. These women weren’t watching our two-wheeled hero interact socially at a live event. Yet, three different women reached out to him via an online dating website at almost the same time. It’s as if they knew magically knew that other women were interested in this fellow regardless if they personally witnessed it. I’ve communicated with numerous guys who have experienced much the same thing. They suddenly get a group of responses from women they’ve sent messages to. Or, they logged in an online dating website and have received two or more messages at roughly the same time. I’ve experienced this as well. It’s preselection in a completely virtual, online plane.

There may be a biological explanation as prosaic as random ovulatory cycles synching up that caused these women to act in a consistent manner. But there is a certain of mysticism to the online nature of this phenomenon. It’s been written about enough times and discussed amongst men doing the online dating thing. The problem lies in that it doesn’t have a clever name. Not long ago I mentioned the term “twigging“. That word perfectly captures a particular type of human behavior in a specific social context. The same type of fitting word or term is required for the online phenomenon described above.

So, I ask my blog readers to come up with a fine term or word. A single word is more appropriate because it’s more easily used. But the word has to be a fitting, clever, and accurate. Submit through the comments, please.

[If you liked this blog post, please support my continued efforts by subscribing through my Patreon or clicking the Donate button at the top of this page. Many thanks.]

 

Video Podcast 5 – A Dating Secret For Women

Yes, I’ve been cranking out the video podcasts recently. This one is aimed right at women. To my guy readers, please share this link (or just the video) to all of your single, female friends who are frustrated with attraction and dating. Many thanks.

The original blog post is here.

[If you liked this video podcast, please support my continued efforts through my Patreon subscription effort. Thanks.

 

Video Podcast 4 – Chivalry

This video podcast is fairly brief at about six minutes, but I get my point across about chivalry. Guys, don’t be chivalrous, be confident.

Bring Chivalry Back

Chivalry Background

[Want to support me? Here’s a way through my Patreon]

 

Guys, Don’t Be A Schmuck

Early in the dating process, when a man and a woman have clear mutual attraction and the possibility of a serious relationship is on the near horizon, women often develop some unpleasant expectations from the man. She starts to feel that the man owes her something, something tangible that costs him money. She calls it generosity . He should call it exploitation.

Guys, here’s the rule – if you’re not also directly enjoying the act of your generosity through her actions, you’re a schmuck, a putz, a nebbish. You’re being exploited in the most venal, selfish way imaginable. I say directly enjoy because her smile and words of gratitude are fleeting and can vanish with a mere thought on her part. Smiles and words are too easy for women. She has to earn, through actions over time, your generosity.

If you don’t expect to directly enjoy your generosity through her actions, she will lose respect for you. You’ve become a beast of burden, only deserving to be figuratively whipped when your generosity again becomes necessary for her. No woman respects a man who is in that position. Her hindbrain is telling her that he’s weak and supplicating, no matter what her words might indicate – actions over words, above all.

When a woman expects generosity, a man must directly communicate his own expectations in return. Here’s the immediate response he must deliver when she mentions his “generosity”: “What will you do for me?” There’s nothing selfish about this. That question is the manifestation of a man standing up for himself. He’s showing some backbone. He’s showing confidence. The woman will likely spew out some feisty words in response but a man must ignore that logorrhea. Instead, he must look to her subsequent actions, they will likely be diametrically opposed to her words.

A woman’s expectation of generosity is also a huge shit test for the man. If he says no, he fails that test. If he says yes, he also fails that test. If he applies serious conditions to that generosity expectation, he passes the test. “Sure, I’ll buy that for you, what are you going to for me?” If her response is that her presence is enough or that she’ll stop dating him if he doesn’t, then the man must gird his loins and cut her adrift because she’s simply too selfish to maintain a relationship beyond casual dating. She perceives herself as a special snowflake princess, the type of woman to avoid.

I am completely aware that the definition of generosity does not imply a reciprocal action from the receiving party. But women demand generosity, a concept that also flies in the face of the that word’s dictionary definition. A man’s generosity must be random and unpredictable. It will mean so much more to her. As well, she’ll likely respond in a reciprocal fashion. And guys, don’t forget that dependability and predictability are not attractive to women, no matter what they might say.

Relationships during the early phase of dating is when the pattern of expectations is formed. If she expects generosity and he delivers it consistently and dependably, he’s a schmuck and she will find someone who has some backbone. You’re welcome.

[If you liked this blog post, support my continued efforts through my Patreon or click the Donate button at the top, left side of this page. Thanks!]

Video Podcast 3 – Request The Date

I give some very solid advice on how guys can get a date with a woman.

This one is fairly long at about 21 minutes. Because I can’t link to certain websites directly from the Youtube (Patreon excepted), the links I mention in the video are in this blog right below the embedded video.

Body language summary from the Roosh V Forum.

[If you liked this video podcast and blog post, please support me through a very cool way of funding content providers like me. It’s called Patreon.]

New Dating Term – “Twigging”

One of my favorite online activities is to find new words and new concepts that apply to attraction and dating. I surf a lot of websites, forums, and blogs. I also closely follow my Twitter feed so I can retweet valuable stuff. I regularly check out a private area in a motorcycle forum. It’s a discussion thread about Red Pill topics, particularly how men and women relate to each other in the context of attraction, dating, and relationships.

The guys in that motorcycle forum are a very clever bunch and their observations are often perceptive and hilarious. One fellow coined a new term that I think is incredibly apropos to the beginning of the dating process ‘twixt a man and a woman. Here’s the relevant quote directly from that forum:

In 2013, I had a gal who I saw a lot, great sex, she wasn’t funny but pleasant to be around, very affectionate. She began “twigging”. Putting stuff of hers in my place to build a nest. I saw it, asked her once, “Why are these slippers here?” She would answer to have them when she was over.

It is said that a woman has a nesting instinct wired into her DNA. I agree with this. The verb “twigging” in this context is absolutely perfect. I’ve experienced it. I’ve talked to many men who’ve experienced it. When a woman starts getting attached and spends more and more time at a guy’s place, that nesting instinct starts to take hold and twigging commences.

Twigging is neither a good thing nor a bad thing. The word simply describes something completely natural in a woman’s behavior. If a man’s relationship goal includes such an attachment, he can happily facilitate a woman’s nesting behavior by offering a bureau drawer for her stuff. However, bathroom issues might get tricky as women have so much bathroom stuff that the laws of physics might get violated. Ever seen a woman’s purse? There’s a rift in the time-space continuum that allows her to put more stuff in there than the purse can actually hold. The same applies to the lotions, potions, and sundry skin and sundry hygiene material required in the bathroom by the double-X chromosome crowd.

For the man whose relationship goal does not include such attachments, twigging is not something to encourage. Even her humble hairbrush is a difficult logistical entanglement when it’s parked in the medicine cabinet or displayed prominently next to the sink. If the guy is dating more than one woman, another woman’s twigging at his place is also about marking her territory. It’s a form of “mate guarding”, whether he likes it or not. The woman is looking to ensure that other woman know that he’s somehow taken, even if she isn’t around.

This mate-guarding situation requires a man be firm and unyielding about nesting and willing to risk the distinct possibility that the woman won’t be paying a visit to his place any more. The classic PUA tactic is to never have a woman at your place. For the middle-age crowd, this is not always doable. A man being firm (hehe) is not a bad thing because it helps him establish a confident frame during the dating process. Such confidence – as is repeated consistently – is something women find attractive.

On a positive note, twigging can be the first part of the stayover relationship and quite healthy if the man and woman agree mutually to such an arrangement. In this scenario, he can leave stuff at her place. For a man, however, this is not nesting in the feminine, it’s a matter of convenience and efficiency.

Twigging can reach some rather impressive heights if allowed or desired. I’ve had a woman completely re-arrange my apartment while I was out for a couple of hours. At the time, I was flattered that she took such an interest in my place. Of course, at the time, I was unaware that she was twigging on a grand scale. As well, any attractive woman who gave me attention at that time in my life was a woman to whom I became instantly smitten. Yes, I didn’t know crap about women or myself back then, about 10 years ago.

From that very same motorcycle forum comes this hilarious anecdote that illustrates just how far twigging can go:

I came home one day to find my NOT-live-in girlfriend redecorating MY home.
“Ah…Roberta…Don’t DO That.”
“What?”
“Look, I can appreciate you wanting to ‘Play House’ but hot glue-gunning pretty stones to the light switch covers and such just doesn’t work for me.”

Do note that I did Tweet a variation of this tale but the full quote from that forum fleshes things out better. The overall point is that finding a term to accurately and cleverly describe consistent human behavior vis-a-vis how women behave is an efficient use of our language. It’s my hope that “twigging” enters the common attraction and dating vernacular.

I don’t mind you coming over every now and then, but please don’t be twigging.

[If you liked this blog post, please support me through my Patreon. It’s a way to keep me seriously motivated to keep writing and making video podcasts through a paid subscription model. Thanks!]

 

Alphabet Soup, Volume 1

Years ago I had a satirical website, Upchuck.com, about the city of Charleston, SC. I lived there on two separate occasions back in the ’90s and the second time around my ex-wife and I actually owned a home in the downtown area. The website was vaguely similar to The Onion in that I wrote amusing “news” stories about the stereotypical goings on in that wee historical city.

The website was quite popular and when the news media tracked me down I was interviewed and put on the front page (below the fold) of the Sunday Post and Courier, the local daily newspaper. The satire I wrote was also republished in the local free weekly, The City Paper. Three or four times, I used the “alphabet soup” format which I’m using for this blog post.

The format here you’ll see immediately. I don’t remember where I got the idea although I’m positive I copied it from another source. As I’ve been blogging quite a bit recently, I think it’s time I lightened up just a bit to get a break from all the serious stuff I’ve been scribbling this past week or so. You’ll recognize some words and concepts in this Alphabet Soup format, the Red Pill attraction and dating version.

Adrift – Where too many post-divorce men find themselves when they re-enter the dating world.

Bad Boy – Women still love this type of man regardless of age. See “Edge”.

Consistent – Too much of this is actually makes a man look dull and boring. Mix it up, guys.

Dating – It can actually be fun if you don’t take it too seriously.

Edge – This is a type of independent confidence that women find very attractive in a man.

Far – Even with Skype and other technologies, the long distance relationship is not realistic.

Gorecki – Take a date to a classical music concert. You’ll impress her and she has to dress up.

Handy – Not that kind of handy. A man should be good with tools and fixing stuff.

I – A pronoun to avoid during a conversation on a date. This goes especially for women.

Jump – Guys, if she asks, don’t. That’s for weak, obsequious doormats

Knowledge – There’s so much truthful dating advice in the Manosphere there’s no reason to be willfully ignorant.

Love – It gets qualitatively different as we get older and wiser.

Manipulative – We all have it in us. Keep it to a dull roar because men should be direct.

Organize – What to do if you’re doing a lot of dating with different women.

Politics – I don’t talk about such things nor should you on a date.

Qualify – Just because she’s got ladyparts doesn’t automatically make her a potential date.

Respect – Only give it to her if she’s earned it.

Sex – Why yes, adults do this. Giggity.

Tomassi – Are you reading Rollo? You should.

Uxorious – Guys, know this word. Don’t be like this.

Vivaldi – He didn’t compose 1500 concerti. He composed the same concerto 1500 times.

Wall – With age comes this phenomenon, for men and women alike. It’s easier for men to deal with it.

Xylophone – A man knowing how to play a musical instrument is a good thing.

Youtube – Yeah, I’m doing that. Check out this one. More to come.

Zundapp – German motorcycles are cool. Every man should learn to ride a motorcycle.

I’ll be using this format frofm time to time just to keep things interesting. If my commenters want to chime in with their own lists, I look forward to it.

[If you liked this blog post, support me through my Patreon. Gracias!]

 

Video Podcast 2 – The Five Noble Rules of Attraction & Dating

I’ve written about the Five Noble Rules of Attraction & Dating before. In that blog post, I simply listed them out and let the readers fill in any blanks with their own thoughts. In this video podcast, I’ve filled in some of those blanks with additional commentary. The video runs about 10 minutes and does stand alone as just audio.

Please note that I made two verbal mistakes in the video that I must address. I twice used the phrase “social contract” when I meant to say “social construct”. It’s a vital distinction. I stuck a couple of speech bubbles in the video for a correction but if you’re only listening to the audio portion, you won’t see those annotations. I hope you enjoy the podcast.

In the future, I will be shooting video from different locations to make things more interesting. If you have suggestions for upcoming video podcasts, please indicate in the comments.

[If you liked this video podcast, please support my efforts through my Patreon. Many thanks.]

 

 

 

 

 

A Woman’s Red Pill Online Dating Profile

This woman’s online dating profile is real. She and I have corresponded in the past and she recently sent me a link to her blog where she copied her profile. Here it is in all its amazing glory. In a subsequent email, she has indicated that this profile is indeed on a real online dating website, Plenty of Fish. Do note that I’ve blogged about her previously.

It’s very clear that this woman reads Red Pill attraction and dating blogs and has incorporated that advice into her online dating profile. As for the response, she indicated the numbers which are found below the quoted profile along with some additional comments from me. Note: I’ve added a few comments to her profile in [brackets].

1. Do you like to eat? If you do, I like to cook, and I like to cook what you like to eat, not what I think you should eat. I’ll even cook fish, even though I don’t (nor ever have) eaten seafood. Of any kind. [Damn, she cooks.]

2. Do you have tools? If you have tools, I won’t let them get rusty. If you have rusty tools, they won’t stay that way. Why? Because I restore tools as a hobby. Don’t worry, I won’t be taking or moving them anywhere. I have my own!

3. Do you enjoy listening to women talk your ear off about nothing that interests you? Or, worse, about things that confuse or frustrate you? I don’t either. I have never been a chatty person who talks just to fill up silent spaces. I like silent spaces. There is nothing awkward about silence, in my opinion.

4. Do you enjoy cleaning? If you don’t, that is great because I enjoy it and, frankly, I am not sure what I think of men who are compulsively neat. If you are more fastidiously clean than I am, we are probably not a great match. [I’ve always been suspicious of guys who are neat freaks]

5. Do you have an ego? Meaning, has anyone ever described you as an a**h*le? I hope so, because I believe men have egos for a good reason and I like to feed them. Well. If you have never been an a**h*le, again, we probably aren’t a great match. Men are either valiant or violent [Ed. – this is simplistic and I’m not on board with it]. If you have not been with a woman, lately, who appreciates the things about you that are “male”, you will simply love me.

6. Do you like having intelligent discussions about interesting topics? I do, too. How about a sense of humor? If you like to laugh, you’ll like me. If you like to make me laugh, too, we might be quick friends.

7. Do you like to enjoy your hard-earned money? You should. Your wallet is safe around me. I have never expected anyone to support me financially. I work hard, too. I understand.

So, what’s the catch? Well, I am a woman in her 40’s, so, I don’t bring the same appeal as a young woman does. I am also divorced and have children. My children are adults and self-supporting, however. I am hardly perfect. I am not a 10, but, I would be a solid 7 on even my worst days. As for age, I have acquired wisdom that saves us both the aggravation of navigating my changing moodscape. I know that feelings aren’t facts. The worst you’ll experience is my taking time alone to process my emotions before I discuss anything that requires a rational contribution on my part.

As far as appearance, my rule is simple, my dress size should be about the same as my shoe size. I wear an 8.5 shoe, by the way. I keep my hair long. It’s blonde. My eyes are blue. I am 5’6? and I have no hang ups about men’s height. If you are anywhere between 5’4 and 8’11, we’ll be ok.

What am I attracted to? I am open-minded. I suppose I find open minds attractive, as well. I don’t tolerate physical violence and I promise I am not inclined to do those things that push a man to respond with violence. We both know the type.

To be fair, and realistic, I am a woman. By nature, You and I are different in many ways [Men and women are different, duh]. I will honor and respect those differences and can only ask that you do, too.

In subsequent correspondence, the profile writer wrote that she had over 625 total responses since posting the profile back in May of this year. Given the words in her profile, I am not surprised. Here is a woman who is willing – based on her words – to actually respect a man’s needs in the context of dating. Of course it helps that she’s blonde and attractive. Some will argue that her appearance is the only reason she gets so much online attention. But given the excellent written content of the profile, I argue that the photos are only a part of the motivation for so many guys to respond to her.

Just yesterday (08/16/2015), here is the response breakdown in her own words:

Since yesterday morning, 126 men on the site indicated they wanted to meet me using the “meet me” feature on the site (a slideshow of profile pictures and profile headline) And, 90 men viewed my profile, directly. and 6 men ‘favorited’ my profile.

So…

Of the 126 indicating they wanted to meet me through PoF’s “meet me” feature, some or all 90 of these men clicked through to view my profile, directly. Some apparently decided they would meet me based on the photo and headline shown.

Of those 90 direct profile views, 11 resulted in a message, 6 resulted in my profile being marked as a ‘favorite’.

This response rate in just one day clearly shows that men are starved for a woman who understands what they want. If women doing online dating understood this, they wouldn’t be single very long. But instead, the message women receive is that they should make demands of men; insist that men cowtow to the feminine imperative. So few profiles written by women actually state what they offer a man. It seems some sort of contemporary shibboleth for a woman to explicitly state what she offers a man that he actually desires in a woman.

As an aside, here’s my standard online dating advice for guys. Don’t use the one button shortcuts or the “favorite” function. Send the message as soon as the profile is displayed and the woman looks appealing. The message should be short but customized for each profile. There’s more online dating advice for men here.

There are posts that I wish more women would read. This is one of those posts.

[If you liked this blog post, please support my efforts through my Patreon. Thanks!]

Post Navigation

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 3,322 other followers