You're viewing a single thread.
This is why men like men-only spaces.
And why "just find a group hobby to meet a girl" is such bullshit advice. I worry about making women feel uncomfortable when they're just out living their lives so the only place I have to actually reach out to anyone are the absolute atrocious hellholes that are online dating sites...
It's not exactly bullshit advice, it's just advice that is used in a bullshit way. The advice can work when you don't throw yourself at a potential SO and just treat them like a normal person and don't force it.
I've met multiple partners through groups like that, and it always started out as treating them like a real person, making a real friend connection, and then letting the relationship grow on its own. I've also watched dudes flame out trying to make a relationship out of nothing and wonder why girls get creeped out when no isn't accepted. I'd also be lying if I said I've never been that guy, but thankfully I got better and saw the error of my ways.
There's also another side to this where you're too passive. Since girls, and especially more introverted girls, will expect the man to be the driving force of the relationship, if you don't express interest and eventually shoot your shot, then even if she was interested in you she will just move on to someone else.
So you really have to be in touch with social queues in order to strike a balance between too pushy and too passive, which for groups that massively overprepresent the autistic and otherwise socially awkward is asking a lot.
Yup, been there done that. I’ve just resigned to the fact that the whole social cues thing is too much for my brain and I’ll just stick to the hobby and be friends with them unless I get really lucky and get to know a girl that’s simultaneously interested in me and willing to make the first move.
100%. It's funny you mention that, as that was the situation with my first partner/wife. We ended up being close friends for a few years and I didn't take my shot because I didn't want to ruin the relationship, but thankfully one of her friends pushed the two of us together and we've been happily married for years.
My situation is also funny because I did a similar thing with my 2nd partner/our girlfriend. Though thankfully she was confident enough to make the first move, I wasn't going to risk the friendship even though I knew we were all poly. But in either case, it was always friends first, then light flirting that only increases as it was reciprocated.
Ultimately, our system has evolved over millions of years and our culture builds on top of the basic instincts. Optimal sexual strategy for humanity has long been that men push as hard as fuck even if it means a lot of us don’t make it. We can do this because male sperm is cheap and plentiful.
So civilization has adopted cultural standards that are extremely harsh on men to the point of destroying some of us. To make an analogy, our culture has a grading curve for men that is designed to fail 60% of us.
This is called “male disposability” and while MRAs take it as a grievance, it’s really just a fact of the world. It’s right up there with childbirth and externally-kickable balls as one of the facts of life.
Why am I talking about culture being a gauntlet in this way? Because men often complain about how our cultural rules not making it possible to mate without breaking any of the rules. Like in this thread: “I’m damned if I make a move on her because then I’m a creep, and I’m damned if I don’t because women expect men to take the initiative. So what the fuck?”
Well, culture isn’t a video game that’s balanced to ensure players have a way to win. That’s what I’m saying. Culture is a game, a game that evolved to win wars against nature and other human settlements. And it is a game that’s been balanced.
Unfortunately for those who cut their teeth on video games, culture is not balanced to be playable. It’s balanced to eliminate 60% of the players.
And one of the ways that extremely difficult “weed-out” mechanic works is that a man who plays by all the rules he is given, loses. If he does everything he is told to do, he loses the game. That is by design. Probably because some great unconscious information processing mechanism that selects our rules to win wars and survive into the future, knows that men who are perfectly obedient are poison to the group’s long-term survival.
Basically what the whole interface is telling you, is that what we need you to be is capable of doing the right thing based on your own judgment, not based on minimizing the degree to which you get in trouble or get chastised by people.
So we’ve made a game you can’t win, unless you’re willing to stop trying to stay out of trouble. Because if that’s all you’ve got — following orders and avoiding conflict — the next generation doesn’t need your genes.
Fascinating perspective, well expressed.
One thing I would clarify is that there are still many different cultures in existence. Although most cultures are converging due to the global economic hegemony enforced by the US, they still maintain highly significant differences.
For instance, in many Muslim countries, your argument wouldn't apply as much for a wide variety of reasons, including the prevalence of arranged marriages.
Furthermore, each generation actively produces its own culture and it can sometimes change rapidly due to changing environments. I agree with you that culture is built around human biology and in some ways remains similar across all human communities regardless of time or location. However, within that general framework, the possibilities are almost infinite, as we can see just by observing history.
So, in this specific context, I would argue that while it's essentially inevitable that men will take on the more dangerous and difficult roles in any given culture, the actual manifestation of that tendency can come in many different forms. Western society manifests the male disposability phenomenon in a particularly harsh manner, in my personal opinion.
I think that many other cultural lineages may have traditionally held less demanding/dangerous expectations of masculinity. A relevant factor is that all Western nations have military traditions going back millennia, whereas many other regions of the planet do not share such an extensive history of warfare. All Western cultures essentially trace their roots back to the Roman Empire, in which basic mechanics of the male gauntlet which you speak of had already been firmly established.
Doubt this would work if the individual is not attractive.
Depends on your standards of 'attractiveness' and that of the people you associate with. I don't consider myself that attractive, but I've had multiple women make the first move on me after treating them like normal people and getting to know them as friends. That sort of behavior has its benefits :)
But I might be a special case, in that my proclivities mean I hang out in circles where women know they can feel safe to make moves without dudes being dudebros or have any expectation of 'the implication' being in play.
Men’s attractiveness is not very reliant on looks. Men are attractive to women mostly when they are successful and prosocial. So by getting out and improving his social skills, a man changes his own level of attractiveness.
Even the texture of the body changes with social status. Your postures get more attractive. Your body fills with the hormones that make your every action sexier. Heck, women find muscles attractive.
A man’s level of attractiveness is basically malleable. Any man who’s thinking of himself as “ugly” is just giving himself cover to give up on improving himself.
That's the thing - You say that like being prosocial is malleable property, but imo it is even more difficult to change than appearance.
A man’s level of attractiveness is basically malleable. Any man who’s thinking of himself as “ugly” is just giving himself cover to give up on improving himself.
Sad you're getting downvoted for saying the truth, but I've met plenty of dudes who can't wrap their heads around this. But as a dude who is pretty far from 'conventional attractiveness', you're 100% right.
I had similar feelings about myself in my teenage years, and it led to me doing all kinds of behaviors that self-sabotaged any interest women had in me (and led to a really toxic relationship in high school). But "surprisingly", after I gave up on the stereotypical proto-dudebro/PUA behavior and focused on myself, I ended up making a few really cool female friends and that's literally why I have a wife lol. Improving myself mentally (I was fat af at that time) led to finding a LTR before I did any work to get to a reasonable weight. After shedding that weight, I've since had multiple relationships that were started by the woman instead of me. Hell, our current girlfriend made the first moves for our relationship too lol.
Men have to make relationships happen. If they do not directly and obviously show interest and intent on pursuing a person they're interested in, they will never have any sort of relationships. Ever.
lol
Out of the 5 relationships I've been in maybe two were ones that I initiated, and I don't even consider myself to be that attractive. I've just had much better luck being a real person that someone wanted to like and letting things naturally develop than I ever did with that kind of behavior. In fact, some of the most cringey behavior of mine that I can remember is me directly and obviously showing interest in women who (looking back) clearly had no interest in me.
I think you're allowed to flirt within your hobbies, but only if it's reciprocal
but before it can be reciprocated, you need to flirt.
so you're never allowed to flirt, because you can't flirt until you've been flirted back. And they can't flirt until they've been flirted at.
Catch 22.
I mean that’s the whole point of flirting. You establish a rapport and read the social cues to see if there’s reciprocation. Smiles, eye contact, etc. The problem of course, is misreading.
but HonoraryManacian said it's only allowed if it's reciprocated.
it's not allowed because it can't be reciprocated until after you do it.
I mean there’s a large category of conversation that can lead to further flirtation without being considered initial flirtation. That’s the whole point, escalating socially acceptable requests.
I think that's the biggest things several people keep missing. It isn't that flirting is forbidden. Flirting should be worked up to, and should be stopped immediately if the other person isn't interested.
Just like racing, if you try to gun it right off the line you're most likely just gonna lose traction and smoke your tires out. You gotta ease onto the throttle and ease off it if you start losing control.
I don't like racing so no idea why I chose that analogy.
you should tell HM, not the guy making fun of him.
There is nowhere that those people want you to meet people. They just want your (valid ) grievances with how much dating is shit to get out of their sight.
Find a hobby used to be 'get out of the damned house and be sociable, you will find not being weird makes you more likely to socialise with women and gain dates." Even the neckbeardiest of nerds would find it worked.
Then the 4-chan twats broke containement.
So it’s bullshit advice because you see yourself as so toxic that your meeting a girl, or going to social spaces to meet a girl, is somehow violating her ability to live her own life?
I think maybe the bullshit advice is from whoever told you to see yourself as a villainous monster whose desire to find a mate is a source of social toxicity.
You’re a human being, with the same right to be here as everyone else. It is not inherently violent for you to meet or even seek to meet sexual partners.
Ok, I hear you on that, but.....
It doesn't really fix the problem, does it? Sure, the guys don't end up distracted by someone with female physical characteristics, but when they interact with those people later, they're still socially inept, creepy guys.
Which isn't to mention it basically excludes any women from participating, which isn't very fair to the women who would appreciate the opportunity to join, limiting their options for positive interactions.
It can also reinforce the negative behavior, since they're probably forced into those spaces because any space that isn't men-only, they've made so awkward and uncomfortable for the women that they've been asked to leave. So a nontrivial number of these problematic people are going to be funneled into men-only types of spaces, and they'll play off of eachother incel opinions, producing a confirmation bias that's hard to dispel.
Don't get me wrong here, I'm a guy, and I was the creepy dude in my younger years. I tried to be more subtle about it, but I recognize a lot of the incel opinions as opinions I once had or at least considered. I broke out of it through having some rather strong female friends who very bluntly told me when something wasn't okay. After a while of that, I realized that if you look past gender, and just treat everyone basically the same in all circumstances and don't be a fucking incel, then you can actually develop friendships with people regardless of their gender, and, as I discovered, once you're friendly with someone who you find attractive who also is fond of you, it can turn into more than just friendship. Once I put these pieces together, my entire life improved.
By essentially labeling them as a problem and putting them into their own little echo chamber, it will likely make the problem worse, not better.
I mean, social ineptitude might not be something that can be rectified.
Maybe in some, but it can. Source: was incel neckbeard in college. Was rehabilitated.
The problem is like with any person and their flaws, they have to actually be convinced it's a flaw, and then they have to actually want to fix it, which getting there is usually the hard part.
Ah, sorry. I should stop assuming one is (semi-) autistic alike mine. For me, the autism has been main barrier for fluidic communications.
Permanently Deleted
The post is from a women’s perspective about men and the way they can make a woman feel.