The Private Man

Attraction and dating information for the post-divorce crowd

Archive for the category “Relationships”

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.

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!]

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!]

 

The Stayover Relationship

As we get older and have experienced relationships and the sad breakup of relationships and divorce, our approach to new relationships requires a new approach. After a period of living single and living on our own, we become attached to habits and our personal living space. Sharing space with a relatively new person in our lives is fraught with potential perils. A minor change such as adjusting the thermostat can become too easily become a source of ugly conflict in a new living-together situation.

A relationship trend surfaced in the mainstream media back in 2011. It was a realistic response to the problems of living together. It’s called the “stayover relationship”. Here are some links via Google for your enjoyment and further research.

Standard caveat: I normally don’t write about relationships that have transitioned into the exclusive, committed phase. But the stayover needs special consideration. I was going to describe it during my interview with Goldmund but technical difficulties ended the last segment of the interview early. One of my Twitter followers who heard that interview then asked that I describe this type of relationship in more detail.

The media sources I listed in the Google search attributes the stayover relationship to the low-commitment arrangements of the young – 20-somethings wanting to pair up but not cleve to each other through living together or marriage. As my readers know, I usually don’t wallow in the muddy waters of youthful dating and relationships

I am not so short-sided as to eschew all that is the realm of young adulthood. Those wacky millennials might have something good going on if applied to us middle-age gangsters. The youngsters might have a looser type of relationship in mind but their logistical arrangements can apply to an older demographic with a more committed relationship in mind. This stayover relationship can work for the average age of my readers.

The primary reason that the stayover relationship can work for our age is that we don’t have to foist well-ingrained habits on each other. When living together, the minutae of life takes on hugely disproportionately importance. Toilet seat up, toilet down…mail placed in a different place…pay bills immediately or wait until the last minute…dishes wait for cleaning or scrub them up immediately. You get the idea. It all seems so trivial but it’s not for many of us because we become as attached to our habits as we do to another person. Adjusting habits can lead to ugly resentment and the eventual end to the relationship.

The logistics of the stayover relationship are fairly easy. Each person maintains their own respective living space and takes turns staying at the other person’s place. The assumption is that the two are emotionally committed to each other in an exclusive, intimate, and long term relationship.

Sometimes the rationale for living together is to cut costs. This might involve selling previous properties and purchasing a new one, jointly. This simply raises the complication factor for the couple and with complications come conflicts. Image two middle age people trying to compromise on making a major real estate purchase. The alternative to this is for the two to individually downsize on their existing living arrangements so that each can economize on living expenses. Of course, this works best when kids are grown and out of the house.

Another benefit of the stayover relationship is that it allows each person to have very valuable alone time. When you read the last paragraph you’ll understand why alone time is vital. Lest my readers think I’m niave, I know the realities of attraction and dating. The high value man might have a soft harem and the woman is often casting her eye towards a man who could be a bigger better deal. This reality certainly complicates the concept of alone time in the context of the stayover relationship.

There might be a fix to that complication. Some years after my died of cancer (I was 21 at the time), my step-father met and fell in love with a lovely woman named Judy. The two were clearly in a serious relationship and very much committed to each other. By the way, my step-father, despite being short and kind of pudgy, was quite the charismatic playboy before meeting Judy. Rather than get married, they elected to have a “commitment ceremony” to show the world what they meant to each other. In full disclosure, Judy would have lost her lifetime alimony if she had married to my step-father. Also, they bought a place together and moved in. But I think they had the right idea with that committment ceremony.

With age comes many physical and emotional complications. Everyone who reaches a certain point in life has accumulated experiences. Those experiences cannot be erased. If such experiences can’t be resolved in a healthy emotional way, they become into emotional baggage. Here is the reality, everyone has baggage to a certain degree. The stayover relationship can be a way for us to cope with such baggage as best we can while still having a committed relationship.

A Red Flag – Perfectionism

My previous blog post described a woman’s red flag of no emotional impulse control. That particular red flag is relatively obvious and makes a woman easy to pass by. In keeping with the red flag theme, there’s another one for men to be aware of, perfectionism.

There’s a good description of the psychology of perfectionism in Wikipedia. The Wiki entry goes into some detail about concept of perfectionism complete with links to sources. It’s a fairly long entry so I’ve quoted some of the more salient points that relate to dating.

They also tend to dissociate themselves from their flaws or what they believe are flaws (such as negative emotions) and can become hypocritical and hypercritical of others, seeking the illusion of virtue to hide their own vices

I frequently see women in their online dating profiles claim to be perfectionists. These are women to avoid. I’m sure that many of my readers have come across perfectionists in their dating and relationship experiences.

Perfectionism is the behavioral manifestation of being a control freak. Control freaks are miserable people. If a man falls into web of the control freak, he’s going to hate life unless he wants to be bossed around by a dangerously neurotic woman. The woman, in her desire to be a perfect, attempts to control all within her grasp, especially the man in her life

In its pathological form, perfectionism can be damaging. It can take the form of procrastination when used to postpone tasks and self-deprecation when used to excuse poor performance or to seek sympathy and affirmation from other people. In general, maladaptive perfectionists feel constant pressure to meet their high standards, which creates cognitive dissonance when one cannot meet their own expectations. Perfectionism has been associated with numerous other psychological and physiological complications as well.

To make the flag even redder, there’s a relationship between perfectionism and narcissism as observed by researchers. Narcissists are wildly toxic people unfit for dating and intimate relationships

According to Arnold Cooper, narcissism can be considered as a self-perceived form of perfectionism – “an insistence on perfection in the idealized self-object and the limitless power of the grandiose self. These are rooted in traumatic injuries to the grandiose self.”

I’m keenly suspicious of any personality disorder being blamed on “traumatic injuries”, a very nebulous term open to exploitation and rationalization for a having a shitty personality and behaving like crap. The entry goes on.

Narcissists often are pseudo-perfectionists and require being the center of attention and create situations where they will receive attention. This attempt at being perfect is cohesive with the narcissist’s grandiose self-image. If a perceived state of perfection isn’t reached it can lead to guilt, shame, anger or anxiety because he/she believes that he/she will lose the imagined love and admiration from other people if he or she is not perfect.

The take away advice for men is this – when reading online dating profiles and meeting a woman in person for the first time – look for signs of her perfectionism. If in doubt, just ask her. Perfectionism is usually perceived as a positive trait so a woman will proudly state she’s a perfectionist. In actually, however, perfectionism is a serious character flaw. Gentlemen, avoid the perfectionist. That also goes for the guys you know who are perfectionists.

You’re welcome.

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

 

Honest Dating – Repost

[I don’t frequently repost, but this one was worth it. It’s sort of naive considering a woman’s hypergamy but I think central theme needs to be recognized]

My blog-buddy, A.B. Dada, recently tweeted out a link to his Facebook post about “low reward dating”. I’m not a big fan of Facebook so, with his permission, here’s his whole post and link here:

Here’s additional info on his policy regarding anti-copyright (I like it)

A guy trying low reward living in 2014 asked for dating advice in 2015. Guess his TV addicted girl-friend didn’t appreciate him saying no to wasting cash at the bars and foodie crackhouses anymore.

Low reward dating is different. It’s about bonding two people closer together. It isn’t about having fun as much as knitting two disparate threads together without knotting them up or fraying them.

I’ll be writing more about low reward dating throughout 2015, but I told him about a few date ideas:

1. Go to a thrift store together and pick up some cheap musical instruments that you aren’t talented at. It might takes a few thrift stores but you’ll find it. Commit to avoiding the clothing section. Then go home, or to a park, or to a local train station and jam together.

2. Read to her. Toss her cheek on your bare chest on the couch and pick a used book up and read it. Slowly. Use your diaphragm so she takes in the deepest vibrations from your voice.

3. Fishing combined with preparing a meal later from what you’ve caught. Learn how to gather wild greens, too. That’s a full day or weekend planned right there.

I never understood the modern premise of dating. I am going to take my hard earned money and my rare time and take a woman I am attracted to so that she can be wowed by better men than me? Sure, let me take you to a movie to gawk at the ripped actor who spent 16 hour days for 3 months to get in shape. Let me take you to the concert where the more confident guy on drugs is crooning on stage. Let me take you to the bar where the mixologist in a vest and bowtie is going to juggle fancy addictive chemicals for $15 each. Let me take you to a restaurant where an executive chef is slaving others to create an amazing plated experience with rare ingredients you never heard of.

Doesn’t make sense, modern dating. It’s shared consumerism, but it doesn’t make you the winner at the end of the night. You’re just the consumer that is paying with both time and money.

A.B. is spot on. However, I don’t like the term “low reward dating” because the connotations are too negative yet the concept is perfect. Dating must not be about sharing consumerist goals. Fancy dinners, expensive gifts, and weekend trips sets up terrible future expectations and patterns. As A.B. states, dating is a fundamentally a bonding experience. While courtship is part of it, if the relationship goal is to have an satisfying and intimate relationship then it’s best to focus on the bonding element.

I prefer the term “honest dating”. That’s the process where two people get to know each other with shared activities and conversation without all the overhead of consumerism. If either the man or the woman expect such consumerism, neither party can expect real intimacy. Sure, they’ll enjoy some sexy-time and if that’s what they both want, bonus!

Honest dating is a great filter for winnowing out women who are more concerned with security than forming an intimate bond. Men must have a list of inexpensive but interesting date ideas so he can spend time with his date(s) and not be worried about impressing them with cash and prizes. Here’s the bottom line: charisma trumps cash. A trip to the zoo has more opportunities for wooing a dame than any fancy restaurant or gift of a handbag. If she mistakes a handbag, jewelry, or a fancy dinner for intimacy, she can hope the those things gives her intimacy in return.

[If you liked this (re) post, please support me through my Patreon, thanks!]

Request For Questions

Inspired by this Illimitable Men blog post, I am requesting that my readers send me questions about post-divorce attraction and dating or any subject where curiosity lies.

Some questions I will answer publicly (with permission) through a mail bag blog post or privately with an email from me. Please note, I suck at relationship advice. I have some ideas about relationships but I will likely defer to those who have much better advice.

So, shoot me some questions either via email or with a comment below. Hell, I’ll even answer personal questions, within limits. My email information is here.

I look forward to hearing from you.

The Perils Of Technology (Beware The Facebook Zone)

As I peruse the interwebz looking for interesting and relevant content for my blog, I came across a video from a dating coach, Kezia Noble, who speaks to the issue of Facebook in the context of attraction and dating. She’s fundamentally correct about Facebook. This is especially true for the younger crowd, Kezia’s main focus. Mercifully, men over a certain age can plead ignorance regarding much of social media, especially Facebook. “I don’t do Facebook” is perfectly acceptable. Try that if you’re under 35 years old.

Note, I do have a Facebook account but it is not active and I’ve locked it down to friends and family only and I haven’t updated my timeline in almost a year. It could be more but I simply don’t log into Facebook anymore. Facebook is a stinking digital swamp for post-divorce singles unless updating family and close friends. Just for shits and giggles, Google up the term “Facebook divorce“.

Technology is a galaxy-sized mixed blessing when it comes to attraction and dating. The good things are obvious. It starts with online dating, yet another mixed blessing. Regardless, online dating is one way of contacting women. Texting is another good thing regarding efficient communication. Back in the day, we had land lines and answering machines. We also had public pay phones. That wasn’t so efficient but we made do with what we had.

Technology helps us communicate, this much is true. As social creatures, humans need to communicate. A quick text or a Skype video conversation can go a long way to reinforce social and romantic connections. With technology, we are never out of touch with each other, often regardless of geography. This is certainly a method of connection but it’s certainly not perfect.

It’s now time to talk about the cons of technology in the context of attraction and dating. The worst is that technology can be used as a shield. Texts can be ignored. Calls can be ignored. Skype can be ignored. The worst of it applies to online dating. Men send out messages and no responses are received. This is the catalog nature of online dating. It also strongly points to the failure of technology when attempting to connect individuals in hopes of meeting relationship goals.

What’s the ultimate end result of using technology to facilitate communication between the sexes? Scammers. These are the filth of the earth who are exploiting the need for human interaction in the nebulous world of online dating. Scamming can also be more passive. This is where a person merely seeks validation of desirability with no intention of meeting up in real life. Hell, the African scammers are at least direct in their efforts. The validation scammer is far more conniving and dishonest. Technology allows this to happen.

Let’s get back to Facebook. One of the central tenets in the pick up artistry realm is escalation. The man is the first to ask for the phone number. He is the first to declare (not ask!) the date. He is the first to go for the kiss. When a man asks for a phone number and her response is to go to Facebook, it’s a rejection, pure and simple. She’s using technology as an excuse to protect his feelings.

Once pushed into the Facebook moat, a supplicating simp will attempt to scale the castle walls with Facebook messages and updates. I roll my eye at this. It’s a sad place for a man to be. I’ve watched guys do this. In my past, I’ve done this but it was before Facebook and the landscape of social media.

For guys, the de-escalation into social media must be seen as a total rejection. His response must be that she’s done, she’s gone – never to be contacted again. This is how technology can help a man. It can be a means of gauging how much a woman is attracted to him. If she proffers up her Facebook account in lieu of a phone number, there’s simply not enough interest on her part.

For all post-divorce singles, I will re-iterate my advice – keep your online dating efforts in the background. Spend more time with Meetup.com or similar live events where singles actually see each other face to face, as how it must happen. Yes, it can be intimidating, but without guts, there is no glory.

There’s no small irony that I exploit technology ruthlessly to get these messages out. This is the reality on the ground for content creators like myself. Gutenberg was a good start. Data centers and blogging is a great leap forward (that’s a reference to the scumbag Mao) to reach so many more.

[If you liked this blog post, please support my efforts through my Patreon endeavors]

 

The War Between The Sexes

I’ve heard this expression often over the past couple of decades. This is the concept that men and women are involved in some type of conflict over ideology, politics, and interpersonal relationships. There is a lot truth to that. As is patently obvious, men and women are different. Such differences result in conflicts.

Yet, men and women want and need each other. Politics and ideology must be dismissed when it comes to interpersonal relationships ‘twixt the sexes. Such a dismissal would reduce the war between the sexes to something more manageable. Ideology and politics have no business in personal relationships. Social justice warriors (SJWs) keep on trying to insert ideology into personal relationships. That’s a huge source of conflict between the sexes.

I have huge pity for the younger generation that must deal with current ideological expectations vis a vis interpersonal relationships with the opposite sex. It has become very polarized but not one sex against the other. Rather, the sexes – male and female – are divided into separate camps, two groups of men, two groups of women. And such polarization is not age-dependent.

It works something like this… the two groups of men consist of those with confidence and charisma (learned or natural) and those without. One group is noticed by women, the other group is ignored by women. There are ways for women to actually notice those invisible men. But frankly, it’s up to men to be noticed. It can be learned and it can be accomplished. Here’s a good start: www.succeedsocially.com. Being invisible to women is what the majority of men must cope with.

As for women, the two camps are divided as well. One group of women wants to be “strong and independent”, in effect, more masculine. The other camp, the much smaller one, is all about being being feminine. It’s easy to observe the first camp of women, especially from online dating profiles. They describes themselves with masculine words. They also highlight their travels and other achievements that don’t raise her attractiveness to high value men. The feminine women are noticed by men.

Men looking to be more noticeable to women have to watch out for the vicious cycle of lies and misinformation.  This cycle has resulted in something of an psychological arms race where women up their masculinity because they believe (through projection) that men are attracted to masculine women. Guys have to then increase their masculinity even more.

This is an untenable cultural situation. Google up some Maureen Dowd to see how this end game plays out. No one is content except the top-flight Alpha guys who can play the field with a huge age range of women. The high achieving women – in a man’s world – limit more and more of their relationship options as they move up the capitalistic and educational food chain. My dating coach peer, Evan Marc Katz, deals with this constantly. . Another peer, Bobbi Palmer, also copes with this same problem.  Both of these dating coaches have all-female clients: high achieving single women looking to meet their relationship goals.

For guys, the takeaway is this: When doing online dating always look for more feminine profiles. Eschew profiles that use the code-words of bossy and domineering women.  For real life, pay attention to women who make an effort to appear feminine. They may not have perfect figures or faces, but femininity is profoundly alluring and such women almost demand your attention, even if a simple “hello” along with some honest eye contact.

For women, the advice is simple and blunt: Men are not attracted to masculine women. You dames know what to do.

The war between the sexes can easily be reduced to a minor skirmish.

A Most Amazing Comment

[Not too long ago I published one of my blog’s early posts about what men want from women. One of my lurking female readers made an incredible comment that I’m publishing, with her permission, below. I’m not adding any commentary because the comment’s value stands by itself. It’s a very personal comment and I’m tremendously thankful for her input into my blog.

Oh, and she thinks I’m cute.]

I relish this blog. I read the posts and reader comments that truthfully make me wince, but, provide perspective on a topic that is personally relevant for a couple reasons.

The first, is relevance with regards to my future. I am a 46 year old woman who has been married and has grown children. Frankly, I did not manage my marital relationship well as a young woman who married a man who was 30 when I was 19. He treated me well, was an excellent provider and good father. 10 years into the marriage, at 29, I was guilty of having many of the traits echoed within the words I read, here. Despite having recognized it, the damage had been done. Today, I am willing to accept that I will likely never marry, again. Since I am of the opinion that marriage is the domain for establishing a family and home, marrying at this stage in my life or beyond wouldn’t serve any social purpose. Perhaps, it would be offered as a gesture of some other kind, but, even if it were, I would need to consider carefully.

I don’t believe I was fit to marry when I did with what I knew. The role model I had was a woman who embraced the values of pop culture circa 1969-1979. I was a latch-key kid. My mother was the epitome of the disasters of feminism. To an extent, I was a casualty of her example. At some point, information became available and if I was given sufficient intelligence to evaluate this information, then it was my responsibility to determine what I would do with it.
Truth is often not palatable. It is easy enough to rationalize oneself all around it without ever aligning to it. The problem of course is that a person unaligned with the truth is by definition off point. The truth is a straight line that doesn’t deviate. It serves as the ultimate measure of oneself. No wonder it’s not often a welcome visitor.

In any event, by failing in marriage I failed as a mother. That’s simply the truth. My children suffered as a result of my not being competent for marriage and raising a family within it. I cannot go back in time and apply the information I have, today, to what was already done. However, what I can do is raise my voice and tell my daughters what they must know if they expect to successfully marry and raise children of their own. This is an example of some of what I have actually instructed to my daughters:

1. Have and show respect for yourself and for others. Don’t waste anyone’s time, including your own, indulging what is in fact petty and unimportant. Feelings are not facts. Emotions are fluid. They change sometimes for reasons that are unrelated to whatever it is you have assigned them to. Therefore, check yourself before demanding anyone spend time addressing your emotional states. You’re confused when emotional and will only confuse the other person. Get clear on managing your feelings before attempting to introduce facts. Remember, feelings are not facts. Your feeling bad does not make it fact that what you have bad feelings about is bad.
It may or may not be. Feelings are useful as instruments to guide your initial sense of direction towards that discovery but they are only as useful as they are correctly understood.

2. If you want to have a happy marriage to a man you find desireable, you cannot expect from him what you should be finding in your relationships with other women. Your husband is not your best girl friend. If he is, you can expect that eventually the marriage will fail because one day you will think you married someone you no longer desire. This will be your fault. You married a man and then expected him to perform as a woman. What did you expect would happen once the man you once desired for being masculine was emasculated by your demands from him to be more like a woman? Don’t go to the hardware store to buy bread. Whatever it is that is satisfied by your friendships with women needs to remain there. Not in your marriage. Similarly, don’t expect to fulfill the role of being a man’s best buddy. Men need to have relationships with other men and you don’t need to like or understand them. You do need to honor and respect those that are made.

3. Sex is not a weapon. It is not a bargaining device. Sex is not owned by you once you marry because you can refuse it. You better get this straight in your head: during marriage, sex is a mutually owned venture. It feeds the engine of your marriage. If you intend on staying married to a man you desire and who wants to remain married to you, you will be generous when feeding the marriage. Sex is the gift of renewal to a married man. It tells him he is on track. He’s man enough for the job. He can slay tigers and conquer enemies. Refuse a man this and you can expect him to eventually leave where he isn’t appreciated.

4. Men and women desire one another for their differences. Men, generally, are attracted to women because of their femininity. Being feminine is neither a weakness nor a tool for manipulation. To be feminine, simply, is to embrace those unique qualities inherent to being female: soft, relationship conscious, loving & alluring. This isn’t to suggest that men are not loving, alluring, etc.. It is to emphasize that men do not desire (generally, and this is speaking to heterosexual men) what is considered masculine, such as physical strength, competetiveness, solution oriented and territorial. It is counter-productive to compete with a man you are in a committed relationship with. Men compete to win. That means a man is wired to crush his opponent. Avoid being your partner’s opponent.

5. Emotional blackmail, like desperation, is not a good look on anyone. Check your motives. Check your words and behavior. Have integrity. Sometimes, women may resort to verbal weapons because this is perceived as a substitute strength. Most women would be at a physical disadvantage if they managed their disputes with men via fist fights. Men, in general, are simply physically larger and stronger. However, consider this: if the relationship requires your employing weapons to manage it, you may be failing your relationship by being the creator of discord that was avoidable. Just think about it when you find yourself sabotaging your relationship with your words.

Would you rather be right or would you rather be happy? What’s actually important?

I appreciate the forum and thank you for the opportunity to contribute an additional voice.

 

 

Post Navigation

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 3,322 other followers