doorik

I don't want to get into a big debate over whether or not it is easier for women to get a relationship, but yes, it is MUCH easier for women to get sex. This is mainly to do with the fact that men do the chasing whereas women do the accepting. Women just need to accept a man.

What!!?? But, But, women get pregnant, do the same work for less pay!!! Don't you know the only advantages/disadvantages that are allowed to exist (on these boards at least) are when someone points out a an advantage of being a man, and a disadvantage of being a women? Geez Corvidae, where's your head at? Making sacrilegious statements like that.

Does music effect people?

Just look at my sig below - It's from the movie High Fidelity starring John Cusack and Jack Black

Depends on where one works I guess. I work in an office so it would be inappropriate if one of my colleagues aproached me during work - After work? - all good. On the other hand, if an individual worked in the service industry, ie. restaurant/bar/club or something where interaction with customers, clients, etc,. are the norm, then I don't believe that is is inappropriate to approach.

Perhaps one of you should start a topic on how many forum members have met their sig. other while working.

I love When Harry Met Sally - that's one of my favorite movies of all time! That said - yes - I do think that men and women can be friends. But, like DN said - it happened the other way around.

 

As long as you still have romantic feelings for them, I think it's a bad idea to be friends with the ex. It only winds up hurting you in the long run.

 

Ok - well, obviously, I'm not a guy, but I think that guys who are friends with their ex-gfs (that they didn't love) are keeping them around as a "backup plan." You know - if he's ever bored and lonely one night - he can call you. Or maybe they really do like them as friends - but they obviously don't like them as more - otherwise, they wouldn't have broke up.

Pretty much makes sense to me (except the favourite movie part, and that I am a guy).

actually, you know what - statistically, if you define "oppurtunity to date" as the event that a person has a chance to date -

 

then men and women have EQUAL oppurtunity because by definition, when one man asks one woman out, both the man and a woman can chalk that up as an "oppurtunity to date", and same thing vice versa.

 

maybe you should ask *waiting to dodge some tomatoes*: who works harder at creating oppurtunities to date: my answer: men, ref. my post above. *get's hit by a large tomato at which point, shuts up*

Interesting perspective- I never thought of it that way.

I don't see the point of this hypothetical question.

I was out with several of my UofT lady friends on Sat. evening and a situation reflected one of the discussions on this tread. The topic of which breaks down to ladies have the advantage in the dating arena because the fellas have to do most if not all of the approaching.

We were at bar/club here in the T.O and were lucky enough to secure a table for ourselves. on many occasions the ladies in our group would go in pairs to dance and return with stories that usually began with "can you believe that guy"...and end with some comment about how the right guys don't ask them out.

Later on in the evening "Nad" pointed out a women in a group of women who Nad claimed was eyeing me, so I decided to go talk to her to see if there was a vibe. Turns ouit she had a BF (well, at least she claimed to), and turned me down. Fast forward towards the end of the evening where the conversation turned towards relationships, guys/girls/etc. In which I claimed that ladies had the advantage in the dating arena because the responsibility of the approach/asking out side of the dating game rests on the fellas. I backed the claim up with what I observed that night where they were approached on numerous occasions, while my fate rested squarely on my decision whether or not to approach.

And, as you all may have guessed, I was unsuccessful in convincing them - They came back with the disadvantages of being a lady (you're not sure if he'll call, prenancy, pay disparity etc.). So I posed the above question to them. At the end of it all they said it was the man's job to ask out women, and that's why it's not an advantage as it is the way it is and that's that - eventhough they admitted the the lady would have more dating opportunities. I am posing the above question here for the same reason I posed it to my UofT mates, to see what the varying opinions are.

Hello

 

I would always say the woman has more chances in most cases.

 

 

Kuhl

 

8)

And why would that be?

One question for you. How confident (self-esteem wise) are they. And is it equal?

Let's say both have the same positive self-esteem. Remember, I stated "all things being equal"

Hello,

I posted the following question in a couple of other topics, where no one seemed to want to answer. So I decided to post it as a topic on its own.

The question is,

All things being equal - let's say 1 guy and 1 girl are at the same class/education/career level, and are attractive to the same proportion of the opposite sex, and both decide not to ask anyone out, who do you think will have more dating opportunities? Please explain your answer.

Thanks!

ive learned to leave a lot of 'love' up to fate....im on God's watch...when its the right timing, itll happen with the right person....whenever...whoever that may be. PLUS ITS SUMMERTIME NOW!! WHO WANTS TO BE TIED DOWN DURING THE SUMMER!! hehehe

 

thanks for asking tho.

Hey DG,

Hmmmm ,

Maybe you should read my sigs. below - It's great advice. You know, many people have been in your situation where fuzzy feelings seem to develop for a friend. You probably weighed the risks of fully disclosing those feelings and dedicated a subject post to, and decided if the risks (awkwardness between you him, being "tied down" during the summer etc.) outweighed the benefits.

While I agree that if it's not meant to be, all the trying in the world won't make it work. However, I am in no way implying that if it is meant to be it will work itself out (IE fate and destiny). Because if it is meant to be, you gotta do everything you can to make sure it doesn't slip away.

Remember, the fault dear DG lies not in our stars but in ourselves.

Good luck

Oh,

since we are arguing here, I was wondering if you can answer something for me Annie (sorry other readers - off topic). In another tread we were arguing about advantage in the dating game. The question I posed (that no one would answer) was,

All things being equal - let's say 1 guy and 1 girl are at the same class/education/career level, and are attractive to the same proportion of the opposite sex, and both decide not to ask anyone out, who do you think will have more dating opportunities?

Any comment?

??? I said it very clearly. These magazines (AKA = Mainstream media and popular press) have columns telling women dating tips.

Since I am a man, and you are a women, I guess what we have here is a failure to communicate - Ha

When the poster posted,

In fact, can anyone give me an example of an article written by a woman on the faults of women's strategies in dating, in the popular press or e-magazines?

and your clarified answer was,

ah. excuse me. Sure, look up in that case, any review article on any one of those dating books. Also, often, those authors are asked to give advice in Cosmpolitan or Glamour, or other girlie magazines.

I guess it was the way you got to the magazines, I had to find a book, look for review article, find out if the article's author wrote for a girlie mag, and see if their advice columns placed blame exclusively on the ladies. My bad - But, I do concede that those mags are MSM.

Ok - so, I just did another google, "women men communication" and here is what I got

 

I addressed this in my previous post. Yes this a "gender neutral" search parameter. However, I am waiting for corvidae to write what he used to come up with the male negative results.

ah. excuse me. Sure, look up in that case, any review article on any one of those dating books. Also, often, those authors are asked to give advice in Cosmpolitan or Glamour, or other girlie magazines.

Review articles in books that support the thesis are not examples from mainstream media, popular press or e-magazines.

Try googling, "Miserable failure." What is your #1 hit? That's right - the official website for the President of the United States of America.

 

Google, "idiot" GW Bush is the second hit.

 

Just saying... Google isn't the scientific way to conduct a study on communication.

This is because Progressives/moderates/liberals have been linking "Miserable Failure" and "idiot" to president bush's website. They are using working knowledge of how the google search engine works to skew results (If you want links, I will provide them). That said, I completely agree with you that googling is not a scientific way of way to conduct a study.

oh yeah... just for giggles, I decided to google a gender neutral search, "Dating and communication." I got:

I concede that your search was a "gender neutral" search. However, my interpretation of what corvidae was arguing is that when you have both men and women in the search parameter (gender neutral meaning if you include both, you eliminate skewing results for one),the results/articles for problems in the dating game with respect to communicating intent appear to be "it's the guys' fault, they are doing everything wrong". I guess we need corvidae to chime in and let us know. Anyways, I am enjoying arguing with you Annie, as usual (good mental exercise).

In fact, can anyone give me an example of an article written by a woman on the faults of women's strategies in dating, in the popular press or e-magazines?

 

Sure - every single dating book for women, written by women. They want you to buy their books, so they explain that you are dateless on friday nights not because you are unattractive, but because your dating strategy has been all wrong.

Um, he asked for articles and E-magazines not books. If these articles exist, please tell us the search parameters entered into Google to find them . IE were they gender neutral or not? Remember that Corvidae's search parameters were gender neutral and the results were "Blame Men" articles

Does anyone have tips on approaching guys? Also, would it be a bad idea to approach him? He is sort of at work.

Hmmm (rubbing my chin in deep thought),

In this situation? It's a tough one. If you're good at using Chop sticks pretend that your not and ask him for help. It will at least give an openning for you two to speak to each other. If you're bad at using the chop sticks then you're honestly looking for tips to use them proficiently.

Let us know how it goes.

A good example is the President of Harvard and the negative attention he has gotten in the press for "sexist" comentary that in my opinion was supposed to be rhetorical and thought provoking on the status of women in society- not something to be taken as a statement of position. Everyone was on the guy anyway.

Funny thing is I posted the commentary on his comments by another Harvard Prof. on another another thread, started by Corvidae - We've come full circle.

Here's the Quote:

It takes one's breath away to watch feminist women at work. At the same time that they denounce traditional stereotypes they conform to them. If at the back of your sexist mind you think that women are emotional, you listen agape as professor Nancy Hopkins of MIT comes out with the threat that she will be sick if she has to hear too much of what she doesn't agree with. If you think women are suggestible, you hear it said that the mere suggestion of an innate inequality in women will keep them from stirring themselves to excel. While denouncing the feminine mystique, feminists behave as if they were devoted to it. They are women who assert their independence but still depend on men to keep women secure and comfortable while admiring their independence. Even in the gender-neutral society, men are expected by feminists to open doors for women. If men do not, they are intimidating women.

It was, um received less than ecstatically by the ladies on the forum.

There is a problem with this line of reasoning. If the two fellas in your story prove that the articles/studies are all true, then there should be a wealth of articles/studies that demonstarate the second observations (women get their share of blame in the end). If Corvidae's search was gender neutral, something like "communication problems between men and women" and articles that reflect the sentiments of your second observation come up as much as the "blame men" articles, then your point is valid and Corvidae's observation about media bias against men is false.

However, if he used a gender neutral search, and few to no articles come up in his search that support the "women get the blame in the end", then your anecdotal evidence does nothing to invalidate Corvidae's point.

@ Cordivae,

Can you post what search parameters you used to google your search. IE was the search gender neutral?

One of my older sigs was

"The media sets the trends, determines the 'in-styles,' and mandates the socially acceptable standards by which society lives" -April Masini.

This topic demonstrates why I left it on my sig for so long. The socially acceptable standard is that today's women are smart, sexy, sassy, modern, confident etc., while we fellas are dumb oafs.

Annie,

I'm gonna peruse the "O" magazine to see what's what. Can you picture the clerks face when I tell them to ring up "O" magaznine? LOL!

thanks for the kind words. and FYI im single ready to mingle baby! hehehe

Hmmm, what happened with that guy friend of yours? I guess it's still unresolved?

When my man "plays the role" when other guys are around. It could be a work friend, or one of his oldest guy friends. He still changes his tune completely for some reason. Drives me nuts.

George Castanza: There's Relationship George and then there's independent George. independent George is the George you know, the George you love. If Relationship George meets independent George, he will kill independent George....

I don't think he's "changing his tune". I believe he's being himself in a different context. I mean I don't think he'll start all the baby talk while his boys are around would he?

@ Muneca

What are you talking about Muneca? That makes no sense at all!!!!

Just kidding - I agree with your assessment of the situation. Hmmm, you better look up in the sky as I believe those are pigs flying by. What's going on? Next thing you know I'll be agreeing with Annie24 lol.

@ Asia

Do not feel you have to do anything that you are not comforatble with

it is 50/50. In a lasting relationship things should be equal, anyone should tell you that. As far as dating, again, it should be equal.

You argue that it is 50/50 correct? Then why did you write should

twice. The word should indicates that the situation that is being addressed is not the way it ought to be. Your argument should say

"In ideal relationships it would be 50/50".

The guy has to be aggresive and seek out a girl while the girl is passiveand chooses among the potentials. But why limit ourselves to these roles? Why not break the cycle and change the way things our done.

If you read the posts, this is exactly what Corvidae is advocating.

Corvidae wrote:

It's like saying to someone 'you get a hundred lottery tickets a week, I get one a month, but I'm more likely to win because it's quality not quantity.' What? It doesn't make sense? Why are the two women every four months better quality? Why would all 30 men be rubbish? The laws of probability apply to both men and women my friend.

To which Shysoul responded with:

I'll argue that its not a numbers game. Your lottery ticket example shows my point. Someone can buy 100 tickets a week but the numbers still have to match. If they don't then you still lose out. You could say your odds are improved, but they are still pretty astronomical. One in a billion vs 100 in a billion. Odds are still slim. On the other hand, someone could buy just one ticket and win.

Corvidae does not explicitly state winning the entire jackpot (the analogy would be soulmate would it not?) there are other prizes as well (free ticket = 1 date, small sum of money = several dates, larger sums of money = relationships) So the lady who receives 100 tickets has a better chance of winning than the fella who buys one. Corvidae's analogy is still valid.

Shysoul, if you read all of the posts on the topic the issue is not who has a better chance of meeting their soulmate, it's who has a better chance of getting a date.

All things being equal - let's say 1 guy and 1 girl are at the same class/education/career level, and are attractive to the same proportion of the opposite sex, and both decide not to ask anyone out, who do you think will have more dating opportunities?

Anyone? Anyone? Peterson? Frye? Bueller?.......