# Jumped into dating again. Confused.



## itsontherocks (Sep 7, 2015)

So I decided to dip my feet into the water again with online dating. I tried Match and eHarmony. This one woman (who's ironically on both) messaged me on eharmony and after the 1st of the year we met and we seemed to hit it off. We live about an hour away, however, I can get there in about 45 minutes, and she takes the long way around and it takes her a bit over an hour to get to my place. She's 37, no kids, has her own job and her own place. She's a bit reserved, but opens up slowly. I reach out to her each week to setup plans to see her. She doesn't reach out to me, and I am always the one reaching out to her. She claims it's the mans job to reach out, and I do once a week and would of course convo anytime that she reaches out. I prefer face to face interaction than phone or text (call me old fashioned). I also explained this to her and she seemed okay. 

We were intimate a couple of weeks ago, which she did state two things. One, she was nervous and two she doesn't sleep around. I said I do not sleep around either. Not sure if she believed me or not, but I do not. I called her a few days later to setup something for the following weekend, and she agreed. That Saturday morning, she texted me early that she was "sick with a stomach flu". I said oh, that's not good. Rest up and feel better. Next day I reached out and checked to see if she was okay. She replied a few minutes later that she was much better. I then said I'd like to see you again. How's next Saturday (this was Sunday). Three hours later she replied, can't Saturday, but can Friday. I said, that works. However, in my mind, I felt something was up, as we've always met on a Friday. I suggested she come to my place and we'll cook something, she agreed. She texted me Friday stating massive traffic and she will be a bit late. This is true as we had bad weather. When she got to my place she was happy and pleasant. We talked for a bit, watched a show, started kissing and touching. She blocked my hands from her breasts and her butt stating not today. I said fine, but I said is everything okay, she said yes, but I have my period and I do not feel comfortable in having sex with you on my period. I said not a problem. I was a bit discouraged, but I am not going to push. She was then snuggling up to me during the movie really tight, and I'd look to her and she'd start to turn her head and make out, but of course, block my hands from her breasts and butt. I just stop and call her a tease. She said she wasn't. 

She then said it is getting late, so I better get going soon. I said it's pretty bad out, why not stay over. She agreed and we slept in the same bed, snuggling and holding each other on and off through the night. She left the next morning. I called her on Monday night and see if she wanted to get a bit to eat, it went to vm. She called me back Tuesday night stating she was out, I said no problem, that's cool. I then stated I'd like to see her this weekend, she said she's going away for the weekend, I said okay, maybe next week then.

I think I should hang back and see if she reaches out to me next week. It seems I am doing all the reaching out and making plans. Plus, she's still active and online with online dating. Am I reading this wrong? I would assume a woman who has interest in you would reach out a bit. Am I becoming too predictable by calling once a week and asking her out? I purposely didn't leave a vm on Monday to see if she'd call back, and she did, but the next day. She didn't offer to reschedule when she wasn't feeling well, or didn't offer to see me when she's going away for the weekend. It's hard to know if she has interest or not. 

Is it best to just back away and wait to hear from her again? One would think, after two months of dating, she wouldn't still be online with Match and eHarmony. Plus, she's not once offered to pay for anything. I didn't push this, but at least offering would had been nice. I am bewildered and confused with her actions. 

Any clarity would be helpful. Thank you.


----------



## Cromer (Nov 25, 2016)

I recently got into the dating pool after 33+ years, but not online. Before I had a chance, I met someone the old school way and have been seeing her for 3 months now. There is a lot of reaching out both ways LOL. In other words, she's clearly into me and I into her. What it sounds like to me is that she is playing the field. Hard. By having you reach out to her, she is making it easy for herself to manage multiple men. She doesn't have to take any initiative or keep track of anything except with a calendar on when she meets them. She's not offering to pay because it would be very expensive for her when she has multiples she seeing, even if she went halfsies. It's just a theory. Take what I'm saying for what it is, a total noob when it comes to dating.


----------



## ewam (May 28, 2017)

at this stage of you knowing each other she might still date other men too.I think you should still date others too


----------



## itsontherocks (Sep 7, 2015)

I know I cannot bring this up, as it will scare her (been down that road before). However, a colleague things I am appearing too available and have no other options, so she feels safe in knowing that you are not going anywhere. It was suggested to pull back a bit and see if that gets her to reach out. Women like a challenge, me being predictable and non-challenging could be working against me. This is the first where I hear very little from a woman I am dating. I was surprised that she even called me the next day. So there is interest, I just do not know how much. If I do not see her again, I will understand, but I just feel like I am running after her and have to entertain her for her time.


----------



## itsontherocks (Sep 7, 2015)

Cromer said:


> I recently got into the dating pool after 33+ years, but not online. Before I had a chance, I met someone the old school way and have been seeing her for 3 months now. There is a lot of reaching out both ways LOL. In other words, she's clearly into me and I into her. What it sounds like to me is that she is playing the field. Hard. By having you reach out to her, she is making it easy for herself to manage multiple men. She doesn't have to take any initiative or keep track of anything except with a calendar on when she meets them. She's not offering to pay because it would be very expensive for her when she has multiples she seeing, even if she went halfsies. It's just a theory. Take what I'm saying for what it is, a total noob when it comes to dating.


At least she's reaching out to you. Is she paying for somethings as well? 

I only had to bring this up with one other woman, and that didn't go over well. This is one of the reasons why I dislike dating. I cannot multi-date and pay for everything. I do not know how men who multi-date do it. Plus, how does one bond with someone when you are seeing multiple people? Boy, things have changed over the years in dating.


----------



## Cromer (Nov 25, 2016)

ewam said:


> at this stage of you knowing each other she might still date other men too.I think you should still date others too


I would like and agree with this comment, but then I would be a hypocrite!! :surprise:


----------



## itsontherocks (Sep 7, 2015)

If she had sex with me (a few times two weeks ago) and then on that Sunday morning state she was nervous and doesn't sleep around, then how does this multi-dating work for her? Was she lying? Why state this (she brought it up out of no where when I looked at her and she seemed disturbed).


----------



## Cromer (Nov 25, 2016)

itsontherocks said:


> At least she's reaching out to you. Is she paying for somethings as well?
> 
> I only had to bring this up with one other woman, and that didn't go over well. This is one of the reasons why I dislike dating. I cannot multi-date and pay for everything. I do not know how men who multi-date do it. Plus, how does one bond with someone when you are seeing multiple people? Boy, things have changed over the years in dating.


Oh yes, they have changed!!!

I wouldn't worry about it too much, you definitely should give it time to see if she is into you. For me, things started from an entirely ambivalent attitude on her part until after date number 3, then she started chasing me a bit. I was really interested in her but was too much of a coward to make it known until she made the first move. Like you, I didn't want to chase her away, especially since I'm newly divorced, which isn't the strongest position in the dating world.

I am fortunate that I am in a situation where paying if I were to date multiples wouldn't be a barrier. However, the woman I am seeing is a career woman and she insisted on paying her share the first few dates. You might say that was our first "argument" and I let her "win" out of respect for her LOL. Now, the dynamic is different as we are "exclusive" and we do a lot for each other.

Ya, it moved fast and TAM let me know it!


----------



## Cromer (Nov 25, 2016)

itsontherocks said:


> If she had sex with me (a few times two weeks ago) and then on that Sunday morning state she was nervous and doesn't sleep around, then how does this multi-dating work for her? Was she lying? Why state this (she brought it up out of no where when I looked at her and she seemed disturbed).


That's a good question, one someone else may have more insight about. It would seem that she connected with you on some level, I just don't get the "you call me and I'll let you know what's up" situation. I just think she is playing the field, maybe not sleeping with the field, and was laying the groundwork for when you found out she was dating others that she hasn't been sleeping with them too?


----------



## xMadame (Sep 1, 2016)

You are number 2.

Sorry.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Cromer (Nov 25, 2016)

xMadame said:


> You are number 2.
> 
> Sorry.
> 
> ...


Or this, which is probably most likely.


----------



## itsontherocks (Sep 7, 2015)

Cromer said:


> That's a good question, one someone else may have more insight about. It would seem that she connected with you on some level, I just don't get the "you call me and I'll let you know what's up" situation. I just think she is playing the field, maybe not sleeping with the field, and was laying the groundwork for when you found out she was dating others that she hasn't been sleeping with them too?


She doesn't know I know she's on Match. I was on with a friend as I was helping setting up his Match profile and she came-up as online.


----------



## itsontherocks (Sep 7, 2015)

xMadame said:


> You are number 2.
> 
> Sorry.
> 
> ...


So, it's best I back off a bit and wait til she contacts me?


----------



## Livvie (Jan 20, 2014)

She doesn't seem very interested in you, or she would definitely be more proactive about making plans, and rescheduling in the instances she was unavailable.

OR if the case really is that she IS interested, and isn't dating others, does this kind of personality work for you?? It wouldn't for me. She doesn't sound very enthusiastic or dynamic....


----------



## itsontherocks (Sep 7, 2015)

To add, when she offered Friday instead of Saturday this past weekend, she did state she made plans with her friends to go to a specific city. I didn't ask for this information, she volunteered it as we were discussing the traffic she experienced coming to my place. I stated with a smile jokingly, if you didn't bump me from Saturday to Friday, then the traffic might had been less. She then said well I already setup plans with my friends to go to so and so in the city. I said, okay, that's fine. What I found weird was usually sex, especially multiple times, usually brings people closer. The week after, when she was not feeling well, they usually offer up another date. With every woman who's cancelled in the past stated though I really want to see you, so how's next Friday or Saturday. There is the other issue of distance. She's about 50 miles away. I prob. wouldn't had reached out to her if she didn't reach out to me first. In addition, if she had little interest, why drive the hour + drive to see me? She even said her sister told her a shorter route to go next time to come to my place. As strange as it sounds, her sister (and brother-in-law) live in the same city as I do.

See how it doesn't make much sense.


----------



## Elizabeth001 (May 18, 2015)

Follow your instincts. Back off some and see what happens. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## itsontherocks (Sep 7, 2015)

Livvie said:


> She doesn't seem very interested in you, or she would definitely be more proactive about making plans, and rescheduling in the instances she was unavailable.
> 
> OR if the case really is that she IS interested, and isn't dating others, does this kind of personality work for you?? It wouldn't for me. She doesn't sound very enthusiastic or dynamic....


No, it's a bit annoying. I can understand in the beginning, but it's been 2 months. Again, I was shocked she called on Tuesday, as I didn't leave a message on Monday. However, when I didn't hear from her in over a day, it shows to me either mild interest, waiting to see if she can do better, or maybe this is her attitude. After sex, she asked me how long my longest relationship was, I said about 9 years. I asked her the same, she said most last about 3 years; which I thought was odd for a 37 year old career woman.

To say I feel uneasy would be an understatement. When I saw her online on Match, that bothered me, as it makes me feel I am not good enough. Plus, the never reaching out is quite strange. Most women love the phone. I was talking to this other woman, and from the first call to the second date, she was texting me daily. I did go for a kiss, so I got the cheek on the second date, so I knew she wasn't interested. The point I am trying to make is that seemed pretty normal. To never hear from this one, doesn't seem normal. I did bring this up, and the first time, she said that's the man's job. The second time, she said, you could contact me more too. So it feels like a tug of war for just some acknowledgment.


----------



## itsontherocks (Sep 7, 2015)

Elizabeth001 said:


> Follow your instincts. Back off some and see what happens.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Yep, that is what my gut is telling me, just I feel uneasy.


----------



## chillymorn69 (Jun 27, 2016)

Shes just not that into you!

Shes playing games. Is that what your looking for?

If not put the walking boots on!

One of those women who want you to do all the chasing as they act like their **** don't stink!

How was the sex? Did she lay there like a princess as you did all the work pleasing her?

Or did she reciprocate and take a turn pleasing you?


Shes sounds stale! And far away! Look for someone whos into you thats closer.


----------



## itsontherocks (Sep 7, 2015)

chillymorn69 said:


> Shes just not that into you!
> 
> Shes playing games. Is that what your looking for?
> 
> ...


Sex was pretty hot and she was very active. I am just trying to figure out why someone would have sex with someone, allow him to sleep over her house, she drives an hour plus to come to my house and sleep over if she's just not into me. From past experience, a women who is not interest, doesn't go this far. I am told a woman knows in the first few minutes of meeting a man if she's interested in him or not. Even on the first date, we had a make-out session. Her actions do not match her communication skills. 

So frustrating. I will open up to other women. If she reaches out, we'll see. I do not like to juggle more than one woman at a time. I know that is unheard of these days, but I am actually looking for a woman I cannot connect with, not just entertain have have sex with. Sex is great, however, it's the closeness and connection I desire. Just too old to play these games.

I still think she was dating someone else on that Saturday as well as Monday. Who gets over a stomach flu/virus/etc. in a day? It's okay for her or anyone to date multiple people. I just wish I was told she was going to still date multiple people after we had sex. 

Is sex not a big deal anymore? Sex used to be a bonding experience. Is this no longer the case?

I just hope I am not reading things wrong. I've jumped the gun before. It's one of the reasons why I am just backing off and waiting to see what happens.


----------



## chillymorn69 (Jun 27, 2016)

itsontherocks said:


> Sex was pretty hot and she was very active. I am just trying to figure out why someone would have sex with someone, allow him to sleep over her house, she drives an hour plus to come to my house and sleep over if she's just not into me. From past experience, a women who is not interest, doesn't go this far. I am told a woman knows in the first few minutes of meeting a man if she's interested in him or not. Even on the first date, we had a make-out session. Her actions do not match her communication skills.
> 
> So frustrating. I will open up to other women. If she reaches out, we'll see. I do not like to juggle more than one woman at a time. I know that is unheard of these days, but I am actually looking for a woman I cannot connect with, not just entertain have have sex with. Sex is great, however, it's the closeness and connection I desire. Just too old to play these games.
> 
> ...


Good luck.


----------



## Mr.Married (Feb 21, 2018)

She is still dating...plain and simple. She is less invested than you are. There is nothing wrong with her actions. You have let your emotions get the best of you over her having
sex with you. It seems to me you are coming off as the needy type which is definitely not attractive to women. 

Have your ears open and listen now......What ever you do...DO NOT send one of those long text blowing out all yours feelings and then leave yourself hanging on a string waiting
for her to respond! I can't count how many times I have seen that happen and it never never never works out well.

Go with the back off plan ..... wait some time. Don't let your emotions run away. She just isn't into you as you are into her. It's critical you don't come off needy in this phase.

Good Luck !

Remember: She is still dating .... there is nothing established about your relationship.


----------



## EleGirl (Dec 3, 2011)

You two have hardly even started to date. You have apparently not talked about being exclusive.

It seems that you expect her to drop her life on a dime. She went away for the weekend and you are put off by this. Why? 

She told you that she believes that the man does all the asking/chasing. She's a bit oldfashioned. Yet you are surprised that she expect you to do do all the asking/chasing. If you are not comfortable with that, then she's not the woman for you. So just don't call her anymore.

But, if you are ok with you doing most of the asking/chasing and you want to have an exclusive relationship with her and have the two of you set aside time on a regular basis, you need to talk to her about it. Take her out to dinner (not at your house) and formally ask her to be exclusive with you.

By the way, inviting a woman to your home is a statement that says "I expect sex tonight." You would have been better taking her out as the first date after you had sex with her the first time. Why? Because very often, once a guy gets a gal in bed, he forgets about dating.. you know going out, having fun and getting to know each other without the sex clouding things. Maybe she's gotten the idea now that this is all you want with her.


----------



## jlg07 (Feb 24, 2017)

Instead of these games, maybe you should just talk directly to her and ask if she is still actively dating others, and that's why she's been unavailable? Of course, I haven't dated anyone in over 30 years (other than my wife), so maybe this is a bit old fashioned these days....


----------



## Satya (Jun 22, 2012)

Don't be surprised if she's on multiple sites. I was on 3 while seriously dating. Difference was, I was transparent with my dates about it.

Shes just not that into you and she sounds like she has some hangups. She wants you to believe she doesn't sleep around, but has sex with you early? I think she's either a bit confused since her words don't match her actions or she knows precisely what she's doing. I'd stop pursuing so hard. Have you never been to her place? 

I have a feeling that when you stop contacting her, she'll fade away.


----------



## Cooper (Apr 18, 2008)

For the record Match will show you as active if all you did was read an email they sent about matches or you that received a message. I learned that when someone I was seeing flipped out on me accusing me of still being on active on Match when I honestly hadn't logged on in weeks, but had been reading the notifications they sent me.

It doesn't sound like the relationship is progressing, for what ever reason she seems happy just seeing/talking with you occasionally. My guess is she likes you but doesn't see any future with you so she's being casual about dating you. Also.... yes I expect her to be dating others, and so should you.


----------



## Wolf1974 (Feb 19, 2014)

As others have said you are number 2 maybe even 3 or 4

She is just not that interested in you but you keep her interest enough she isn’t dropping you either. I agree with others when you back off she will likely ghost you completely.

Don’t get discouraged this is just OLD. Just have to learn the game and it gets easier. One lesson you just learned was never show more interest in someone then they are showing in you.


----------



## MJJEAN (Jun 26, 2015)

itsontherocks said:


> It was suggested to pull back a bit and see if that gets her to reach out. Women like a challenge, me being predictable and non-challenging could be working against me.


That would totally have failed with me back when I was single. I don't chase. Ever. If a man pulls back thinking I'll chase him I don't reach out. I just interpret it as a lack of interest on his part and move on. 



itsontherocks said:


> I can understand in the beginning, but it's been 2 months.
> 
> I asked her the same, she said most last about 3 years; which I thought was odd for a 37 year old career woman.
> 
> ...


Hun, two months IS the beginning. When you're 20 two months seems like a LTR. Not so much when you're in your 30's and beyond. At two months you barely know each other.

I don't think it's odd for a career woman to have a series of 1-3 year relationships if she's never been married. I'd think most career women would be concentrating on their careers more than dating at least until they become firmly established and beyond if they are ambitious and want promotions. 

Why wouldn't she be on Match still? You've only been dating two months. The relationship isn't exclusive. Why would you be surprised that she's still looking or at least leaving her profile up? It'd be different if you'd been dating for some time, agreed to exclusivity, and the relationship was serious, etc. But that's not the case.

I realize some women love talking on the phone. I'd rather have a root canal. She may share that sentiment.

She lets you pay. She's straight out told you that initiating contact is primarily the man's job. She seems to have a traditional view of male-female romantic relationships. If that's something you aren't up for then you're simply not compatible and should move on.



itsontherocks said:


> I still think she was dating someone else on that Saturday as well as Monday. Who gets over a stomach flu/virus/etc. in a day?
> 
> It's okay for her or anyone to date multiple people. I just wish I was told she was going to still date multiple people after we had sex.
> 
> ...


You may be right, but you may also be reading this wrong. I've been sick as a dog in the morning and felt nearly my old self by the next morning many times.

You don't know she's multi-dating. Have you asked? The default is generally that a relationship isn't exclusive until exclusivity has been discussed and mutually agreed on. If you want to know whats going on with her you have to communicate. Ask her. That simple. "Are we exclusive or are you seeing other people?" "What does sex mean to you?"

Whether or not sex is a big deal/bonding experience depends on the people involved. 

For me, sex is sex. Sex can be completely casual or it can have profound meaning, depending on who I am having it with. In the beginning stages of a potential relationship it's part of the process of determining compatibility. I wouldn't want to develop feelings for a man, become exclusive with him, and then finally have sex only to find out we aren't sexually compatible. For me, sex isn't in any way related to exclusivity.

On another forum this topic was discussed recently. A gentleman dated a lady, they had sex, she was also seeing other people, he got sand in his undies, accused her of cheating, and ended the relationship. She was upset because, as far as she knew, they were merely dating and having sex, but weren't exclusive, so she had every right to also see other men. He came to the forum to ask about his situation. The replies were mixed. About half thought sex meant exclusivity and the others thought that only agreeing to be exclusive meant exclusivity. 

Clearly, there are many people who do not believe dating+ sex = exclusive. If you're out there dating you're bound to find those people. If you want an exclusive relationship, you can't assume. You have to ask.


----------



## Ynot (Aug 26, 2014)

itsontherocks said:


> See how it doesn't make much sense.


It doesn't make much sense because the template you are comparing it to was the one you used when you were young. I don't know how much time has passed since you last dated, but things have definitely changed. 

Unless you really like this woman. Not just the fact that you had sex, but the person herself, I would maybe give her a couple of weeks to see if out this plays out. If nothing happens I would be honest with her and tell her that since it doesn't appear as though she is really into this, that you don't want to waste anymore of her time and move on.


----------



## ReformedHubby (Jan 9, 2013)

Its either one of a few things, look I am no expert in dating myself but I have noticed a few things since I have become newly single. For starters if a woman is really into you when she first meets you, she pretty much throws all of the "rules" of contact out the window. In other words you become number one on her social calendar, pretty quickly. Also keep in mind that there are many levels of compatibility/clicking. Could be that she likes you just enough to casually date you, but isn't looking for much more from you, or she is waiting for someone she clicks better with. Provided you are okay with that its not all bad, it beats being friend zoned. Just don't put more into it than you are getting back. The third possibility is that she has been single her whole adult life and is used to living a certain way,and doesn't really want to get too wrapped up in anything. Not everyone gets intense in relationships, this very well could just be who she is when in a relationship.


----------



## MJJEAN (Jun 26, 2015)

Satya said:


> She wants you to believe she doesn't sleep around, but has sex with you early? I think she's either a bit confused since her words don't match her actions or she knows precisely what she's doing.


Or her definition of "doesn't sleep around" is different from OP's. People use common words and phrases assuming those words and phrases mean the same thing to all people when they do not.

I swear, the older I get the less I assume the more I feel like Inigo Montoya. "You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means." 

For example, my friend only has sex with men she's dated, but no casual hook ups. However, she's dated a fair number of men for anywhere from a few weeks to a few months when in between serious relationships. She's got a partner count in the mid-double digits. But, again, to her way of thinking it's not sleeping around because these weren't ONS or bar hook ups, but men she'd been on a few dates with.

This is one of the reasons I think having the partner number talk is a good thing. Hard numbers are much less vague than "I don't sleep around."


----------



## Bananapeel (May 4, 2015)

I'm really good at reading women, so let me just tell you that you seem to have a good handle on what's going on and are doing most things right. So, good job on that! 

Now in addition to what you are doing, just understand that if a woman really likes you she'll make things easy on you. If she isn't making things easy to get together then she's still undecided, which this woman appears to be. The best thing to do at this point is to pull back a little and stop pursuing her. I'd personally just tell her that you'd love to see her again and that if her schedule opens up for next weekend to give you a call and if you're available then you'll plan a date. Then stop contacting her. The more you chase a woman the less she has to chase you, so the less interested she'll act. 

BTW, you shouldn't have asked her to stay over and instead should have ended the date early and sent her home (having her stay over was a beta move). See, if she's on her period and not feeling well then she shouldn't be coming over and taking up your evening. I'd feel differently if she was your wife or in a long term committed relationship with you, but she isn't. What I'd say is "Babe, I love spending time with you but if you aren't feeling well let's just plan to get together when you are so we don't have anything distracting us from each other. Why don't you head home and get a good nights sleep in your own home/bed where you are most comfortable. We'll talk soon. Bye."


----------



## itsontherocks (Sep 7, 2015)

Mr.Married said:


> It seems to me you are coming off as the needy type which is definitely not attractive to women.


Since I never text and call once a week to setup plans, how am I coming off as needy?


----------



## itsontherocks (Sep 7, 2015)

EleGirl said:


> You two have hardly even started to date. You have apparently not talked about being exclusive.
> 
> It seems that you expect her to drop her life on a dime. She went away for the weekend and you are put off by this. Why?
> 
> ...


Only second time at my place. The other six times, I took her out to various activities and dinner. Hardly the only thing I want from her. However, I am backing off now as I need to see a little interest from her end. Can't do everything.


----------



## itsontherocks (Sep 7, 2015)

Satya said:


> Don't be surprised if she's on multiple sites. I was on 3 while seriously dating. Difference was, I was transparent with my dates about it.
> 
> Shes just not that into you and she sounds like she has some hangups. She wants you to believe she doesn't sleep around, but has sex with you early? I think she's either a bit confused since her words don't match her actions or she knows precisely what she's doing. I'd stop pursuing so hard. Have you never been to her place?
> 
> I have a feeling that when you stop contacting her, she'll fade away.


Been to her place a few times. She may fade away. I guess we will see.


----------



## itsontherocks (Sep 7, 2015)

Wolf1974 said:


> As others have said you are number 2 maybe even 3 or 4
> 
> She is just not that interested in you but you keep her interest enough she isn’t dropping you either. I agree with others when you back off she will likely ghost you completely.
> 
> Don’t get discouraged this is just OLD. Just have to learn the game and it gets easier. One lesson you just learned was never show more interest in someone then they are showing in you.


I'm was calling once a week. How am I showing too much interest?


----------



## itsontherocks (Sep 7, 2015)

Bananapeel said:


> BTW, you shouldn't have asked her to stay over and instead should have ended the date early and sent her home (having her stay over was a beta move). See, if she's on her period and not feeling well then she shouldn't be coming over and taking up your evening. I'd feel differently if she was your wife or in a long term committed relationship with you, but she isn't. What I'd say is "Babe, I love spending time with you but if you aren't feeling well let's just plan to get together when you are so we don't have anything distracting us from each other. Why don't you head home and get a good nights sleep in your own home/bed where you are most comfortable. We'll talk soon. Bye."


Agree, however, it was coming down pretty hard. Since she had 60 miles to drive, I thought it would be best to offer for her to stay over. Her driving home at 1am in rain and fog I'd be concerned. She said she was better the week before. I didn't know about her period til she came over towards the end of the date.

Nonetheless, I agree with the consensus and already started to mentally back off. Dating has changed so much. Not crazy about these new rules.


----------



## Bananapeel (May 4, 2015)

Dating is actually a lot of fun once you get the hang of it. The new rules really favor men, as long as you keep your options open and don't get too attached to any one person early in the relationship. 

BTW, you don't sound needy to me at all. Calling once a week is absolutely perfect and what I try to do.


----------



## Um Excuse Me (Feb 3, 2018)

Bananapeel said:


> Dating is actually a lot of fun once you get the hang of it. The new rules really favor men, as long as you keep your options open and don't get too attached to any one person early in the relationship.
> 
> BTW, you don't sound needy to me at all. Calling once a week is absolutely perfect and what I try to do.


Could you explain what the new "rules" are in more detail please? Thanks...:scratchhead:


----------



## cc48kel (Apr 5, 2017)

I would just continue to do your own thing.. If you want to go on some other dates go, if you don't then don't. Just leave her alone for awhile, let her miss you. Not sure you were coming off needy, but I know I don't like it. When I'm busy with whatever I have going on, I don't like to be bothered. If she does not text or call you after a week or two then you have your answer.


----------



## minimalME (Jan 3, 2012)

itsontherocks said:


> Is it best to just back away and wait to hear from her again? One would think, after two months of dating, she wouldn't still be online with Match and eHarmony. Plus, she's not once offered to pay for anything. I didn't push this, but at least offering would had been nice. I am bewildered and confused with her actions.
> 
> Any clarity would be helpful. Thank you.


I don't understand why you're confused.

You haven't asked her for exclusivity - yes? Why not? If you have expectations (dating profiles coming down, paying for dates) then why can't you simply initiate a conversation and say so?

I disagree with the comments here that say just because she isn't counter-pursuing you equally, she isn't interested. 

Those of us in mid-life have come from situations that we don't want to repeat. My ex-husband was very passive, and I don't want to get into a relationship with another passive man. So for me, men are either going to speak up and be direct and say what they think and what they want, or they won't. 

In high school and college, this is exactly how men behaved when they wanted to spend time with me, or when they wanted to go out on a date. They just said it.

Now it's like turning yourself into a pretzel to figure where you stand, because so few are willing to be vulnerable. 

If you like this person, consider leading. If you don't want to be bothered, then move on.


----------



## Ursula (Dec 2, 2016)

Cooper said:


> For the record Match will show you as active if all you did was read an email they sent about matches or you that received a message. I learned that when someone I was seeing flipped out on me accusing me of still being on active on Match when I honestly hadn't logged on in weeks, but had been reading the notifications they sent me.
> 
> It doesn't sound like the relationship is progressing, for what ever reason she seems happy just seeing/talking with you occasionally. My guess is she likes you but doesn't see any future with you so she's being casual about dating you. Also.... yes I expect her to be dating others, and so should you.


So that's why everyone is always "active" whenever I log in. Wow, that's a really silly and misleading feature that Match has!

OP, multi dating these days is fairly common. Not necessarily sleeping with all of them, or being serious about all of them, but there's nothing wrong with going out for a drink or a common activity with more than 1 person. I'm on OLD, and this is what I've been doing. It has come back to bite me in the @$$ once, so you need to be wary of your actions. I do think this is what your lady is possibly doing, and maybe you should think about also extending an invitation out to someone else. Also, as a woman, I don't like it when a man is always available. It's too easy, and portrays him as not having a life of his own; waiting by the phone for my phone call. So, be unavailable a little bit, but if you do, suggest another day/evening to get together.


----------



## itsontherocks (Sep 7, 2015)

minimalME said:


> I don't understand why you're confused.
> 
> You haven't asked her for exclusivity - yes? Why not? If you have expectations (dating profiles coming down, paying for dates) then why can't you simply initiate a conversation and say so?
> 
> ...


If I had some initiative from her, I would had done this already. However, since I am doing all the reaching out, it's hard to know her interest. Thus, hanging back and seeing if she reaches out, seems to be the best bet. Other women I trust have told me this. Most men agree, other say drop her, but if she reaches out, I'd be willing to see her again. It's hard to build rapport with her when I am only seeing her once per two weeks. She told me not too long ago that if I am in the area, I should reach out and do something during the week. I did this past Monday, and it went to voicemail. Yes, she did call me back, the next evening, but it is what it is.


----------



## Bananapeel (May 4, 2015)

Um Excuse Me said:


> Could you explain what the new "rules" are in more detail please? Thanks...:scratchhead:


Sure, since it is applicable to the OP. 

Men need to understand that high quality guys are in high demand by women and those men should act that way. Those men should let the women chase after them and should never over-pursue. Men can date multiple women at once until their favorite woman asks them for commitment (women should always be the one to push for commitment/relationship labels). Dating should be on the man's terms or he should dump her and find someone else. Men should be willing to end a date when it isn't going well, even if that means walking out in the middle because men should value their time and not waste it on people that aren't worthy. Never put a woman on a pedestal. 

Now for the dating techniques. Men need to be the one to take charge and plan the date. You don't text or talk on the phone between dates, other than the bare minimum needed to setup a date. Getting to know each other is done in person, not via electronics. Ask her out once a week and if she doesn't respond to a date invitation with an acceptance or an alternative day/time that fits her schedule then go silent until she does, but make her earn back her time with you by cutting back to a no cost date (e.g. coming over to cook dinner then have sex). If she blows you off even once then never see her again. Never accept a "maybe" answer for a date (e.g. call when it's closer to the weekend) and instead just cancel the invitation. Cheap date are the norm, especially for first dates. Always go for the kiss on the first date and if you don't at least kiss her then you should never see her again. Sex usually happens by the first or second date if the woman is really into you and you never continue to see a woman that isn't really into you. Sex shouldn't have unreasonable restrictions and if she tries to limit your sexual menu/frequency then dump her. Don't sell yourself short with the quality of woman you deserve, so try to date women that are younger and hotter than you're used to. Don't respond to texts/phone calls after 8 PM until the next day, because this conveys you have a life. Don't respond instantly to texts, and instead respond when it is convenient for you. Don't accept last minute plans, rather try to lock down a day/time/activity at least 5 days in advance because you are too busy to do otherwise.


----------



## minimalME (Jan 3, 2012)

itsontherocks said:


> If I had some initiative from her, I would had done this already. However, since I am doing all the reaching out, it's hard to know her interest. Thus, hanging back and seeing if she reaches out, seems to be the best bet. Other women I trust have told me this. Most men agree, other say drop her, but if she reaches out, I'd be willing to see her again. It's hard to build rapport with her when I am only seeing her once per two weeks. She told me not too long ago that if I am in the area, I should reach out and do something during the week. I did this past Monday, and it went to voicemail. Yes, she did call me back, the next evening, but it is what it is.


Well, I wish you the best. 

If you pulled back and waited for me to chase you, you'd be allowed to go on your merry way. And it would have absolutely nothing to do with how much I was physically attracted to you or enjoyed your company.


----------



## itsontherocks (Sep 7, 2015)

Ursula said:


> So that's why everyone is always "active" whenever I log in. Wow, that's a really silly and misleading feature that Match has!
> 
> OP, multi dating these days is fairly common. Not necessarily sleeping with all of them, or being serious about all of them, but there's nothing wrong with going out for a drink or a common activity with more than 1 person. I'm on OLD, and this is what I've been doing. It has come back to bite me in the @$$ once, so you need to be wary of your actions. I do think this is what your lady is possibly doing, and maybe you should think about also extending an invitation out to someone else. Also, as a woman, I don't like it when a man is always available. It's too easy, and portrays him as not having a life of his own; waiting by the phone for my phone call. So, be unavailable a little bit, but if you do, suggest another day/evening to get together.


I know it's hit and miss with the active on match.com. However, if you are not logged in for several days, it goes to recently active. If you haven't logged in for over a week, it shows nothing. Thus, it's safe to assume she's active. That's cool, no problems with that. This is just the first I've been with a woman who does very little to no reaching out. Thus, I question her interest. I guess the only way to see if she has anything more than marginal interest is to back away. I did state when she said she was going away this weekend, maybe we'll do something next weekend, waited for a few seconds and just wished her a good rest of week. Can't force attraction or interest. I reactivated my profile, a few women have reached out. I guess I will start conversing with them and setup calls and first meets. They are all younger, which I'd prefer around my age, but we'll see. I usually called her first for the weekend either Monday or Tuesday. If she declined, then I'd go spend time with someone or do something else. I guess, I gave her first dibs. I assumed that was natural and what one does. 

I tired multi dating several years ago, it's really hard. I just wonder how anyone forms bonds with anyone if all multidate. I guess I am looking at an emotional problem with a logical solution; which rarely works.


----------



## itsontherocks (Sep 7, 2015)

minimalME said:


> Well, I wish you the best.
> 
> If you pulled back and waited for me to chase you, you'd be allowed to go on your merry way. And it would have absolutely nothing to do with how much I was physically attracted to you or enjoyed your company.


To each their own. I am sure, if you were/are dating and you had interest in someone, you'd reach out at least once in a while.


----------



## Ursula (Dec 2, 2016)

itsontherocks said:


> Agree, however, it was coming down pretty hard. Since she had 60 miles to drive, I thought it would be best to offer for her to stay over. Her driving home at 1am in rain and fog I'd be concerned. She said she was better the week before. I didn't know about her period til she came over towards the end of the date.
> 
> Nonetheless, I agree with the consensus and already started to mentally back off. *Dating has changed so much.* Not crazy about these new rules.


I agree, and am not having the most fantastic time anymore either!


----------



## itsontherocks (Sep 7, 2015)

It was easier to date and get to know a woman 10 -15 years ago. With the advent of the swiping, it's much harder. Much harder to form a bond when a person (any person) is dating multiple people at once. Dr. Jordan Peterson has stated the same theory.


----------



## minimalME (Jan 3, 2012)

itsontherocks said:


> To each their own. I am sure, if you were/are dating and you had interest in someone, you'd reach out at least once in a while.


Well, that would depend.

If we were just 'dating', no I wouldn't. But dating for me is different than most. It's simply time spent getting to know one another, without sexual involvement. 

If we were in a committed relationship that we both hoped would lead to marriage, then that's a whole different story.


----------



## Ursula (Dec 2, 2016)

itsontherocks said:


> I know it's hit and miss with the active on match.com. However, if you are not logged in for several days, it goes to recently active. If you haven't logged in for over a week, it shows nothing. Thus, it's safe to assume she's active. That's cool, no problems with that. This is just the first I've been with a woman who does very little to no reaching out. Thus, I question her interest. I guess the only way to see if she has anything more than marginal interest is to back away. I did state when she said she was going away this weekend, maybe we'll do something next weekend, waited for a few seconds and just wished her a good rest of week. Can't force attraction or interest. I reactivated my profile, a few women have reached out. I guess I will start conversing with them and setup calls and first meets. They are all younger, which I'd prefer around my age, but we'll see. I usually called her first for the weekend either Monday or Tuesday. If she declined, then I'd go spend time with someone or do something else. I guess, I gave her first dibs. I assumed that was natural and what one does.
> 
> I tired multi dating several years ago, it's really hard. I just wonder how anyone forms bonds with anyone if all multidate. I guess I am looking at an emotional problem with a logical solution; which rarely works.


I think you're on the right track. OLD is hard, and frustrating. And, I think it's natural to give first dibs to someone you're interested in. 

As to multi-dating, for me anyways, it's more about meeting men to see who I click with and who I don't. On paper, people can be much different (and can lie, I'm finding out) than they are in person. On paper, someone may seem perfect, and in person, maybe not so much.


----------



## Ursula (Dec 2, 2016)

Bananapeel said:


> Sure, since it is applicable to the OP.
> 
> Men need to understand that high quality guys are in high demand by women and those men should act that way. Those men should let the women chase after them and should never over-pursue. Men can date multiple women at once until their favorite woman asks them for commitment (women should always be the one to push for commitment/relationship labels). Dating should be on the man's terms or he should dump her and find someone else. Men should be willing to end a date when it isn't going well, even if that means walking out in the middle because men should value their time and not waste it on people that aren't worthy. Never put a woman on a pedestal.
> 
> Now for the dating techniques. Men need to be the one to take charge and plan the date. You don't text or talk on the phone between dates, other than the bare minimum needed to setup a date. Getting to know each other is done in person, not via electronics. Ask her out once a week and if she doesn't respond to a date invitation with an acceptance or an alternative day/time that fits her schedule then go silent until she does, but make her earn back her time with you by cutting back to a no cost date (e.g. coming over to cook dinner then have sex). If she blows you off even once then never see her again. Never accept a "maybe" answer for a date (e.g. call when it's closer to the weekend) and instead just cancel the invitation. Cheap date are the norm, especially for first dates. Always go for the kiss on the first date and if you don't at least kiss her then you should never see her again. Sex usually happens by the first or second date if the woman is really into you and you never continue to see a woman that isn't really into you. Sex shouldn't have unreasonable restrictions and if she tries to limit your sexual menu/frequency then dump her. Don't sell yourself short with the quality of woman you deserve, so try to date women that are younger and hotter than you're used to. Don't respond to texts/phone calls after 8 PM until the next day, because this conveys you have a life. Don't respond instantly to texts, and instead respond when it is convenient for you. Don't accept last minute plans, rather try to lock down a day/time/activity at least 5 days in advance because you are too busy to do otherwise.


Are you serious? So screw women, and rah-rah men?


----------



## minimalME (Jan 3, 2012)

itsontherocks said:


> It was easier to date and get to know a woman 10 -15 years ago. With the advent of the swiping, it's much harder. Much harder to form a bond when a person (any person) is dating multiple people at once. Dr. Jordan Peterson has stated the same theory.


I agree, and I prefer the way it was. 

Now, no one sticks around long enough to see if you even like one another as people. Folks are too busy sussing out red flags and moving on to the next 50 pages of profiles.


----------



## itsontherocks (Sep 7, 2015)

minimalME said:


> I agree, and I prefer the way it was.
> 
> Now, no one sticks around long enough to see if you even like one another as people. Folks are too busy sussing out red flags and moving on to the next 50 pages of profiles.


Agreed. It's hard to build a relationship when either know there are dozen of other people looking to "meet" you. It seems to be a means to an end. 

Even stated to her on the first date, what you see is what you get. I don't exaggerate or lie. What's the point. The other person will eventually find out. I just prefer to be honest. She says everyone lies. I don't. No one has ever caught me in a lie. Maybe I am in the minority, but I just feel better being honest. Or, if the question is too personal, not answering.

Now, let me be clear to the board, I am not an open book, however, if I am asked a question or I am explaining something, it's done by experience and fact, not by hyperbole and lies. That is what I was trying to get clear.


----------



## MJJEAN (Jun 26, 2015)

minimalME said:


> Well, I wish you the best.
> 
> If you pulled back and waited for me to chase you, you'd be allowed to go on your merry way. And it would have absolutely nothing to do with how much I was physically attracted to you or enjoyed your company.


Same here. I think of it as a compatibility issue. So, really, going on separate merry ways is good. Why waste time?



itsontherocks said:


> It was easier to date and get to know a woman 10 -15 years ago. With the advent of the swiping, it's much harder. Much harder to form a bond when a person (any person) is dating multiple people at once. Dr. Jordan Peterson has stated the same theory.





minimalME said:


> I agree, and I prefer the way it was.
> 
> Now, no one sticks around long enough to see if you even like one another as people. Folks are too busy sussing out red flags and moving on to the next 50 pages of profiles.


This isn't new. Multidating has been a thing for a very long time, but it comes and goes. Of course, social media and OLD have changed how it looks, but the concept is old.

When my mom was young, young men and women went on dates with different people (multi-date) until they decided to become exclusive with one. Then they were said to be "going steady" and considered in a relationship. If all went well, they'd marry. If not, they'd repeat the process. Which makes total sense. It's a good way to avoid picking someone who really isn't a good match. 

We all know that being jacked up on new relationship hormones has been many a man and woman's downfall. They meet, they become attached early on, red flags and incompatibilities are ignored because they're seeing through rose colored glasses manufactured by their internal hormone factory, and people get hurt. Dating more than one person prevents becoming attached to any one person too soon and gives the daters a chance to see each other more clearly before making the decision to be exclusive, bond, and become emotionally attached on a deeper level.


----------



## purplesunsets (Feb 26, 2018)

By the sounds of it, she seems to be quite comfortable with your attention. Not in a malicious way, but she knows it's coming her way and she doesn't really have to make an effort. As a woman, I can say that many of us like being chased, but not tooooo much. There needs to be some back and forth, otherwise it can become a bit boring. Let her chase you for a bit. Back off on the calling and planning and let her do it a few times. It's not a game but it will answer your question: "Is she into me?". How will you ever know if you keep initiating?


----------



## purplesunsets (Feb 26, 2018)

MJJEAN said:


> Same here. I think of it as a compatibility issue. So, really, going on separate merry ways is good. Why waste time?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yes, yes, a thousand times yes! I need to print this and read it like a mantra when/if I ever start dating again. My current husband and I fell victim to the rose-coloured glasses. Now we are (or at least I am) awake to the fact that we may not be super compatible, haha. Oops! The weird thing is, I had been dating a few guys when I met my husband and I still chose him.. I guess the rose-coloured glasses are there regardless of how many options you have .


----------



## itsontherocks (Sep 7, 2015)

purplesunsets said:


> By the sounds of it, she seems to be quite comfortable with your attention. Not in a malicious way, but she knows it's coming her way and she doesn't really have to make an effort. As a woman, I can say that many of us like being chased, but not tooooo much. There needs to be some back and forth, otherwise it can become a bit boring. Let her chase you for a bit. Back off on the calling and planning and let her do it a few times. It's not a game but it will answer your question: "Is she into me?". How will you ever know if you keep initiating?


I do agree somewhat. I do not know many women that will drive twice, first time took 1.5 hrs to get to my place and the second a little less (again, told her the best way, she likes another way) about 60 miles from her place to mine just for marginal interest. She did say she's not really a planner and does things on a whim. Though, she's trying to become more of a planner than a spur of the moment type of gal (her words, not mine). I did think that she calling me back when she missed my call (I didn't leave a vm), was a positive sign. However, I would like to see more interest into her. In the meantime, I will speak to others. Normally, when I start to have sex with a woman, I do not have sex with other women. However, that may not be the norm any longer either. It seems, from the previous posters, that I am the exception, not the rule.


----------



## itsontherocks (Sep 7, 2015)

purplesunsets said:


> Yes, yes, a thousand times yes! I need to print this and read it like a mantra when/if I ever start dating again. My current husband and I fell victim to the rose-coloured glasses. Now we are (or at least I am) awake to the fact that we may not be super compatible, haha. Oops! The weird thing is, I had been dating a few guys when I met my husband and I still chose him.. I guess the rose-coloured glasses are there regardless of how many options you have .


I'm just cautious how I proceed. I do not have rose colored glasses on. Those were broken after experiencing the coldness of the first woman I dated after my divorce. I know my mistakes (over communicating every two days), but we DID have the exclusivity talk and she cheated, so trust is an issue for me to give to a woman. That was about a year ago, so I'm better now.

The only red flags I see now are distance and lack of communication. I am thinking she will not reach out, however, I've been wrong before with her. I didn't think she was interested in sex, but then, two weeks ago, she ripped my clothes off. I didn't think she'd come over last week due to the rain and foggy weather, and she did. Though, her hands off approach during kissing was reminisce from the second date. So, it's like we're zigzagging. Hard to read her interest level.


----------



## Bananapeel (May 4, 2015)

Ursula said:


> Are you serious? So screw women, and rah-rah men?


Totally serious...this is the way dating has become. Especially with OLD. But you misunderstand the rest. It isn't about screwing anyone it is about understanding supply/demand dynamics and negotiation techniques. The supply/demand dynamic between the sexes changes naturally as people age. When women are in their early 20's there is limited supply and lots of demand, so they have the power to be as selective as they want and advocate for their needs first without regard to their suitors needs. As women age their demand goes down because traditionally their demand is associated with their youth and beauty. But as men age and become more successful their demand goes up because their demand is linked more to success and power than to beauty/youth. Eventually, this flips the supply/demand curve to being highly in the men's favor. Once men realize that they stop accepting less than they want in a relationship (just like women did in their early 20's) because it is very easy to replace a suboptimal partner with someone better. Regarding negotiation techniques - that means that men need to realize that the only person that is going to advocate for their relationship needs is them, and it would be counterproductive to be a weak negotiator. Likewise, it is the woman's job to advocate for her needs, which historically is something women have been better at than men, especially since they learned earlier when the supply/demand curve favored them in their early 20's. If you were a high quality man, knew you were in high demand, knew you could replace a suboptimal partner very quickly, and knew you could successfully advocate for your needs and find someone to meet those needs, then why wouldn't you accept the new dating norms when it benefits you? This is a pragmatic and realistic view of dating, but not a romantic one. Again, this only applies to high quality men.


----------



## minimalME (Jan 3, 2012)

MJJEAN said:


> Same here. I think of it as a compatibility issue. So, really, going on separate merry ways is good. Why waste time?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


For me, dating multiple people isn't a problem at all. Cause as I said, it's simply getting to know a person. The issue is the lack of communication. People are having sex _first_, and _then_ trying to sort out the relationship. That's backwards, and, as Bananapeel stated, it's dating on men's terms.

And in regard to his 'rules', the one and only reason that current dating is what it is (men as buyers and women as seller) is because women are willing to have carefree, commitment free, casual sex. If women were to stop this behavior, the dynamic would change.


----------



## Bananapeel (May 4, 2015)

minimalME said:


> And in regard to his 'rules', the one and only reason that current dating is what it is (men as buyers and women as seller) is because women are willing to have carefree, commitment free, casual sex. If women were to stop this behavior, the dynamic would change.


Agreed. I have long thought that the sexual revolution was ultimately detrimental for women because it lead to this dating environment. There is no way to put the genie back in the bottle on this one, so this is the environment we should expect for the future.


----------



## minimalME (Jan 3, 2012)

Bananapeel said:


> Agreed.* I have long thought that the sexual revolution was ultimately detrimental for women* because it lead to this dating environment. There is no way to put the genie back in the bottle on this one, so this is the environment we should expect for the future.


Exactly.

I do think that it's possible to change - all women would have to do is say 'no'. But it might take a generation of women willing to go without a partner, and lots of women are too desperate/fearful for that.


----------



## MJJEAN (Jun 26, 2015)

minimalME said:


> women are willing to have carefree, commitment free, casual sex. If women were to stop this behavior, the dynamic would change.


I've been married a while, but when I was single casual sex was what I wanted. I wasn't looking for anything more than charming company and good sex. I was open to the concept, but definitely not seeking it. Casual sex wasn't a behavior I had any desire to stop. Besides, I think sexual compatibility is crucial to a relationship and that it's foolish to get emotionally invested without knowing if you're sexually compatible. For me, sex is part of the getting to know a man process. I prefer it to happen within the first few dates so that no one wastes time if it isn't good.


----------



## minimalME (Jan 3, 2012)

MJJEAN said:


> I've been married a while, but when I was single casual sex was what I wanted. I wasn't looking for anything more than charming company and good sex. I was open to the concept, but definitely not seeking it. Casual sex wasn't a behavior I had any desire to stop. Besides, I think sexual compatibility is crucial to a relationship and that it's foolish to get emotionally invested without knowing if you're sexually compatible. For me, sex is part of the getting to know a man process. I prefer it to happen within the first few dates so that no one wastes time if it isn't good.


And you're totally free to make that choice.

But...

The truth of the societal consequences stands. 

In the past, men primary were willing to marry in order to have convenient, frequent access to sex. Now that modern women are willing to engage in convenient, frequent sex without any sort of commitment at all, they're finding it increasingly harder and harder to find a man willing to marry.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

minimalME said:


> For me, dating multiple people isn't a problem at all. Cause as I said, it's simply getting to know a person. The issue is the lack of communication. People are having sex _first_, and _then_ trying to sort out the relationship. That's backwards, and, as Bananapeel stated, it's dating on men's terms.


It is not backwards for me nor is it dating on men's terms. At least where I live, the idea that women are the gatekeepers of sex and sex is some kind of relationship badge a man earns is long gone. I love sex. Sex is part of communicating and feeling with another person. If I had to play some stupid when is the right time to snag a guy thing in my head, I would scream. AND I would never know if a guy was right for me. You can tell within the first hour of meeting someone if they are a just wanna bang person. Meh. Not for me. But weird when is the sex happening games? Likewise not for me.



> And in regard to his 'rules', the one and only reason that current dating is what it is (men as buyers and women as seller) is because women are willing to have carefree, commitment free, casual sex. If women were to stop this behavior, the dynamic would change.


Yup. I am no longer seen as a commodity that sells sex to the right bidder but a PERSON. One who happens to like sex. Love it.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

minimalME said:


> And you're totally free to make that choice.
> 
> But...
> 
> The truth of the societal consequences stands.


Living a highly alty lifestyle for a few decades now, I often wonder what the consequences are that society can meet out that are so horrible. 




> In the past, men primary were willing to marry in order to have convenient, frequent access to sex. Now that modern women are willing to engage in convenient, frequent sex without any sort of commitment at all, they're finding it increasingly harder and harder to find a man willing to marry.


Seems kind ok not not find someone compatible, to me. I guess it depends on the goal. If the goal is just finding a man willing to marry, that seems a pretty low bar.


----------



## minimalME (Jan 3, 2012)

NobodySpecial said:


> It is not backwards for me nor is it dating on men's terms. At least where I live, the idea that women are the gatekeepers of sex and sex is some kind of relationship badge a man earns is long gone. I love sex. Sex is part of communicating and feeling with another person. If I had to play some stupid when is the right time to snag a guy thing in my head, I would scream. AND I would never know if a guy was right for me. You can tell within the first hour of meeting someone if they are a just wanna bang person. Meh. Not for me. But weird when is the sex happening games? Likewise not for me.
> 
> 
> 
> Yup. I am no longer seen as a commodity that sells sex to the right bidder but a PERSON. One who happens to like sex. Love it.


Okay. I'll agree to disagree. 

To me it has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not you love sex. 

And if modern women think that casual sex is earning them respect and that they're being seen as people and not objects, I think they're quite mistaken.


----------



## minimalME (Jan 3, 2012)

NobodySpecial said:


> Living a highly alty lifestyle for a few decades now, I often wonder what the consequences are that society can meet out that are so horrible.
> 
> Seems kind ok not not find someone compatible, to me. I guess it depends on the goal. If the goal is just finding a man willing to marry, that seems a pretty low bar.


Okay. :smile2:


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

minimalME said:


> Okay. I'll agree to disagree.
> 
> To me it has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not you love sex.
> 
> And if modern women think that casual sex is earning them respect and that they're being seen as people and not objects, I think they're quite mistaken.


I'm not mistaken in my experience. I have had and do have great friends with whom I have uncommitted (casual? I guess that depends on precisely what that means) sex. That said, I am well over 40 so maybe it differs if husband hunting is what one is into. Lack of respect though? Nope.


----------



## itsontherocks (Sep 7, 2015)

It's long been said women are the gatekeepers of sex and men are the gatekeepers of relationships. Women have always had control over their bodies, as they should. However, due to the change from feminism, many give it away for free. I liked it better when both people took the time to get to know each other and build something. Those days are long gone.

Since this change, which was from the women's side, not the men's, the rise of STDs has exploded. Thank you feminism. Hope it was worth it...


----------



## minimalME (Jan 3, 2012)

itsontherocks said:


> It's long been said women are the gatekeepers of sex and men are the gatekeepers of relationships. Women have always had control over their bodies, as they should. However, due to the change from feminism, many give it away for free. I liked it better when both people took the time to get to know each other and build something. Those days are long gone.


I'd like to think it's not totally gone. Hopefully it just takes a little longer.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

itsontherocks said:


> It's long been said women are the gatekeepers of sex and men are the gatekeepers of relationships. Women have always had control over their bodies, as they should. However, due to the change from feminism, many give it away for free. I liked it better when both people took the time to get to know each other and build something. Those days are long gone.


Oy! I would rather "give it away for free" than have it paid for!  Those days are not long gone. There are still people out there who feel the way you do. You just have to find the one for you.



> Since this change, which was from the women's side, not the men's, the rise of STDs has exploded. Thank you feminism. Hope it was worth it...


You can blame feminism. Or you can cover it up. Your choice.


----------



## itsontherocks (Sep 7, 2015)

minimalME said:


> I'd like to think it's not totally gone. Hopefully it just takes a little longer.


Sadly, at least where I am now, outside of NYC it is. It's mainly a hookup culture. Same with many metro city areas. Perhaps the unintended consequences of feminism, but that is the cause of all the promiscuity. It's only going to get worse before it gets better.


----------



## itsontherocks (Sep 7, 2015)

NobodySpecial said:


> Oy! I would rather "give it away for free" than have it paid for!  Those days are not long gone. There are still people out there who feel the way you do. You just have to find the one for you.
> 
> 
> 
> You can blame feminism. Or you can cover it up. Your choice.


Brilliant answer. What's your answer to herpes, molluscum and hpv? They are skin diseases which are transferred from skin to skin contact.

Oh, as "my choice", many do not disclose, others do not even know. Some much for covering up. This is not the 1970's.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

itsontherocks said:


> Brilliant answer. What's your answer to herpes, molluscum and hpv? They are skin diseases which are transferred from skin to skin contact.
> 
> Oh, as "my choice", many do not disclose, others do not even know. Some much for covering up. This is not the 1970's.


I guess herpes is the Big Thing that people are scared of for no great reason, in my mind. Many, many people have it with no clue. The others are totally treatable. Molluscum is not even designated as an STI. Sex has risk, just like the rest of life. Cheers.


----------



## itsontherocks (Sep 7, 2015)

NobodySpecial said:


> I guess herpes is the Big Thing that people are scared of for no great reason, in my mind. Many, many people have it with no clue. The others are totally treatable. Molluscum is not even designated as an STI. Sex has risk, just like the rest of life. Cheers.


If you're a woman, I'd be more concerned about HPV, than herpes. Most people, they say, have HSV-1 (approx. 80%). Approx. 15% - 20% have HSV-2. Molluscum IS considered and STI/STD in many countries. However, it's your life, live it as you wish. However, it would be wise for you to be tested after each and every encounter. If you do not care about yourself, fine. At least give the other person the right to make that choice. 

Funny story.. A co-workers ex-husband was cheating on her. He contracted both strains of HSV (herpes) and a couple of other STDs. He, of course, didn't share this with her until later on. They had a child who was infected during birth and has major complications. He then came clean. So, in review, this moron effected two people which could had been prevented. The child has serious issues due to said complications and she will have to deal with this for the rest of her life. 

Just keep that in mind next time you make an preposterous statement like that. Oh, "cheers"


----------



## Ynot (Aug 26, 2014)

itsontherocks said:


> Since this change, which was from the women's side, not the men's, the rise of STDs has exploded. Thank you feminism. Hope it was worth it...


Do not be fooled by the hyperbole. The rates of syphilis has DECREASED from a high of 368 per 100,000 (0.368%) to around 27 per 100,000 (0.027%). Gonorrhea has DECREASED from a high of 464 per 100,000 (0.464%) to around 146 per 100,000 (0.146%). The only category that has really increased has been the rates of Chlamydia, from which most people who are infected have no symptoms. You have a better chance of being hit by a car than you do of catching an STD. The rates have NOT exploded. I am not saying you won't catch something, just that the fear of many people are blow way out of proportion. If you are practicing safe sex, you will probably never even run across the issue. It should also be noted that vast majority of new cases are among those aged less than 24 years. So unless you are into teeny boppers, you should be OK as well.


----------



## Wolf1974 (Feb 19, 2014)

itsontherocks said:


> I'm was calling once a week. How am I showing too much interest?


?? I think you accidentally quoted me. I never said you are showing too much interest

But I think you are more interested in her than she is you. That’s what I was trying to say


----------



## itsontherocks (Sep 7, 2015)

Wolf1974 said:


> ?? I think you accidentally quoted me. I never said you are showing too much interest
> 
> But I think you are more interested in her than she is you. That’s what I was trying to say



Sorry about that. I think it was meant for Mr. Married.

I am backing away from her. We'll see what happens. I am not too sure if she reach out to me, but I"ve been wrong with her a few times already. Perhaps she'll surprise me. In the meantime, I've opened the flood gates and women are reaching out to me again. Fun stuff.


----------



## itsontherocks (Sep 7, 2015)

Ynot said:


> Do not be fooled by the hyperbole. The rates of syphilis has DECREASED from a high of 368 per 100,000 (0.368%) to around 27 per 100,000 (0.027%). Gonorrhea has DECREASED from a high of 464 per 100,000 (0.464%) to around 146 per 100,000 (0.146%). The only category that has really increased has been the rates of Chlamydia, from which most people who are infected have no symptoms. You have a better chance of being hit by a car than you do of catching an STD. The rates have NOT exploded. I am not saying you won't catch something, just that the fear of many people are blow way out of proportion. If you are practicing safe sex, you will probably never even run across the issue. It should also be noted that vast majority of new cases are among those aged less than 24 years. So unless you are into teeny boppers, you should be OK as well.


Actually, in Canada and the Northeast, Gonorrhea, Chlamydia and Syphilis are on the rise. Just check Google News and you can read about the alarming outbreak.


----------



## Wolf1974 (Feb 19, 2014)

itsontherocks said:


> Sorry about that. I am backing away. We'll see what happens. I am not too sure if she reach out to me, but I"ve been wrong with her a few times already. Perhaps she'll surprise me. In the meantime, I've opened the flood gates and women are reaching out to me again. Fun stuff.


It’s all good sir. When I got divorced I also went through the growing pains of OLD. It’s fast paced and take no prisoners. Pretty much every woman I went out with was dating multiple people. At first I didn’t like this but it just what’s commonly accepted so I did the same. 

When you meet the right one and she feels the same you’ll know. You’ll both be eager to have that commitment talk and get off old. That’s the best I can tell you is you’ll know.

Until then date and have fun. Don’t over invest time, energy, or money into people you don’t know and likely won’t have a long term thing with. When it’s right you won’t have doubts.

Enjoy 😉


----------



## Ynot (Aug 26, 2014)

itsontherocks said:


> Actually, in Canada and the Northeast, Gonorrhea, Chlamydia and Syphilis are on the rise. Just check Google News and you can read about the alarming outbreak.


But....it isn't alarming! It is hyperbole. Rates have increased by X amount, which is well within the margin of error. Live in fear if you want, continue to be confused about the world today. I really could not care any less. All I am saying is that the overwhelming fear of STDs that seems to drive some people to celibacy is completely overblown. 
You made a statement that there has been an explosion of STDs because of feminism. But you are just flat out wrong. If anything there has been an explosion of divorces because of feminism, because now for the first time in history many women, especially those in the developed world have choices. They can and do have casual, recreational sex. They no longer need to be married or hide in order to simply enjoy sex for the sake of having sex.


----------



## itsontherocks (Sep 7, 2015)

Ynot said:


> But....it isn't alarming! It is hyperbole. Rates have increased by X amount, which is well within the margin of error. Live in fear if you want, continue to be confused about the world today. I really could not care any less. All I am saying is that the overwhelming fear of STDs that seems to drive some people to celibacy is completely overblown



Respectfully, I disagree. However, to each their own.


----------



## itsontherocks (Sep 7, 2015)

Wolf1974 said:


> It’s all good sir. When I got divorced I also went through the growing pains of OLD. It’s fast paced and take no prisoners. Pretty much every woman I went out with was dating multiple people. At first I didn’t like this but it just what’s commonly accepted so I did the same.
> 
> When you meet the right one and she feels the same you’ll know. You’ll both be eager to have that commitment talk and get off old. That’s the best I can tell you is you’ll know.
> 
> ...


Yea, it's a whole new world. I am not crazy about it, but it is what it is.


----------



## Wolf1974 (Feb 19, 2014)

itsontherocks said:


> Yea, it's a whole new world. I am not crazy about it, but it is what it is.


Neither was I at first however once I learned the game, lowered my expectations,and set boundrys as to not be taken advantage of I had an absolute blast. And I do mean had the time of my life dating for about 5 years post divorce. If things with my GF ended tomorrow I wouldn’t mind going back at all. Just need to give it some time and figure out what you’re comfortable with. Don’t let it be discouraging


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

itsontherocks said:


> If you're a woman, I'd be more concerned about HPV, than herpes.


Had it. Cleared it.

Most people, they say, have HSV-1 (approx. 80%). Approx. 15% - 20% have HSV-2. Molluscum IS considered and STI/STD in many countries. However, it's your life, live it as you wish. However, it would be wise for you to be tested after each and every encounter. If you do not care about yourself, fine. At least give the other person the right to make that choice. 

Funny story.. A co-workers ex-husband was cheating on her. He contracted both strains of HSV (herpes) and a couple of other STDs. He, of course, didn't share this with her until later on.
[/quote]
Jerk face. On many levels.



> They had a child who was infected during birth and has major complications. He then came clean. So, in review, this moron effected two people which could had been prevented. The child has serious issues due to said complications and she will have to deal with this for the rest of her life.
> 
> Just keep that in mind next time you make an preposterous statement like that. Oh, "cheers"


This is the world we live in. It is not always pretty.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Ynot said:


> But....it isn't alarming!


I can say that I am not alarmed. I get tested all the time. As I said, life has risks...



> It is hyperbole. Rates have increased by X amount, which is well within the margin of error. Live in fear if you want, continue to be confused about the world today. I really could not care any less. All I am saying is that the overwhelming fear of STDs that seems to drive some people to celibacy is completely overblown.
> You made a statement that there has been an explosion of STDs because of feminism. But you are just flat out wrong. If anything there has been an explosion of divorces because of feminism, because now for the first time in history many women, especially those in the developed world have choices. They can and do have casual, recreational sex. They no longer need to be married or hide in order to simply enjoy sex for the sake of having sex.


Yup.


----------



## Ynot (Aug 26, 2014)

itsontherocks said:


> Respectfully, I disagree. However, to each their own.


Yep, the choices are paralyzing fear and utter confusion or freedom. I choose freedom.


----------



## itsontherocks (Sep 7, 2015)

NobodySpecial said:


> Had it. Cleared it.


Good for you. Not all are able to be cleared. Just keep that in mind.


----------



## itsontherocks (Sep 7, 2015)

Ynot said:


> Yep, the choices are paralyzing fear and utter confusion or freedom. I choose freedom.


To each their own.


----------



## Ynot (Aug 26, 2014)

NobodySpecial said:


> I can say that I am not alarmed. I get tested all the time. As I said, life has risks...


Yep unfortunately many prefer to live life in a security blanket, trying to eliminate any possibility of risk. It is one of the reasons why the world is the way it is today. People are so afraid to die that they aren't brave enough to live (see my signature line)


----------



## ReformedHubby (Jan 9, 2013)

Bananapeel said:


> Totally serious...this is the way dating has become. Especially with OLD. But you misunderstand the rest. It isn't about screwing anyone it is about understanding supply/demand dynamics and negotiation techniques. The supply/demand dynamic between the sexes changes naturally as people age. When women are in their early 20's there is limited supply and lots of demand, so they have the power to be as selective as they want and advocate for their needs first without regard to their suitors needs. As women age their demand goes down because traditionally their demand is associated with their youth and beauty. But as men age and become more successful their demand goes up because their demand is linked more to success and power than to beauty/youth. Eventually, this flips the supply/demand curve to being highly in the men's favor. Once men realize that they stop accepting less than they want in a relationship (just like women did in their early 20's) because it is very easy to replace a suboptimal partner with someone better. Regarding negotiation techniques - that means that men need to realize that the only person that is going to advocate for their relationship needs is them, and it would be counterproductive to be a weak negotiator. Likewise, it is the woman's job to advocate for her needs, which historically is something women have been better at than men, especially since they learned earlier when the supply/demand curve favored them in their early 20's. If you were a high quality man, knew you were in high demand, knew you could replace a suboptimal partner very quickly, and knew you could successfully advocate for your needs and find someone to meet those needs, then why wouldn't you accept the new dating norms when it benefits you? This is a pragmatic and realistic view of dating, but not a romantic one. Again, this only applies to high quality men.


I am sorry, but I couldn't disagree with you more. I'm not at all PC so I am not going to apologize for the picture that I paint. The bottom line is I think women don't ever really lose their value. Your theory makes sense on the surface, but IMO you are forgetting how much inner cave man most of us really have in us. We still pretty much exist to attract and provide. The bottom line is P Power rules us men, it literally motivates everything we do. If I were to test your theory lets see what happens when myself a millionaire mid 40s guy who is decent looking goes to a bar vs an average woman in her 40s. If both of us are looking to hook up, I guarantee you she finds someone first.

I will acknowledge that your theory isn't completely bunk, its true that a successful man can get attractive women easier than most. But....once you get them guess what. They wrap you around their finger. P power rules the world....just accept it.


----------



## itsontherocks (Sep 7, 2015)

ReformedHubby said:


> I am sorry, but I couldn't disagree with you more. I'm not at all PC so I am not going to apologize for the picture that I paint. The bottom line is I think women don't ever really lose their value. Your theory makes sense on the surface, but IMO you are forgetting how much inner cave man most of us really have in us. We still pretty much exist to attract and provide. The bottom line is P Power rules us men, it literally motivates everything we do. If I were to test your theory lets see what happens when myself a millionaire mid 40s guy who is decent looking goes to a bar vs an average woman in her 40s. If both of us are looking to hook up, I guarantee you she finds someone first.
> 
> I will acknowledge that your theory isn't completely bunk, its true that a successful man can get attractive women easier than most. But....once you get them guess what. They wrap you around their finger. P power rules the world....just accept it.


Really depends on a a person's genes and if they take care of themselves. As for a man, if you are a millionaire, congrats, but that's not the norm for most men.


----------



## oldshirt (Apr 1, 2017)

ReformedHubby said:


> The bottom line is I think women don't ever really lose their value. Your theory makes sense on the surface, but IMO you are forgetting how much inner cave man most of us really have in us. We still pretty much exist to attract and provide. The bottom line is P Power rules us men, it literally motivates everything we do. If I were to test your theory lets see what happens when myself a millionaire mid 40s guy who is decent looking goes to a bar vs an average woman in her 40s. If both of us are looking to hook up, I guarantee you she finds someone first.
> 
> .



If you are just talking about a no-strings ONS, then yes, even a fat, gross, wrinkled middle aged woman will score quicker and easier than a fit, good looking, successful man of any age. If a woman is giving away P, there will always be a taker. 

But the playing field evens out quickly ifyou are talking about LTR/Marriage. 

If you are talking about relationship potential, then a reasonably fit and presentable, gainfully employed middle aged man that is not an alcoholic/drug addict and has at least healthy and effective interpersonal skills is not going to be crying in his pillow on very many lonely nights. 

A fit, attractive and gainfully employed middle aged woman will do fine as well but after a certain age, the relationship scales are going to tip towards the middle aged man that has kept himself healthy, sober, well-groomed and is successful. 

When it comes to random and no-strings hook ups, the female will always have the advantage. They can get that anywhere, anytime from teen years until they are incontinent. 

But when it comes to LTR opportunities with a reasonably fit, attractive, sane, sober and financially solvent partner in middle age, the relationship scales tip towards men.


----------



## itsontherocks (Sep 7, 2015)

oldshirt said:


> If you are just talking about a no-strings ONS, then yes, even a fat, gross, wrinkled middle aged woman will score quicker and easier than a fit, good looking, successful man of any age. If a woman is giving away P, there will always be a taker.
> 
> But the playing field evens out quickly ifyou are talking about LTR/Marriage.
> 
> ...



True, but I know a lot of them, the men, that have the high paying jobs, nice car, threads, etc., that would be up sh!ts creek if they lost their job. It amazes me how many men (don't get me started on the women - they are worse financially) earning over 100k that really spend all that moolah on BS. I read on CNBC not too long ago that this is the norm, not the exception. 

Happily, I am the exception. I am a minimalist (I.E. Aaron Clarey).


----------



## Bananapeel (May 4, 2015)

ReformedHubby said:


> I am sorry, but I couldn't disagree with you more. I'm not at all PC so I am not going to apologize for the picture that I paint. The bottom line is I think women don't ever really lose their value. Your theory makes sense on the surface, but IMO you are forgetting how much inner cave man most of us really have in us. We still pretty much exist to attract and provide. The bottom line is P Power rules us men, it literally motivates everything we do. If I were to test your theory lets see what happens when myself a millionaire mid 40s guy who is decent looking goes to a bar vs an average woman in her 40s. If both of us are looking to hook up, I guarantee you she finds someone first.
> 
> I will acknowledge that your theory isn't completely bunk, its true that a successful man can get attractive women easier than most. But....once you get them guess what. They wrap you around their finger. P power rules the world....just accept it.


Just write your phone number on your ATM receipt and the rest takes care of itself :grin2:. 

But in all seriousness, yes you are correct that an average woman can hook up for casual sex more quickly than an average man on any given night. However, if a man keeps his options open and multidates he can have casual sex whenever he wants and will be resistant to being wrapped around a woman's finger because he has choices. You are thinking like a guy that doesn't have options and isn't in high demand, which is why you'd be ruled by the P power. The dating scene has changed and if you learn to play by a different set of rules you can completely negate P power.


----------



## SpinyNorman (Jan 24, 2018)

You've both said you don't sleep around and you've had sex, so next I would establish whether the relationship is monogamous or not. Mention the above facts and say "I'm ok w/ our relationship being monogamous. If you're not ready for that, ok but I need to know." Or if you need it to be, say so. Don't be monogamous and just hope/expect her to have the same mindset, that is a sucker's bet.


----------



## BobSimmons (Mar 2, 2013)

itsontherocks said:


> Agree, however, it was coming down pretty hard. Since she had 60 miles to drive, I thought it would be best to offer for her to stay over. Her driving home at 1am in rain and fog I'd be concerned. She said she was better the week before. I didn't know about her period til she came over towards the end of the date.
> 
> Nonetheless, I agree with the consensus and already started to mentally back off. Dating has changed so much. Not crazy about these new rules.


No dating hasn't changed much at all. Is it easier with the advent of the internet and smartphones, apps etc, yes.

Is it superficial, absolutely but such was the case way back when, popular still gets you laid, good looking always helps your chances and confidence...100% helps.

A simple question? Why this torture? Forget rules forget exclusivity. Why are you making this so hard?

It's simple. She's either into you or not.

Also you expect others to treat you the way you treat them.

If two people hit it off then nothing has to be complicated. You meet you talk, you reach out, she reaches out..you know, being adults.

This woman is giving you the push and pull, in fact she's stopped all that and you're doing the pulling now you want to push.

All this "I'm going to hang back and see what she does", the game playing, is this what dating is about? Is it not about getting to trial someone and if they don't work out, you move on?

Why not chalk it up as a minor win. You dated, you enjoyed yourself, you got laid, now you move on.

Dating is supposed to be fun. Are you having fun? Is all this fun?


----------



## Bananapeel (May 4, 2015)

SpinyNorman said:


> You've both said you don't sleep around and you've had sex, so next I would establish whether the relationship is monogamous or not. Mention the above facts and say "I'm ok w/ our relationship being monogamous. If you're not ready for that, ok but I need to know." Or if you need it to be, say so. Don't be monogamous and just hope/expect her to have the same mindset, that is a sucker's bet.


I disagree with this. As a Corey Wayne fan he should not be the one to bring up monogamy. She's showing low interest so pushing for monogamy (i.e. a commitment) is a beta male move that will hurt his changes of seeing her again. His best choices is to do what he's already decided and give her space. He'll be able to tell what her interest level is soon enough because she'll either reach out to him (if she's interested) or she won't.


----------



## ReformedHubby (Jan 9, 2013)

Bananapeel said:


> Just write your phone number on your ATM receipt and the rest takes care of itself :grin2:.
> 
> But in all seriousness, yes you are correct that an average woman can hook up for casual sex more quickly than an average man on any given night. However, if a man keeps his options open and multidates he can have casual sex whenever he wants and will be resistant to being wrapped around a woman's finger because he has choices. You are thinking like a guy that doesn't have options and isn't in high demand, which is why you'd be ruled by the P power. The dating scene has changed and if you learn to play by a different set of rules you can completely negate P power.


I actually agree with every single thing you've said....except one aspect of it that I think you under estimate. Most of the women that high value men have on their arm....are also high value. Meaning if that high value man wants to keep her he is in the exact same boat as everyone else. So I still think P Power rules. Rarely do I talk about my personal life on here, but using myself as an example. I do think my current girlfriend loves me....but to her I'm not high value at all I'm just regular. In fact her girlfriends think she is settling. Her ex husband played in the NFL, Her list of suitors when I met her included one rock star, a current star NFL player, and a handful of random guys with private jets. What I'm saying is high value men fish in a pool that pretty much evens everything out.


----------



## itsontherocks (Sep 7, 2015)

SpinyNorman said:


> You've both said you don't sleep around and you've had sex, so next I would establish whether the relationship is monogamous or not. Mention the above facts and say "I'm ok w/ our relationship being monogamous. If you're not ready for that, ok but I need to know." Or if you need it to be, say so. Don't be monogamous and just hope/expect her to have the same mindset, that is a sucker's bet.


It's a catch 22. Usually, the next level is brought up by the woman, not the man. I've actually done that before and the conversation turned into a ghosting. Later on, I was told, when she reached out (second thoughts), she told me I was pushing too hard too fast. My only question that I presented to her was I'd like to build on top of what we have into something. So, I know not to do that again.


----------



## itsontherocks (Sep 7, 2015)

Bananapeel said:


> I disagree with this. As a Corey Wayne fan he should not be the one to bring up monogamy. She's showing low interest so pushing for monogamy (i.e. a commitment) is a beta male move that will hurt his changes of seeing her again. His best choices is to do what he's already decided and give her space. He'll be able to tell what her interest level is soon enough because she'll either reach out to him (if she's interested) or she won't.


Agreed. A man showing too much interest is never a good sign. One of my friends thinks she actually is in to me very much and she's just playing hard to get so she doesn't show her true feelings. I asked why do you think that? Simple. No attractive woman will drive an hour away just for dinner when she lives in a city over over a quarter of a million people, not once, but twice. She may had been burned in the past or you're still mysterious to her, so she's playing it safe. If you over pursue, you look like all the rest of the men chasing her. Trust when I say she's wondering if you really like her or not. Most men are conditioned to contact, run and lock the woman down as fast as possible. You are doing the complete opposite. Just hang back and see what happens organically. 

That is where I am now.


----------



## itsontherocks (Sep 7, 2015)

BobSimmons said:


> No dating hasn't changed much at all. Is it easier with the advent of the internet and smartphones, apps etc, yes.
> 
> Is it superficial, absolutely but such was the case way back when, popular still gets you laid, good looking always helps your chances and confidence...100% helps.
> 
> ...


Never said it was torture. However, I am not just looking for a hole to park my car in every now and then. I am sticking to my hand and I will see. No sense in crying over spilt milk. If she reaches out, then cool, if not, I enjoyed the experience.

Dating is a game. However, I am not going to play the pawn.


----------



## itsontherocks (Sep 7, 2015)

ReformedHubby said:


> I actually agree with every single thing you've said....except one aspect of it that I think you under estimate. Most of the women that high value men have on their arm....are also high value. Meaning if that high value man wants to keep her he is in the exact same boat as everyone else. So I still think P Power rules. Rarely do I talk about my personal life on here, but using myself as an example. I do think my current girlfriend loves me....but to her I'm not high value at all I'm just regular. In fact her girlfriends think she is settling. Her ex husband played in the NFL, Her list of suitors when I met her included one rock star, a current star NFL player, and a handful of random guys with private jets. What I'm saying is high value men fish in a pool that pretty much evens everything out.



You are comparing celebrities to this situation. When a man is a celebrity, they can do a lot of things regular men, even millionaires cannot get away with. I am not a celebrity nor a millionaire. You are comparing apples to oranges.


----------



## Ursula (Dec 2, 2016)

itsontherocks said:


> Agreed. It's hard to build a relationship when either know there are dozen of other people looking to "meet" you. It seems to be a means to an end.
> 
> Even stated to her on the first date, what you see is what you get. *I don't exaggerate or lie. What's the point. The other person will eventually find out. I just prefer to be honest. She says everyone lies. I don't. No one has ever caught me in a lie. Maybe I am in the minority, but I just feel better being honest. Or, if the question is too personal, not answering.*
> 
> Now, let me be clear to the board, I am not an open book, however, if I am asked a question or I am explaining something, it's done by experience and fact, not by hyperbole and lies. That is what I was trying to get clear.


I'm the same way. A friend recently told me that all OLD profiles are fake, that everyone either exaggerates, or outright lies. My profile is 100% truthful, and I like to believe that there are others out there like that too.


----------



## Ursula (Dec 2, 2016)

Bananapeel said:


> Agreed. I have long thought that the sexual revolution was ultimately detrimental for women because it lead to this dating environment. There is no way to put the genie back in the bottle on this one, so this is the environment we should expect for the future.


I wish there were a "dislike" button for posts not because I disagree with you, but because this makes me sad about the future of relationships.


----------



## itsontherocks (Sep 7, 2015)

Ursula said:


> I'm the same way. A friend recently told me that all OLD profiles are fake, that everyone either exaggerates, or outright lies. My profile is 100% truthful, and I like to believe that there are others out there like that too.


Yea, I've heard that before too. I attempted to put her at ease by that statement. I could tell she didn't believe me. I then stated, have you caught me in a lie for the last few weeks on anything? She said no. I said there you go. She smirked. It is what it is.


----------



## Ursula (Dec 2, 2016)

itsontherocks said:


> Sadly, at least where I am now, outside of NYC it is. It's mainly a hookup culture. Same with many metro city areas. Perhaps the unintended consequences of feminism, but that is the cause of all the promiscuity. It's only going to get worse before it gets better.


 @itsontherocks, I was totally going to say earlier that we should do lunch, and hell, I'd even put in some effort to meet up with you. Joint effort is a good thing! However, you're near NYC (one of my favourite cities), and I'm in Alberta, Canada. So yeah, that's a very long commute indeed!


----------



## Ursula (Dec 2, 2016)

Duplicate Post


----------



## itsontherocks (Sep 7, 2015)

Ursula said:


> I wish there were a "dislike" button for posts not because I disagree with you, but because this makes me sad about the future of relationships.


Just brings women down to the man's level. Everyone is a commodity. No one likes to be traded like gold, silver or pork bellies, however, this is what equalism has done. It's basically a race to the bottom of the barrel. I guess, just attempt to have fun on the way down. Not what I like nor want, but it is what it is. Want more proof? Look at all of the people posting about cheating and pending divorces. It's just a shame. Relationships and marriages are treated like yesterdays newspaper. Do you business and then throw it away. Shows zero substance in the end. My opinion, of course.


----------



## itsontherocks (Sep 7, 2015)

Ursula said:


> @itsontherocks, I was totally going to say earlier that we should do lunch, and hell, I'd even put in some effort to meet up with you. Joint effort is a good thing! However, you're near NYC (one of my favourite cities), and I'm in Alberta, Canada. So yeah, that's a very long commute indeed!


NYC. A great place to visit, not a great place to find someone. LOL


----------



## SpinyNorman (Jan 24, 2018)

itsontherocks said:


> It's a catch 22. Usually, the next level is brought up by the woman, not the man. I've actually done that before and the conversation turned into a ghosting. Later on, I was told, when she reached out (second thoughts), she told me I was pushing too hard too fast. My only question that I presented to her was I'd like to build on top of what we have into something. So, I know not to do that again.


Or you'd know not to do that again if all women were interchangeable, which they are not.

It seems to me like you are committed to playing by a set of rules you don't like. If you do that, you will scare off any woman who doesn't like them either, and those are the ones you want.

If you're complaining it's hard to find someone sincere, it is, you have my sympathy. If you're going cynical about it, you are joining the enemy.


----------



## Ynot (Aug 26, 2014)

Ursula said:


> I wish there were a "dislike" button for posts not because I disagree with you, but because this makes me sad about the future of relationships.


I would have to disagree that feminism has been detrimental to women. I think feminism has been detrimental to some women. but not all. Radical feminism has been detrimental to women as well, mainly to those who practice it. However many women have benefitted from feminism. Not only due to improved employment opportunities and increased incomes, but also precisely because this has allowed them enjoy sex as a human being and not be restricted to just :approved" choices any longer.
You seem to have accepted the shame of these women who think you should use sex as a commodity to gain a man (regardless of how they claim OLD is little more than prostitution, that is exactly what they are practicing). Please don't do that. You are a human being with real life wants, needs and desires. Do not settle for their view of the world. Go out and make your own world. Enjoy life. Have sex if you want to. Exploring your own wants and needs is the only way you are going to discover what you want from the world.


----------



## SpinyNorman (Jan 24, 2018)

Bananapeel said:


> I disagree with this. As a Corey Wayne fan he should not be the one to bring up monogamy. She's showing low interest so pushing for monogamy (i.e. a commitment) is a beta male move that will hurt his changes of seeing her again. His best choices is to do what he's already decided and give her space. He'll be able to tell what her interest level is soon enough because she'll either reach out to him (if she's interested) or she won't.


Not really up on Corey Wayne, but I don't see keeping quiet about what you want to know and reading tea leaves as some alpha male thing. Personally if someone can't communicate about something important w/ me, not seeing them again isn't a bad thing. But I think we are cut from very different cloth.


----------



## itsontherocks (Sep 7, 2015)

SpinyNorman said:


> Or you'd know not to do that again if all women were interchangeable, which they are not.
> 
> It seems to me like you are committed to playing by a set of rules you don't like. If you do that, you will scare off any woman who doesn't like them either, and those are the ones you want.
> 
> If you're complaining it's hard to find someone sincere, it is, you have my sympathy. If you're going cynical about it, you are joining the enemy.



Not looking for sympathy, validation or cynical responses. I post because I want other people's opinions. Here's the thing. No one knows what's going on in another person's mind. One can ask them, however, chances are, they will not tell you the truth. Dating has become a game. It's a game I've refused to play for a while now, however, if I want to get anywhere I needed to start rolling the dice; and this is what I've done. The dice are in her court. It's her roll. Will she roll a 7 or a 4? I hope a 7, but I am prepared to see a 4. For people who do not know craps, 7 is good, 4 is no good.


----------



## itsontherocks (Sep 7, 2015)

Ynot said:


> I would have to disagree that feminism has been detrimental to women. I think feminism has been detrimental to some women. but not all. Radical feminism has been detrimental to women as well, mainly to those who practice it. However many women have benefitted from feminism. Not only due to improved employment opportunities and increased incomes, but also precisely because this has allowed them enjoy sex as a human being and not be restricted to just :approved" choices any longer.
> You seem to have accepted the shame of these women who think you should use sex as a commodity to gain a man (regardless of how they claim OLD is little more than prostitution, that is exactly what they are practicing). Please don't do that. You are a human being with real life wants, needs and desires. Do not settle for their view of the world. Go out and make your own world. Enjoy life. Have sex if you want to. Exploring your own wants and needs is the only way you are going to discover what you want from the world.


For everything good that it has done (rights, responsibilities, income, etc.) there are always unintended consequences. I am all for the freedoms and equalities that women now have. However, these equalities have NOT poured over into the dating and relationship world. It's still where the man has to do the courting, the inviting, the paying, etc. If it was truly equal, BOTH males and females would be sharing the tasks. 

Example, I've reactivated my profile on OLD since Monday. Since then, I've received 24 women who've "liked" or "smiled" at me. Now, if it was equal, and they have interest, then they should just reach out and message. But no, that is my responsibility. However, if this was the reverse, MOST women will not respond to "likes" or "smiles". It's so uneven in the dating realm, a man needs to play it calm, cool and collected. Whereas a woman can do whatever and behave (within reason) however she wishes. There is no equality in dating. Men still need to do all the work. A woman or a man not in the dating game just doesn't understand this. Thus, a married man telling me to pour my feelings and wants to her has no idea that this is JUST A REALLY BAD MOVE. And believe me, while I have interest in her, I am not head over heals for her. Nothing wrong with her, it's just I did that with my ex-wife and with another woman a year ago. Expressing any interest above a woman's interest is a turn-off to her. Reason being, it shows you have no other options. It makes little logical sense, but that is what even the women tell me. It's not that I have no other options, I am busy with life and work. I rather not juggle multiple women at once. Call me crazy, but I still feel women are worth more than a receptacle and fun times. I guess I was just born in the wrong decade.


----------



## itsontherocks (Sep 7, 2015)

SpinyNorman said:


> Not really up on Corey Wayne, but I don't see keeping quiet about what you want to know and reading tea leaves as some alpha male thing. Personally if someone can't communicate about something important w/ me, not seeing them again isn't a bad thing. But I think we are cut from very different cloth.


Spiny, I have Mr. Wayne's book and audio book. Bananapeel is correct, you are incorrect, sir. The monogamy talk is for the woman to bring up, not the man. You can check out his videos on Youtube for verification.

https://www.youtube.com/user/coachcoreywayne


----------



## Ynot (Aug 26, 2014)

SpinyNorman said:


> Not really up on Corey Wayne, but I don't see keeping quiet about what you want to know and reading tea leaves as some alpha male thing. Personally if someone can't communicate about something important w/ me, not seeing them again isn't a bad thing. But I think we are cut from very different cloth.


I think you are misunderstanding what BP is trying to say. His point was that you did not have to read tea leaves, minds or anything else. You set your standards and allow them to present to you, because you have presented yourself (self confident, honest, a man who says what he means and means what he says). You don't need to sit around and wonder, because you know you have options. Not in any sort of cynical way, just simply because you are not desperate and know that someone else will be along shortly that will take you exactly life you are. 
You may very well be totally in love with this woman, but if she doesn't accept you for who you are. You will always know there is better. It is POV from the side of abundance rather than scarcity (as in the ONE!)


----------



## itsontherocks (Sep 7, 2015)

Ynot said:


> I think you are misunderstanding what BP is trying to say. His point was that you did not have to read tea leaves, minds or anything else. You set your standards and allow them to present to you, because you have presented yourself (self confident, honest, a man who says what he means and means what he says). You don't need to sit around and wonder, because you know you have options. Not in any sort of cynical way, just simply because you are not desperate and know that someone else will be along shortly that will take you exactly life you are.
> You may very well be totally in love with this woman, but if she doesn't accept you for who you are. You will always know there is better. It is POV from the side of abundance rather than scarcity (as in the ONE!)


I assume that was pointed to the OP, me. I am not desperate, never said I was. I just am not a big fan of multidating. Though, I can adapt to the changing times when necessary.


----------



## Ynot (Aug 26, 2014)

itsontherocks said:


> I assume that was pointed to the OP, me. I am not desperate, never said I was. I just am not a big fan of multidating. Though, I can adapt to the changing times when necessary.


It was not directed towards you. It was directed towards the poster I quoted. He referred to reading tea leaves, implying that it was he who was in a position of weakness, worrying about their offer. BP simply said there was no worry involved, because none is needed. You are valuable in your own right and have no need to be weak by worrying.


----------



## SpinyNorman (Jan 24, 2018)

itsontherocks said:


> Not looking for sympathy, validation or cynical responses. I post because I want other people's opinions. Here's the thing. No one knows what's going on in another person's mind. One can ask them, however, chances are, they will not tell you the truth. Dating has become a game. It's a game I've refused to play for a while now, however, if I want to get anywhere I needed to start rolling the dice; and this is what I've done. The dice are in her court. It's her roll. Will she roll a 7 or a 4? I hope a 7, but I am prepared to see a 4. For people who do not know craps, 7 is good, 4 is no good.


Some people will not tell you the truth. Some people treat dating as a game. Not much point complaining about them after you concede to their rules.


----------



## SpinyNorman (Jan 24, 2018)

itsontherocks said:


> Spiny, I have Mr. Wayne's book and audio book. Bananapeel is correct, you are incorrect, sir. The monogamy talk is for the woman to bring up, not the man. You can check out his videos on Youtube for verification.
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/user/coachcoreywayne


It's obvious you give this guy a lot of authority I don't.


----------



## itsontherocks (Sep 7, 2015)

SpinyNorman said:


> It's obvious you give this guy a lot of authority I don't.


He's only been doing this for 20 years. But, what does he know.


----------



## Suspicious1 (Nov 19, 2017)

itsontherocks said:


> NYC. A great place to visit, not a great place to find someone. LOL


Tell me about it, I have some great women friends successful smart, kind and beautiful. Allot od them can't seem to find they're counterpartners. It almost seems the more successful and beautiful they are the less they are taken seriously. Most of their relationship last 3 to 6 months tops.

I'm mot sure how it is for guys who are looking for a serious relationship, as the ratio favors men.

Sent from my SM-G930T using Tapatalk


----------



## ReformedHubby (Jan 9, 2013)

itsontherocks said:


> You are comparing celebrities to this situation. When a man is a celebrity, they can do a lot of things regular men, even millionaires cannot get away with. I am not a celebrity nor a millionaire. You are comparing apples to oranges.


Very true, I wasn't actually addressing your topic, I was replying to another poster so it was a bit of a thread jack. It was the whole "high value man" thing that got me going. Probably a topic worth discussing in another thread.


----------



## Ynot (Aug 26, 2014)

SpinyNorman said:


> Some people will not tell you the truth. Some people treat dating as a game. Not much point complaining about them after you concede to their rules.


Life is a game. You can either play by their rules or live by your own.


----------



## SpinyNorman (Jan 24, 2018)

itsontherocks said:


> He's only been doing this for 20 years. But, what does he know.


If you study reasoning, you will recognize this as "appeal to authority".

Maybe the self-help authors do know everything, although they sure disagree a lot. If you've concluded they have all the answers you need, I'm not sure why you're wasting your time w/ us.


----------



## SpinyNorman (Jan 24, 2018)

Ynot said:


> Life is a game. You can either play by their rules or live by your own.


Agree. 

In this case, playing by their rules is only going to get you closer to "them", which seems like a dubious prize.


----------



## itsontherocks (Sep 7, 2015)

SpinyNorman said:


> If you study reasoning, you will recognize this as "appeal to authority".
> 
> Maybe the self-help authors do know everything, although they sure disagree a lot. If you've concluded they have all the answers you need, I'm not sure why you're wasting your time w/ us.


Opinions vary my friend.


----------



## Ynot (Aug 26, 2014)

SpinyNorman said:


> Agree.
> 
> In this case, playing by their rules is only going to get you closer to "them", which seems like a dubious prize.


But that dubious prize seems to be what you think a man should seek.


----------



## SpinyNorman (Jan 24, 2018)

Ynot said:


> But that dubious prize seems to be what you think a man should seek.


No, not my position at all.

I'm in favor of playing by rules you think make sense, and not the ones that are popular, i.e. the ones made by "them". If that costs you the company of "them", no big loss. I think TS is inclined to play by their rules, which he does not like and I encourage him not to do.


----------



## SpinyNorman (Jan 24, 2018)

itsontherocks said:


> Opinions vary my friend.


Certainly, which is why it was rather silly to say I was "incorrect" for disagreeing w/ your self-help guru's dating advice.


----------



## SpinyNorman (Jan 24, 2018)

itsontherocks said:


> For everything good that it has done (rights, responsibilities, income, etc.) there are always unintended consequences. I am all for the freedoms and equalities that women now have. However, these equalities have NOT poured over into the dating and relationship world. It's still where the man has to do the courting, the inviting, the paying, etc. If it was truly equal, BOTH males and females would be sharing the tasks.


So fight for equality the way feminists did, i.e. be willing to endure a bunch of name calling and ostracism along the way. Unlike some of them, it doesn't seem like you'll have to put your paycheck in jeopardy to fight your fight.


----------



## SpinyNorman (Jan 24, 2018)

minimalME said:


> Okay. I'll agree to disagree.
> 
> To me it has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not you love sex.
> 
> And if modern women think that casual sex is earning them respect and that they're being seen as people and not objects, I think they're quite mistaken.


I respect people who take responsibility for their actions, including women who responsibly engage in casual sex.

As far as regarding them as people or objects, people can have a libido and an object cannot.


----------



## itsontherocks (Sep 7, 2015)

Back to the original topic at hand. I received an interesting call tonight. The woman called, but I was eating dinner with family, so it went to voicemail, and she didn't leave a message. I was done a few minutes later and instead of waiting a day to call her back (like she did), I left the room and called her back. She was very silent, which I knew wasn't a good sign. Made some chit chat about the weekend storm and asked how her trip was. She said a bit windy. I then said cat got your tongue? Everything okay? She said, I like you, but I think I have to stop seeing you. I said, okay, it is what it is. Take care of yourself, good night and hung up the phone. I entered in with the rest of the family, and attempted to rejoin the conversation.

It hurts, but it is what it is. First time I've heard a woman told me that I like you, but I need to stop seeing you. I am not going to run, beg and plead. No worries. No biggie. I am a big boy, and I kinda saw this coming down the line. They way she acted last weekend, as explained, period or not was just weird. Nothing else I could do but wish her well.


----------



## Elizabeth001 (May 18, 2015)

itsontherocks said:


> Back to the original topic at hand. I received an interesting call tonight. The woman called, but I was eating dinner with family, so it went to voicemail, and she didn't leave a message. I was done a few minutes later and instead of waiting a day to call her back (like she did), I left the room and called her back. She was very silent, which I knew wasn't a good sign. Made some chit chat about the weekend storm and asked how her trip was. She said a bit windy. I then said cat got your tongue? Everything okay? She said, I like you, but I think I have to stop seeing you. I said, okay, it is what it is. Take care of yourself, good night and hung up the phone. I entered in with the rest of the family, and attempted to rejoin the conversation.
> 
> It hurts, but it is what it is. First time I've heard a woman told me that I like you, but I need to stop seeing you. I am not going to run, beg and plead. No worries. No biggie. I am a big boy, and I kinda saw this coming down the line. They way she acted last weekend, as explained, period or not was just weird. Nothing else I could do but wish her well.




No reason? I would be curious. Not that I would chase someone either...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## itsontherocks (Sep 7, 2015)

Elizabeth001 said:


> No reason? I would be curious. Not that I would chase someone either...
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Nope, none given. I have too much respect for myself to ask why. The point is, she likes me but wants to stop seeing me. Enough said. Take care and good night. I think I handled it pretty solidly. Again, strange call. But, it is what it is. Her loss.


----------



## Elizabeth001 (May 18, 2015)

itsontherocks said:


> Nope, none given. I have too much respect for myself to ask why. The point is, she likes me but wants to stop seeing me. Enough said. Take care and good night. I think I handled it pretty solidly. Again, strange call. But, it is what it is. Her loss.




I agree. You probably dodged a drama bullet. Weirdness usually equals emotional instability. Good on ya 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Elizabeth001 (May 18, 2015)

As a side note, I always laugh when I see guys post “no drama” or “no head games” on their profile. It’s usually what they’re attracting. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## itsontherocks (Sep 7, 2015)

Elizabeth001 said:


> As a side note, I always laugh when I see guys post “no drama” or “no head games” on their profile. It’s usually what they’re attracting.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Never met a woman from NYC w/o any drama. I am too old for drama. Thus, I just walk away. There cannot be drama with me if I do not participate. The old saying is true, one does not negotiate with terrorists. 

Her profile said all I need is sunshine, beach and coffee to be happy. That is it. Yet, she gave up on coffee a month ago. I am sure I was # 2, 3 or 4. No doubt. As I said prior, she started to act strange after we were intimate. I wish her well and hope she finds whatever she's looking for. Not going to lie, it stings, but that too shall pass.


----------



## Cynthia (Jan 31, 2014)

There are many possible scenarios of what may have happened. On your end, it's good that you are not getting sucked into the drama and trying to figure her out. Apparently she likes you fine, but there is something going on inside of her that you do not need in your life.


----------



## itsontherocks (Sep 7, 2015)

CynthiaDe said:


> There are many possible scenarios of what may have happened. On your end, it's good that you are not getting sucked into the drama and trying to figure her out. Apparently she likes you fine, but there is something going on inside of her that you do not need in your life.


Agreed. I was just baffled by the I like you but I think we should stop seeing each other. Makes little sense. It is what it is. Just a weird statement that baffles me.


----------



## Elizabeth001 (May 18, 2015)

itsontherocks said:


> Agreed. I was just baffled by the I like you but I think we should stop seeing each other. Makes little sense. It is what it is. Just a weird statement that baffles me.




Me too!!
Hahaaa 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Cynthia (Jan 31, 2014)

itsontherocks said:


> Agreed. I was just baffled by the I like you but I think we should stop seeing each other. Makes little sense. It is what it is. Just a weird statement that baffles me.


No. It doesn't make sense, which is a big red flag and tells you that she is not who you are looking to spend another moment with. lol She told you everything you need to know in order to see that she is not for you. Thank goodness this didn't happen a year down the road. She revealed her true colors early on and you haven't wasted a bunch of time trying to figure out someone who is disordered.


----------



## itsontherocks (Sep 7, 2015)

Yep. Just a confusing situation. Dating should be easy in the beginning. If this is a game or a test, no worries, I quit it before it even started. She sounded it a bit surprised that I said, okay, it is what it is. Take care of yourself, good night and hung up the phone. Ashame, but as CynthiaDe stated, it's better to know now then later.


----------



## SpinyNorman (Jan 24, 2018)

itsontherocks said:


> Actually, in Canada and the Northeast, Gonorrhea, Chlamydia and Syphilis are on the rise. Just check Google News and you can read about the alarming outbreak.


Syphilis has been increasing since about 2000, but pick any year in there and the rate is less than what it was in the 1950's. Unless someone can persuade me the 1950's were the apex of female sexual liberation, I'm going to have to say not only is it wrong that sexual liberation has caused STD increases, but that the opposite is true.


----------



## Ynot (Aug 26, 2014)

itsontherocks said:


> Back to the original topic at hand. I received an interesting call tonight. The woman called, but I was eating dinner with family, so it went to voicemail, and she didn't leave a message. I was done a few minutes later and instead of waiting a day to call her back (like she did), I left the room and called her back. She was very silent, which I knew wasn't a good sign. Made some chit chat about the weekend storm and asked how her trip was. She said a bit windy. I then said cat got your tongue? Everything okay? She said, I like you, but I think I have to stop seeing you. I said, okay, it is what it is. Take care of yourself, good night and hung up the phone. I entered in with the rest of the family, and attempted to rejoin the conversation.
> 
> It hurts, but it is what it is. First time I've heard a woman told me that I like you, but I need to stop seeing you. I am not going to run, beg and plead. No worries. No biggie. I am a big boy, and I kinda saw this coming down the line. They way she acted last weekend, as explained, period or not was just weird. Nothing else I could do but wish her well.


Hey if nothing else give her some kudos for at least calling. She was probably as surprised as you were that she got a civil response. 
I was dating a woman a while back. I started to sense something was off as she suddenly stopped being available and made other plans for a weekend we had previously discussed. She called me when she knew I couldn't answer and left me a VM telling me, much the same thing you had been told. So I called her back and got her VM. I simply told her I understood, but she had some stuff at my place we needed to make arrangements for her to get. She called me back five minutes later and said, "Wow! The last guy I broke up with went ballistic on me, than you so much for understanding." To this day, I am friends with this woman. We meet every couple of months for drinks.
My last GF also decided to break up. We actually sat down and talked about it. Both of us had some misgivings, so it was sort of a mutual break up. I had lunch with her today and we have gone out several times since then as friends.
In my book at least she didn't just ghost you. That is a plus.


----------



## Ynot (Aug 26, 2014)

itsontherocks said:


> Agreed. I was just baffled by the I like you but I think we should stop seeing each other. Makes little sense. It is what it is. Just a weird statement that baffles me.


I don't understand why you are baffled. She was being honest. She liked you. Heck I might like you if I met you, so what? Then she said she didn't want to see you anymore. Maybe she might have expounded on that. But you cut her off and said, OK it is what it is. Which is fine because that is what it is. Just forget about and move on. As I said at least she didn't ghost you. 
I think breaking up probably takes more courage than actually starting to date someone. I'd give her some kudos for being brave enough to call you, even if it wasn't on your time schedule.


----------



## Ynot (Aug 26, 2014)

CynthiaDe said:


> No. It doesn't make sense, which is a big red flag and tells you that she is not who you are looking to spend another moment with. lol She told you everything you need to know in order to see that she is not for you. Thank goodness this didn't happen a year down the road. She revealed her true colors early on and you haven't wasted a bunch of time trying to figure out someone who is disordered.


Not arguing, just curious - why is that a big red flag? You have never just liked who someone was, but didn't feel like pursuing a relationship with them?


----------



## itsontherocks (Sep 7, 2015)

Ynot said:


> I don't understand why you are baffled. She was being honest. She liked you. Heck I might like you if I met you, so what? Then she said she didn't want to see you anymore. Maybe she might have expounded on that. But you cut her off and said, OK it is what it is. Which is fine because that is what it is. Just forget about and move on. As I said at least she didn't ghost you.
> I think breaking up probably takes more courage than actually starting to date someone. I'd give her some kudos for being brave enough to call you, even if it wasn't on your time schedule.


I didn't cut her off. There was a moment or two of silence and then I hung up. She could had expanded, but by the way she was contacting, I knew it was around the corner. I do not stay around if a person doesn't want to be with me. Not sure why I'd go ballistic. That would be a childish response. It is what it is. One cannot force another person to like or want to go out with them. Personally, I would had preferred a text or just to be ghosted. A person only calls another person they've been seeing a hand full of times to get a reaction. I know the game. I just refuse to play. I wish her well and hope she finds whatever she's looking for.

Not looking for friends, so that wasn't an option for me. If that works for you, more power to you.


----------



## Cat4life (Mar 5, 2018)

I think you should stop contacting her and see what happens. If things are confusing now and she is not trying to reassure you or meet you half way then step back and see what happens. You may be just an option for her while you are making her your priority.


----------



## Ynot (Aug 26, 2014)

itsontherocks said:


> I didn't cut her off. There was a moment or two of silence and then I hung up. She could had expanded, but by the way she was contacting, I knew it was around the corner. I do not stay around if a person doesn't want to be with me. Not sure why I'd go ballistic. That would be a childish response. It is what it is. One cannot force another person to like or want to go out with them. Personally, I would had preferred a text or just to be ghosted. A person only calls another person they've been seeing a hand full of times to get a reaction. I know the game. I just refuse to play. I wish her well and hope she finds whatever she's looking for.
> 
> Not looking for friends, so that wasn't an option for me. If that works for you, more power to you.


You seem very defensive, I never said you should have stayed around, only that you more or less cut her off by saying OK. Even if there was a moment or two of silence. What more was there for her to say at that point.
I also never said you should have gone ballistic. I merely suggested that perhaps that was something she had run across in the past. Obviously it is a childish response, but none the less still fairly common in the modern world of adult dating. Get used to it, you may have it happen to you some day. 
And no, a person doesn't just call someone to get a reaction. Sometimes they just call because they feel they owe it to you. Do a search in the forums about ghosting. It is something that truly baffles people, not a phone call. So whatever game you think she was playing is all in your head.
I am not particularly looking for friends either. I was merely making the point that when someone acts with integrity (such as calling) it allows the opportunity for you to remain friendly with those people. Sometimes people just aren't that into you. That doesn't make them a bad person, it just means they do not feel a romantic connection to you. No sense in acting as if they are dead to you.


----------



## Cynthia (Jan 31, 2014)

Ynot said:


> Not arguing, just curious - why is that a big red flag? You have never just liked who someone was, but didn't feel like pursuing a relationship with them?


It's a red flag telling him that she isn't relationship material for him. Why put any effort into someone who strings you along, then suddenly says that she likes him, but doesn't want to spend any more time with him? To me, that's a red flag/stop sign.


----------



## Ynot (Aug 26, 2014)

CynthiaDe said:


> It's a red flag telling him that she isn't relationship material for him. Why put any effort into someone who strings you along, then suddenly says that she likes him, but doesn't want to spend any more time with him? To me, that's a red flag/stop sign.


I would agree it is a stop sign, why pursue a dead end. But to me a red flag is a warning that this person may have issues. Not wanting to date someone does not mean they have issue. To me that is not a red flag, it is just a choice. Being clingy or needy would be red flags. I would much rather get a stop sign, than start seeing red flags.


----------



## itsontherocks (Sep 7, 2015)

Cat4life said:


> I think you should stop contacting her and see what happens. If things are confusing now and she is not trying to reassure you or meet you half way then step back and see what happens. You may be just an option for her while you are making her your priority.


I think that ship has sailed. She wasn't clear, but she said I need to stop seeing you. That is fine. I ended the call as good night and take care. Other women, including my ex-wife, have reached out later on and I do not press rewind. If I wasn't good enough for you then, then I am not good enough for you now. It's okay. I realize not every woman in life will have an interest in you. I'll get over it.


----------



## Cynthia (Jan 31, 2014)

Ynot said:


> I would agree it is a stop sign, why pursue a dead end. But to me a red flag is a warning that this person may have issues. Not wanting to date someone does not mean they have issue. To me that is not a red flag, it is just a choice. Being clingy or needy would be red flags. I would much rather get a stop sign, than start seeing red flags.


I would say a red flag is a warning. Maybe a warning to slow down, look deeper, stop, etc. I guess it depends on how you look at it. I think we all agree that he's better off moving on without this woman.


----------



## itsontherocks (Sep 7, 2015)

Ynot said:


> You seem very defensive, I never said you should have stayed around, only that you more or less cut her off by saying OK. Even if there was a moment or two of silence. What more was there for her to say at that point.


Yea, I know I do that. It's an automatic defense mechanism my brain does w/o thinking to ensure I do not say anything stupid. I learned that from some buddies in basic training with the drill sergeants. It's better than babbling or trying to "convince" her she's making a mistake. People feel what they feel. I just prefer a ripping it off like a bandaid.



> I also never said you should have gone ballistic. I merely suggested that perhaps that was something she had run across in the past. Obviously it is a childish response, but none the less still fairly common in the modern world of adult dating. Get used to it, you may have it happen to you some day.
> And no, a person doesn't just call someone to get a reaction. Sometimes they just call because they feel they owe it to you. Do a search in the forums about ghosting. It is something that truly baffles people, not a phone call. So whatever game you think she was playing is all in your head.
> I am not particularly looking for friends either. I was merely making the point that when someone acts with integrity (such as calling) it allows the opportunity for you to remain friendly with those people. Sometimes people just aren't that into you. That doesn't make them a bad person, it just means they do not feel a romantic connection to you. No sense in acting as if they are dead to you.


Never said she was a bad person. Confused. Perhaps, bad no. At least for me, going from intimate to something else wouldn't work for me. Best to rip the band aid right off. Hurts initially, goes away over time. Heals and you should have harder skin.


I've dated a woman that was only interested in financial and emotional security. She threw a huge fit about something minuscule at a restaurant and withheld sex purposefully for weeks until I "earned" it. She knew she was wrong, but that was the last straw. I didn't take her numerous calls, and just told her via text I am not what you are looking for. Would had been nice if I was, but you are looking for something else. She responded cordially. I feel that went better than this. I was caught by surprise.


----------



## itsontherocks (Sep 7, 2015)

CynthiaDe said:


> It's a red flag telling him that she isn't relationship material for him. Why put any effort into someone who strings you along, then suddenly says that she likes him, but doesn't want to spend any more time with him? To me, that's a red flag/stop sign.


Exactly. It hit me like a battering ram. Would had preferred a text or a ghost.


----------



## minimalME (Jan 3, 2012)

itsontherocks said:


> Exactly. It hit me like a battering ram. Would had preferred a text or a ghost.


Really? Goes to show how different we all are. 

To me, it shows character and courage that she called and spoke to you, whereas texting and disappearing are cowardly.


----------



## itsontherocks (Sep 7, 2015)

minimalME said:


> Really? Goes to show how different we all are.
> 
> To me, it shows character and courage that she called and spoke to you, whereas texting and disappearing are cowardly.


To each there own. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. I prefer the drama free approach. I do not recall stating anything negative about this women. I am just posting an update. Everyone is entitled to form their own opinion. I am not exactly sure what the proper way you feel I should had responded to that. I believe stating, it is what it is, take care and have a good night is neither negative nor positive. It's neutral. No emotional response. If there was something else she wishes to protray, she was welcomed to follow it up with an e-mail, text or voice. Interestingly enough, when she called and I didn't answer (was eating dinner), she didn't leave a voicemail. She could had left a vm stating the same. Believe it or not, she was looking for some sort of reaction. Not saying that is good, bad or indifferent. This is the metro NYC area. Most of the women I've met are pretty up front on their thoughts and intensions. So, process it as you will. However, again, I have nothing against her. I wish her the best. I am not sure what else you want me to do. Jump up and down while rubbing my tummy 100 times? (This was meant for humor and as a joke. Hopefully, you'll at least smirk).


----------



## Hopeful Cynic (Apr 27, 2014)

itsontherocks said:


> I didn't cut her off. There was a moment or two of silence and then I hung up. She could had expanded, but by the way she was contacting, I knew it was around the corner. I do not stay around if a person doesn't want to be with me. Not sure why I'd go ballistic. That would be a childish response. It is what it is. One cannot force another person to like or want to go out with them. Personally, I would had preferred a text or just to be ghosted. A person only calls another person they've been seeing a hand full of times to get a reaction. I know the game. I just refuse to play. I wish her well and hope she finds whatever she's looking for.
> 
> Not looking for friends, so that wasn't an option for me. If that works for you, more power to you.


No wonder I can't succeed in modern dating! I hate ghosting and texting. People should have the common decency to treat other people with respect, and that includes at least a phone call for a definitive break up, and taking a break-up with respect instead of an explosion.

Although now that I think about it, if someone ghosts me, I can be secure in the knowledge that they were not the one for me, whereas a respectful break-up would only serve to make me more attracted.

Yes, modern dating is definitely not for me.


----------



## itsontherocks (Sep 7, 2015)

Hopeful Cynic said:


> No wonder I can't succeed in modern dating! I hate ghosting and texting. People should have the common decency to treat other people with respect, and that includes at least a phone call for a definitive break up, and taking a break-up with respect instead of an explosion.
> 
> Although now that I think about it, if someone ghosts me, I can be secure in the knowledge that they were not the one for me, whereas a respectful break-up would only serve to make me more attracted.
> 
> Yes, modern dating is definitely not for me.


I do not like it either. However, to be honest, I've done the call before and I've have been cursed at, called derogatory names, etc. I treat others the way I want to be treated. I had one who contacted me and I said we had a great time, but I do not think we fit well after the first meet. She went nuts and on a texting storm calling me no good and every other bad word in the book.



As for me, all I said was it is what it is. Good luck and take care. How's what I said disrespectful, bad or negative in any way? I do not lose my cool. The way I protray myself on to others is very important to me. I treat everyone with proper respect and dignity unless otherwise noted. Am I angry at her? No. Am I upset and hurt by her decision? Yes, of course. However, it was only five dates, so I will get over it. No point in crying over spilled milk. Perhaps she found someone better. Perhaps, she's taking a break from dating. Not sure. I hope she finds whatever she is looking for in a partner; short term or long.


----------



## ReformedHubby (Jan 9, 2013)

itsontherocks said:


> I do not like it either. However, to be honest, I've done the call before and I've have been cursed at, called derogatory names, etc. I treat others the way I want to be treated. I had one who contacted me and I said we had a great time, but I do not think we fit well after the first meet. She went nuts and on a texting storm calling me no good and every other bad word in the book.



Bingo! People don't ghost others because they are rude or are jerks for the most part. You ghost people because everyone is so damn sensitive these days. A lot of people don't deal with rejection well at all. I mean really, if we've gone out only once or twice and I call you or text you and say that I don't think we are compatible and I wish you luck on your search. I shouldn't be insulted for being honest. You're damned if you do, and damned if you don't. So when I did briefly dabble in OLD, I ghosted, all the time, and I have zero regrets about it. People say they want the truth, honesty, bla, bla, bla, but not really. I think they'd rather get ghosted and just assume you are a horrible person. I guess to many that beats getting rejected outright. It lets them paint whatever picture they want. Hell, they might even think you were intimidated by their beauty, success, or whatever.


----------



## itsontherocks (Sep 7, 2015)

ReformedHubby said:


> Bingo! People don't ghost others because they are rude or are jerks for the most part. You ghost people because everyone is so damn sensitive these days. A lot of people don't deal with rejection well at all. I mean really, if we've gone out only once or twice and I call you or text you and say that I don't think we are compatible and I wish you luck on your search. I shouldn't be insulted for being honest. You're damned if you do, and damned if you don't. So when I did briefly dabble in OLD, I ghosted, all the time, and I have zero regrets about it. People say they want the truth, honesty, bla, bla, bla, but not really. I think they'd rather get ghosted and just assume you are a horrible person. I guess to many that beats getting rejected outright. It lets them paint whatever picture they want. Hell, they might even think you were intimidated by their beauty, success, or whatever.


Hence the reason why I responded with, it is what it is. Take care and good night. Perhaps she was shocked as I didn't act like that? Not sure. Again, I know not every woman will like me, and that is fine. The dumb lies I caught her in is a bit more disturbing to me. However, now, it really doesn't matter. I have a problem with people lying. It's one of the reasons why I do not do it. However, it's so common these days, I feel people do it without thinking about. Ahh, as I said before, it is what it is.


----------



## Ursula (Dec 2, 2016)

Ynot said:


> I would have to disagree that feminism has been detrimental to women. I think feminism has been detrimental to some women. but not all. Radical feminism has been detrimental to women as well, mainly to those who practice it. However many women have benefitted from feminism. Not only due to improved employment opportunities and increased incomes, but also precisely because this has allowed them enjoy sex as a human being and not be restricted to just :approved" choices any longer.
> *You seem to have accepted the shame of these women who think you should use sex as a commodity to gain a man* (regardless of how they claim OLD is little more than prostitution, that is exactly what they are practicing). Please don't do that. You are a human being with real life wants, needs and desires. Do not settle for their view of the world. Go out and make your own world. Enjoy life. Have sex if you want to. Exploring your own wants and needs is the only way you are going to discover what you want from the world.


Nope, and I'm not sure where you got that from. My initial comment on being sad about the post was just in relation to how the experience of dating has deteriorated so much, and that this is what we can continue to expect in the future. It made me sad because if this is what I need to do: be open to FWB, giving sex away for free, etc., in order to be with someone, I don't want it. I would rather be single with a dozen dogs than degrade myself that way. Not that there's anything wrong with FWB; I've been there, done that. I would just much prefer to have something stable and lasting.


----------



## Todd Haberdasher (Apr 23, 2017)

Dating is just theater women use to appear more virtuous. Let's all pretend the entire thing isn't about having sex.

When Captain Cook found the island of Tahiti, his men were startled to find that the natives were completely uninhibited about sex. If two people encountered each other and wanted to have sex, they would proceed, even if in the middle of the street. Even if their spouses were present. Most of the men and women on the island had hooked up at some point or another, and none viewed it as any more important than a friendly "hello" to somebody you see in the grocery store. They enjoyed themselves. They moved on.

That sort of honesty would be refreshing now, but since we went through the Victorian Age, women have the need to insist that it's about anything but dirty dirty sex.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Todd Haberdasher said:


> Dating is just theater women use to appear more virtuous. Let's all pretend the entire thing isn't about having sex.
> 
> When Captain Cook found the island of Tahiti, his men were startled to find that the natives were completely uninhibited about sex. If two people encountered each other and wanted to have sex, they would proceed, even if in the middle of the street. Even if their spouses were present. Most of the men and women on the island had hooked up at some point or another, and none viewed it as any more important than a friendly "hello" to somebody you see in the grocery store. They enjoyed themselves. They moved on.
> 
> That sort of honesty would be refreshing now, but since we went through the Victorian Age, women have the need to insist that it's about anything but dirty dirty sex.


Haitians should do as Haitians like. The rest of this post is kind of sad.


----------



## Ynot (Aug 26, 2014)

Ursula said:


> Nope, and I'm not sure where you got that from. My initial comment on being sad about the post was just in relation to how the experience of dating has deteriorated so much, and that this is what we can continue to expect in the future. It made me sad because if this is what I need to do: be open to FWB, giving sex away for free, etc., in order to be with someone, I don't want it. I would rather be single with a dozen dogs than degrade myself that way. Not that there's anything wrong with FWB; I've been there, done that. I would just much prefer to have something stable and lasting.


Because you seemed to agree that feminism has been detrimental to women in general. That is where I got that from.
Feminism has opened so many doors for so many women. Doors that allow women like you to explore your sexuality as you choose. You don't have to be a ONS or FWB unless you want to. You do not need do anything you are not comfortable with. It certainly beats being driven into a relationship just for the sake of sex. As was the case in the past.
Don't allow this one experience cloud your view. That is where I am getting the vibe from. There is nothing wrong with wanting something stable and longer lasting, but the reality is, it has to start someplace. It won't just happen.


----------



## Ursula (Dec 2, 2016)

Ynot said:


> Because you seemed to agree that feminism has been detrimental to women in general. That is where I got that from.
> Feminism has opened so many doors for so many women. Doors that allow women like you to explore your sexuality as you choose. You don't have to be a ONS or FWB unless you want to. You do not need do anything you are not comfortable with. It certainly beats being driven into a relationship just for the sake of sex. As was the case in the past.
> Don't allow this one experience cloud your view. That is where I am getting the vibe from. There is nothing wrong with wanting something stable and longer lasting, but the reality is, it has to start someplace. It won't just happen.


I understand that it does have to start somewhere, but I'm not sure I agree with it starting with sex on the first or second date. At one point, I was so sexually deprived that I was ready to hump anything that moved. Now, I want to get to know a man before jumping in the sack with him. Sadly, I'm not basing this on only 1 experience either. There have been a few who are just after a piece of @$$. And, I'm all for feminism -- girl power! The only thing that I think is sad is that the only way we hold any power in a relationship is when it comes to sex. Men hold the power when it comes to LTRs. It's just unfortunate that it wasn't just a little bit more equal in that regard.


----------



## Ynot (Aug 26, 2014)

Ursula said:


> I understand that it does have to start somewhere, but I'm not sure I agree with it starting with sex on the first or second date. At one point, I was so sexually deprived that I was ready to hump anything that moved. Now, I want to get to know a man before jumping in the sack with him. Sadly, I'm not basing this on only 1 experience either. There have been a few who are just after a piece of @$$. And, I'm all for feminism -- girl power! The only thing that I think is sad is that the only way we hold any power in a relationship is when it comes to sex. Men hold the power when it comes to LTRs. It's just unfortunate that it wasn't just a little bit more equal in that regard.


Life is not fair and for every advantage one sex has over the other, there is another advantage the other sex has over the opposite.
FTR, I am sure there might have been more than a few guys who felt the same way you do now back when you were feeling different.
Crap, the OP on this thread is baffled by the fact that a woman had sex with him and then decided he wasn't someone she wanted to date. Which is more or less the same story with the sexes reversed of how you feel now.


----------



## itsontherocks (Sep 7, 2015)

Ynot said:


> Crap, the OP on this thread is baffled by the fact that a woman had sex with him and then decided he wasn't someone she wanted to date.


Thanks for the jab. Totally a d!ck move.


----------



## Rubix Cubed (Feb 21, 2016)

itsontherocks said:


> Thanks for the jab. Totally a d!ck move.


 ^I think you took that wrong.^

What do you think the over/under is on how many days until she calls you back? Now you are the one who doesn't give a rip, and she will likely chase after that. It may be that by her making you do all of the contacting (Her rule) that somehow in her head she overlooked her rule, and saw you as chasing her. Now she realizes that is not the case she'll think she lost out.


----------



## Ynot (Aug 26, 2014)

itsontherocks said:


> Thanks for the jab. Totally a d!ck move.


Jesus F Christ! You are too defensive. Nobody was jabbing you I was making a point to someone else. Did you not say you were baffled? You need to lighten the F up and stop being so GD defensive about anything and everything.


----------



## NobodySpecial (Nov 22, 2013)

Ynot said:


> Because you seemed to agree that feminism has been detrimental to women in general. That is where I got that from.
> Feminism has opened so many doors for so many women. Doors that allow women like you to explore your sexuality as you choose. You don't have to be a ONS or FWB unless you want to. You do not need do anything you are not comfortable with. It certainly beats being driven into a relationship just for the sake of sex. As was the case in the past.


Or worse, finances.



> Don't allow this one experience cloud your view. That is where I am getting the vibe from. There is nothing wrong with wanting something stable and longer lasting, but the reality is, it has to start someplace. It won't just happen.


----------



## VladDracul (Jun 17, 2016)

Todd Haberdasher said:


> That sort of honesty would be refreshing now, but since we went through the Victorian Age, women have the need to insist that it's about anything but dirty dirty sex.


However you slice it, one thing's for sure. Women control over half the money and all the puzzy.


----------

