Leading the Way in Romance

[Eiuol]

The thing about dating sites is the demographic. Plus there are more random creeps out of nowhere, which Bluecherry already precluded. There are also significantly more males than females. So, I wouldn't say this is an accurate or even relevant comparison when our focus is just romance in general. Now, I do think females in general are pursued a lot more often than are the pursuer, but I'd attribute that to social norms, not based on any aspect of female/male nature. I think you would be less likely to notice any particular norm of highly intelligent people (just a personal observation) anyway.

Usually it works rather poorly when women pursue men, but I do wish you the best of luck.

Why does it work rather poorly?

How would you by, say, dating in public places, discover that he's jealous?

Observation of behavior, rather than manipulation.

On the other hand, a man must extrospect and acquire conceptual knowledge, if he is to make sense out of the male-female dynamic. (If he doesn't, he will become the proverbial "clueless" guy that so many women complain about.)

How do you know this is true? Why a dichotomy? This is not true for me really. Everyone needs some amount of introspection and some amount of extrospection for dealing with interpersonal relationships of any kind. For me at least, I lean more towards the introspection end, and that does me more good. Similarly, some women may lean to the extrospection end. Neglecting either is bound to have some negative consequences.

Edited November 7, 2012 by Eiuol

[bluecherry]

"What kind of men are we talking about then, exactly? Because if we're talking about only the men you might find desirable that could narrow the list down significantly."

No, I'm talking about any men in general and with any women in general sans famous people. I already mentioned dating sites though as up there with bars for getting quick responses from men with little serious consideration based on little more than just hitting on anything with boobs and which almost never go anywhere rendering them pretty meaningless wastes of a whole few minutes of time.

"Usually it works rather poorly when women pursue men, but I do wish you the best of luck."

Actually, that's gone really well for me. :3 I don't often find people I'm interested in to pursue in the first place, but when I have it has been highly successful.

"How would you by, say, dating in public places, discover that he's jealous?"

See what happens when and if a situation comes up on its own. Either you find out eventually that way or it is moot. I don't expect there to be a pressing need to find out ASAP since I don't think the vast majority of people have many serious offers to consider, but if they did that would just mean a situation would naturally arise quickly where you would find out anyway.

"I've spent a few years studying all sorts of material on this stuff, observing and... um, I guess you could say practicing. I've participated in communities, exchanging experiences with others and I've met a few guys who make a living out of teaching men to attract women."

Geeze, I hope that doesn't mean that "pick up artist" junk. XD

"You are reading the examples in an a narrow and concrete bound way."

My point in response to your example is that what the guy did may still not make him attractive, which is generalizable to that any case of just standing your ground and avoiding conflict can not only fail to make you more attractive, it can make you less attractive when you don't see eye to eye with somebody. You don't want to change yourself to fit what somebody else wants so no problem if you quickly find out your personalities don't mesh, but some cases, such as refusing to talk to a woman about something because you've figured it's just a test to try to bait you into an argument, that can back fire hugely if you are wrong and she really does give a damn about the topic.

[Alfa]

"What kind of men are we talking about then, exactly? Because if we're talking about only the men you might find desirable that could narrow the list down significantly."

No, I'm talking about any men in general and with any women in general sans famous people. I already mentioned dating sites though as up there with bars for getting quick responses from men with little serious consideration based on little more than just hitting on anything with boobs and which almost never go anywhere rendering them pretty meaningless wastes of a whole few minutes of time.

Datings sites and bars are two of the most common places where people meet, both for short and long term relationships. And just because women may not like most of the guys doesn't mean they don't have many more suitors.

"Usually it works rather poorly when women pursue men, but I do wish you the best of luck."

Actually, that's gone really well for me. :3 I don't often find people I'm interested in to pursue in the first place, but when I have it has been highly successful.

Good for you.

"How would you by, say, dating in public places, discover that he's jealous?"

See what happens when and if a situation comes up on its own. Either you find out eventually that way or it is moot. I don't expect there to be a pressing need to find out ASAP since I don't think the vast majority of people have many serious offers to consider, but if they did that would just mean a situation would naturally arise quickly where you would find out anyway.

I gave a simple concrete example of how to quickly screen for jealous tendencies. Please give an example of a situation where it would happen naturally. The best I can come up with, early on, is if someone else hits on you. Which may happen, but most guys wouldn't hit on a girl who looks to be out on a date.

"I've spent a few years studying all sorts of material on this stuff, observing and... um, I guess you could say practicing. I've participated in communities, exchanging experiences with others and I've met a few guys who make a living out of teaching men to attract women."

Geeze, I hope that doesn't mean that "pick up artist" junk. XD

I mean that among other things.

"You are reading the examples in an a narrow and concrete bound way."

My point in response to your example is that what the guy did may still not make him attractive, which is generalizable to that any case of just standing your ground and avoiding conflict can not only fail to make you more attractive, it can make you less attractive when you don't see eye to eye with somebody. You don't want to change yourself to fit what somebody else wants so no problem if you quickly find out your personalities don't mesh, but some cases, such as refusing to talk to a woman about something because you've figured it's just a test to try to bait you into an argument, that can back fire hugely if you are wrong and she really does give a damn about the topic.

And my point is that when a guy demonstrates confidence, self-esteem, honesty, integrity and so on, women will find him attractive. Not all women all of the time, but in general. Testing is a way to screen for such character traits, and when a guy demonstrates them there's a sexual response.

[Alfa]

The thing about dating sites is the demographic. Plus there are more random creeps out of nowhere, which Bluecherry already precluded. There are also significantly more males than females. So, I wouldn't say this is an accurate or even relevant comparison when our focus is just romance in general. Now, I do think females in general are pursued a lot more often than are the pursuer, but I'd attribute that to social norms, not based on any aspect of female/male nature. I think you would be less likely to notice any particular norm of highly intelligent people (just a personal observation) anyway.

What demographic? There are all kinds of people on dating sites. Simple googling showed that 51% of the visitors on match.com are female.

There are metaphysical differences here. Men are stronger and it's highly unlikely for anything to happen without their consent(note: i'm talking morally or legally here, those are different concerns). Women are powerless when pursuing a man. There's nothing they can do unless he wants to, and if anything happens it's hard to tell wether it's from convencience or desire.

On the other hand, talk to women about being pursued and it's a different story. Being pursued by a strong man makes them feel more powerful, beautiful and desired.

This is not to say that men somehow dislike being pursued. However, that's more typically about convenience and an ego-boost. For someone who know how to pursue women it matters very little. A man with high self-esteem who feels strong and attractive, would rather look at the woman who's the hardest to win.

Why does it work rather poorly?

Because alot of men respond out of convencience rather than desire. You may get men hoping for an easy lay, or men who get strung along hoping to get laid at all. Either way, it tends to work out rather poorly.

Observation of behavior, rather than manipulation.

So, here's a straight question for you: Are you gay?

No, you don't have to answer that. Just consider different responses to it. Agressive? Defensive? Indifferent?

How about OBSERVING the response? How is it MANIPULATIVE to ask that question?

Edited November 10, 2012 by Alfa

[bluecherry]

"And just because women may not like most of the guys doesn't mean they don't have many more suitors."

I didn't say that women don't have more, even many more. I'm pretty sure I agreed that this is often the case. Having much more proportionately though isn't the same as having just flat out a lot. I also wasn't disqualifying anybody on the basis of simply not being liked. You brought up having lots of suitors as a reason for women to do these "tests" as a way to try to sort through the many suitors in a timely fashion. My response has been that the numbers are not that hard to handle for women typically. Bars and dating sites I threw out because though the volume may be higher there these people typically very quickly find ways of getting themselves disqualified even before any "test" could be administered thus rendering these situations moot to the discussion even if we did agree to consider these cases as actual suitors anyway.

"I gave a simple concrete example of how to quickly screen for jealous tendencies. Please give an example of a situation where it would happen naturally."

If a woman has any male friends, especially if they are 1) not homosexual 2) not already in a relationship with somebody else 3) bonus points if they are an ex, then this would probably address the topic. Similar applies for pretty much any other males in her life that she doesn't hate and that aren't old as dirt. Presumably at some point you'd wind up talking about past relationships too. If these sorts of things don't bring up problems, what else would there be for jealousy to cause problems with? This stuff wouldn't take long to come around and if it really did take a long time for this sort of topic to arise then I'd guess it must be a pretty moot issue to your life anyway.

"And my point is that when a guy demonstrates confidence, self-esteem, honesty, integrity and so on, women will find him attractive. Not all women all of the time, but in general."

I'm not intending to object to the contents of that statement. I don't see how the situations Kevin listed in his first post demonstrate these things. Also, wouldn't these same features be attractive in females? They are all virtues that apply to humans in general and moral character is one large factor in attraction. I could certainly understand a sexual response to seeing good moral characteristics in a person, but the kinds of things in Kevin's first post I don't see getting sexual responses from women typically due to there being a lack of connection between these kinds of virtuous and doing what he recomends in response to these things he says females do.

"Men are stronger and it's highly unlikely for anything to happen without their consent"

Men are just as easily slipped drugs as women are though. Not particularly important to the discussion though.

"Being pursued by a strong man makes them feel more powerful, beautiful and desired."

Uh, this hasn't been my experience. Physical strength, if that is what you mean, is at best moot and at worst makes me uncomfortable because it sets off warning bells in my head that somebody may be dangerous. If you mean strength of character though, that's nice, but still doesn't give any sense of additional power to me. Desired though kind of gets a boost regardless of what kind of person is doing the pursuing since, well, desire is desire no matter who does it. Not to say there isn't a preference for being desired by good people, just that it is for different reasons. As for beautiful, the impact on one's assessment of their own looks may vary depending on what kind of people do or do not want you I'd be willing to bet, just try to keep in mind it isn't so for everybody and that doesn't answer what the source of this change in assessment is and if it is a good thing or not.

"convienience and an ego-boost"

That actually sounds a lot more like how I would see being pursued generally. Flattering at least somewhat generally and, if one is attracted to the other person too, it means less work and uncertainty in developing a relationship with them.

[Eiuol]

What demographic? There are all kinds of people on dating sites. Simple googling showed that 51% of the visitors on match.com are female.

I'll disregard that number since you don't provide the link, and visitors is not a meaningful measure. What counts would be profile count. Also, free sites would be the most comparable to a bar - match.com isn't free. All I mean to say is that you are making generalizations applicable to specific contexts that don't apply to other contexts.

Men are stronger and it's highly unlikely for anything to happen without their consent(note: i'm talking morally or legally here, those are different concerns). Women are powerless when pursuing a man. There's nothing they can do unless he wants to, and if anything happens it's hard to tell wether it's from convencience or desire.

Powerless to do what...? This is only relevant for physical force. You may as well say "Men are powerless when pursuing a woman. There's nothing they can do unless she wants to." I sure hope so. The only way to get someone to do something they don't want to do is physical force, which isn't romance at all.

How about OBSERVING the response? How is it MANIPULATIVE to ask that question?

I have no idea what you're talking about.

[Alfa]

I'll disregard that number since you don't provide the link, and visitors is not a meaningful measure. What counts would be profile count. Also, free sites would be the most comparable to a bar - match.com isn't free. All I mean to say is that you are making generalizations applicable to specific contexts that don't apply to other contexts.

You can google "match.com demographics". Here's a link with slightly different statistics, but it's got more sites as well:

http://www.webpersonalsonline.com/demographics_online_dating.html

Bars might be free, but nightclubs aren't. Atleast not where I live.

I'm not trying to compare bars, nightclubs and dating sites. Those are just a few of the most common ways to meet a partner. School and work are also up there at the top of the list. What they all have in common is that the women are being pursued, and men pursue. It's also common that women get plenty of attention.

Powerless to do what...? This is only relevant for physical force. You may as well say "Men are powerless when pursuing a woman. There's nothing they can do unless she wants to." I sure hope so. The only way to get someone to do something they don't want to do is physical force, which isn't romance at all.

I'm not saying rape is romance. However, there is that option. Not morally or legally, in any civilized country, but metaphysically.

It could also matter in romantic contexts. However uncommon, Roark could take Dominique but she would have been out of luck trying to do the same.

I have no idea what you're talking about.

I just threw you a test to see how you would respond. A simple obseration on how you would react. I don't think it would have been manipulative even if it had happened covertly. Do you?

[mdegges]

I'm not saying rape is romance. However, there is that option. Not morally or legally, in any civilized country, but metaphysically.

That's interesting. In one of my textbooks, it says that about 38% of women have 'rape fantasies,' but that these are due to psychological problems (ie: the woman was raped or molested at a young age, or that the woman has control issues). I find myself agreeing with this passage below, because I doubt that real rape is like that 'take me now' seduction fantasy played out in The Fountainhead and other romance novels.

There is another current of thought that women don't really have rape fantasies at all, that the sexual experiences women fantasize about are so different from the real experience of rape that they cannot be fairly described as fantasies about rape.

"Rape" fantasies, these psychologists state, involve an attractive man who, in the words of one expert in the field, "must have divided his time in prison between working out in the gym and reading the love poems of Browning to his cellmate." In erotic rape fantasies, the rapist is an attractive man the woman would want to have sex with, who arouses her desires. In aversive fantasies, the rapist is an ugly, violent man who does not care about her desires.

One kind of fantasy could be fairly described as a "take me" seduction. The other fantasy still could be described as rape. Both fantasies involve passivity, coercion, and nonconsent, but one fantasy is about a desire to achieve sexual pleasure without having to play the seductress, and another fantasy may be about processing fears of sexual experience that may, or may, not be based in the woman's real life history.

Psychologist Paul Joannides even goes so far as to label these fantasies as "control fantasies," in which women have complete control over the outcome of events in the safety of their own minds. Science journalist Matthew Hutson believes that assertive women like the fantasy of handing over control of their relationships as an outlet for the need for sexual variety. -Robert Rister

[Alfa]

Let me clarify that sentence, just in case it was misunderstood. On a second glance it's a bit ambigous. What I meant is that there is the option of rape, but it's not romance and it is wrong.

Roark and Dominique was not rape but consensual.

[Eiuol]

I'm not trying to compare bars, nightclubs and dating sites. Those are just a few of the most common ways to meet a partner. School and work are also up there at the top of the list. What they all have in common is that the women are being pursued, and men pursue. It's also common that women get plenty of attention.

Sure, that may be the norm, so regardless of the demographics, that doesn't help figure out what ways one ought to pursue romance.

I'm not saying rape is romance. However, there is that option. Not morally or legally, in any civilized country, but metaphysically.

What is "metaphysically" supposed to mean in this context? I don't understand.

I know you didn't mean rape, so where else would "powerless" apply? Now that you mention it, the times even in movies where I've seen the "manipulative vixen" is when in fact the woman is in constant danger of physical force due to being mixed up with violent people, powerful people with the willingness to kill, or otherwise dangerous situations. Those are bad situations, and you'll probably find them in film noir. The woman basically has to live on the edge, probably "testing" their target man when applicable, using subtle but not overt manipulation, or using some type of emotional appeal. I've also heard of such behavior with people who are a bit unstable. Even Dominque could be an example of that, with her premises at first being big on that the world is a nasty, malevolent, destructive place. She hit Roark with a stick! She threw a statue down the stairs! In those circumstances of the world being threatening, you might have a very good point about "powerless". But we're not using that context in the first place. We're talking about normal life with stable people.

I just threw you a test to see how you would respond. A simple obseration on how you would react. I don't think it would have been manipulative even if it had happened covertly. Do you?

I don't see how that is a comparable question or anything like a test. I didn't mean to imply questions are bad, I only meant in circumstances where a blunt question doesn't apply. Asking somebody outright "are you jealous?" is not very helpful, so using observation is better. Depending on the context, it's a question someone is genuinely curious about. It also could be manipulative or cruel if asked in a sarcastic way as a reaction towards something I said. If you asked me in person and you only asked to "see how I'd react", I'd probably take offense. If you asked because you were wondering, I'd just find it a funny question.