Why Don’t Women Ask Men Out ?

[PrincessBOT]

Due to my sexual orientation I luckily will not have to deal with women who have these kinds of expectations, but I can think of a considerable number of straight female friends I know personally who are doing rather well for themselves without every having to see themselves this way. I have on friend, for example, who not only did the asking out originally--she also proposed to him. And they have been married six years now and are easily the most happy and compatible couple I know.

 

I was reading and thinking is he serious, then I got to the bold part and it made sense. I will stick to what I know about relationship in my sexual orientation (male & female) and will not talk about what I don't know, relationships for people with different sexual orientation. Your friend is the exception not the norm, so it means very little that 1 out of 1000 would work at any length. Heterosexual men value what they work for and in most cases as I said will give women who pursues them a chance, but will most likely lose interest and go or the women they pursue and be happier.

 

So if women want a high probability of just dating , enjoying the guy's company for a little while etc., sure ask him out.Double standard or not, men have many double standards, one of them being men can have tons of double standards and have the that's the way it is attitude, but woah is he if there is a double standard geared to women, it has to be fixed...so double standard or not if women want a higher probability of a long term, secure and happier relationship where the man is more likely to stick around through the good and the bad then they should let the men pursue them. And men who don't want to "fall out of love " and not know why should go after the women they want .

[BlueMilk]

Well, if we go by nature and the theory of evolution; males try to impress females, females make the decision of who gets to enter (with the exception of 'rape' or coerced sex.) Hell, female chimpanzees will mate for meat (prostitution anyone?)

 

See, I always figured women are the ones who are in the 'danger' zone when it comes to relationships and nature. If she doesn't pick the right man she can be left alone with a baby and no means to care for it (excusing modern day society's changes in methods of accruing resources.) So men had to prove that they'll hang around, that they are better than the others, that they can and WILL help raise the child together. He proves himself, he 'gains entry' if you will.

 

What I am guessing FathomFear is suggesting is that the model above has eventually gone on to produce a rather draconian patriarchal society. HOWEVER, considering its modern day and resources aren't limited, he is suggesting that we may need a break away from patriarchal society and try to establish something more fitting to our modern day society; where females can take advantage of our current ability to empower ourselves. At least that's what I think you're trying to say FathomFear? Please correct me if I'm wrong.

 

As for my response to that; evolution is a lot stronger and a lot older than our current society is. We may need to change things around, but changing our very nature requires a lot more than we can give in our short lifespan. Instead we may need a new method of 'mating' that reflects the power structure of modern society a bit more evenly. Women asking men may go against our deeper ingrained nature but it doesn't mean the patriarchal system is the only way to go.

[timlondon]

Well, if we go by nature and the theory of evolution; males try to impress females, females make the decision of who gets to enter (with the exception of 'rape' or coerced sex.) Hell, female chimpanzees will mate for meat (prostitution anyone?)

 

Interestingly in almost all other animals it's the males that go for bright colouration and markings, whereas in humans it's the females who indulge in the greatest visual attempts to catch potential mates' attention. So it can be argued that it's the females trying to impress the best males, and thus high-value males are doing the selecting rather than females.

 

Can't remember where I read that - The Selfish Gene? - but it's a good point!

[BlueMilk]

Actually I disagree with that fact timlondon. Women don't primp themselves up for men, they do it to upstage other women in order to have men fight over them.

 

The whole 'adorning colors to attract a mate' seen in nature is not exactly mimicked by the females in humans. I still see that attribute in the men but not by make-up; mainly because they aren't trying to entice sexual arousal since women don't respond to that. What women respond to is whatever indicates better survival opportunities for her offspring; which means more money, power, stability etc etc etc. Come on, we all know the popular stereotype that men are more visual creatures while women are more materialistic. Thats how you get the ugliest but richest man in the world with the most beautiful woman. It isn't the most colorful chimpanzee that gets the mate after all (chimpanzees don't have displays of dazzling color). And yet you don't see the richest/most powerful woman with the handsomest guy - I'm not saying there isn't, but it isn't as common a stereotype. (Powerful/rich women I can think of: Hilary Clinton, Oprah Winfrey, Martha Stewart, etc. Not known for their hot husbands - hell most are mocked for being emasculated! Hmmm!)

 

Women, on the other hand, wear make-up to mimic sexual arousal (red lipstick to indicate puffyness and sensitivity since red lips=arousal. Same thing with flushed cheeks=blush powder, etc.) That is to entice the male to make his move - if he is aroused by her he wants her, which means she gets more males chasing after her - which allows for her to pick and choose because THEY chase HER. Again this is seen in most mammals. She isn't doing it to gain access to a male, she is doing it to gain access to as many males as possible. My theory behind make-up is that because humans have evolved past the point of being able to indicate sexual arousal by smell/any other instinctual behavior, we have created 'false' or fake methods of showing our sexuality/in heat/capability of reproducing by mimicking and then exaggerating these signs.

 

Hell, when you think about it even the males with the bright colors are doing it to chase after the female and she gets to say no. Rarely is the female the chaser.

[timlondon]

Hang on a sec - so you don't agree with me, but you then write three paragraphs making pretty much exactly the same point?

[BlueMilk]

But I don't agree that women are the ones that put on the displays to attract a male. I think the difference is that a male chases one female, a female doesn't chase but instead leaves herself open to other males - she then picks the best of the bunch (or whatever). So males do whatever they can to attract attention, NOT the female. She isn't competing for one guy.

 

I don't think women wear make-up to attract males (well sorta, to show reproductive possibilities in that sense yes, but to the levels we see today? No) so much as to upstage other women by attracting more male attention. Men don't give a rat's ass if you're wearing Gucci or a Gucci knock-off as long as you look decent enough to * * * * . Women? Hell yes they do (stereotypically.) So basically men put on displays to get between a woman's legs (whether by showing her can afford her flowers or by presenting her with the best goddamn peacock feathers she has ever seen) but women don't /necessarily/ put on make up to attract males or even /a/ male (meaning there are other methods or that the method is redundant).

 

Besides, who says women are the only ones who adorn themselves with make-up? That is only done so visibly in Western society. I know in the Middle East kohl was worn by men and women alike. Then you have warpaints, which has nothing to do with reproduction but is quite heavy on adornment and color, men typically put on war paints. You also have ceremonial adornments and make-up, which again doesn't have anything to do with natural selection.

 

Basically my point is that make up does NOT equate to colorful feathers of a male bird. A man's bright red Ferrari however might.

 

ETA: I think in my earlier post I got too side-swept by make-up and how it relates to sexual reproduction until I realized it isn't solely focused on that.

[Batya33]

Most relationships do end. Rejection hurts everyone. True.

 

My point is that in my observation, the relationships that went all the way to commitment (marriage) are happier when the guy was the pursuer.

 

That was my personal experience too. I asked out several men, including one I asked to be my boyfriend. Not a big deal -sometimes it was harder than other times. I asked many men who I contacted through on line dating sites if they wanted to meet in person because I had no interest in or time for being phone buddies. When I dated sometimes I was treated like a princess but I am like Ms. Darcy and had no interest in being a princess, nor did I act like one.

 

What I think worked better for me than asking out men was to make sure I was in many situations where getting to know men was a natural part of the environment or activity, so that the whole "should I approach a man I don't know?" was not the typical situation. I was fine with "approaching" men I didn't know but especially in a bar/club scene I found that a bit pointless because I wasn't going to get to know someone in a loud/crowded place especially if the guy was buzzed/drunk. It can be daunting to approach strangers (whatever gender) so I'm a big fan of being involved in activities/environments where it's natural for the people there to talk to each other without any real "approaching".

[rustyskyline]

Has anyone noticed that the OP has only posted once in this thread; lives in a place that doesn't exist and has an extremely chilling motto?

 

I'm really starting to think that ENA plants these topics for us to discuss and topics like this one are always guranteed fire-starters.

[FathomFear]

So basically men put on displays to get between a woman's legs (whether by showing her can afford her flowers or by presenting her with the best goddamn peacock feathers she has ever seen) but women don't /necessarily/ put on make up to attract males or even /a/ male (meaning there are other methods or that the method is redundant).

 

I think that's ultimately the problem. Women get raised themselves as the "prize"--ie, that which is competed for. So they therefore conclude that others should be asking them out, given that they are what is "sought".

[BlueMilk]

But my point is that we are built like that genetically thanks to evolution. Women can't afford to be lazy when it comes to who enters their body or who gets them pregnant, we have a lot more to lose than the guy. Its that way in nature, its that way with humans. Its the prize we receive for bleeding every month, being accused of never being rational thanks to the constant flux of our hormones, and for dealing with childbirth (and how it utterly ruins the body permanently).

 

You guys get to pee standing up, get to be physically stronger, larger, and faster while remaining stable (relatively speaking - no worries about getting your period in the middle of a hunt and having your blood attract predators, nor worry about bleeding through an important business meeting). In return you have to chase women (if you're straight) and have the unfortunate luck of having the most sensitive part of you so brutally exposed. In all honesty I don't think your end of the stick is any * * * * tier than mine. We both have good and bad points.

 

Life is not fair, nature is not fair - we are not equal in our frailties nor in our strengths, but its okay because we're not /meant/ to.

[Stay_home]

Most relationships do end. Rejection hurts everyone. True.

 

My point is that in my observation, the relationships that went all the way to commitment (marriage) are happier when the guy was the pursuer.

 

I don't really think that matters.

 

If it doesn't workout, then that's just the way it is.

[FathomFear]

But my point is that we are built like that genetically thanks to evolution. Women can't afford to be lazy when it comes to who enters their body or who gets them pregnant, we have a lot more to lose than the guy.

 

In most Western societies you don't have substantially more to lose. If you're a guy and get someone pregnant, the law is going to dictate that you support the child. You're not going to be able to weasel out of it any easier than a woman who wants to do the same.

 

Ultimately I reject the idea that we should be rationalizing our behaviors based on pseudo-genetic or evolutionary theory. Not only is it highly questionable "science", it tends to be something people appeal to only when it goes in their favour. While someone might argue that straight guys should lavish women and buy them meals as some sort of compensation for having a menstrual cycle, the same person is likely not going to argue for, say, allowing attractive straight guys with good genes to go around and rape women without penalty just so their DNA is perpetuated as much as possible.

[hexaemeron]

Why would they, honestly? If you knew there would be a guy around every corner who would ask you out/take you out/wine/dine/"romance"/"show you he's serious!"... why do any work in dating when you don't have to?

[TakingtheBlame]

Why would they, honestly? If you knew there would be a guy around every corner who would ask you out/take you out/wine/dine/"romance"/"show you he's serious!"... why do any work in dating when you don't have to?

 

Jeez which corners are all these men hiding behind and why aren't they the same corners I've been passing by all my life?! Frankly, if I didn't believe in taking initiative I'd have probably dated 0 to 2 guys at this point....

[Stay_home]

I think it's a matter of pride more than anything.

[BlueMilk]

I am not saying there is fawning and all men are uncontrollable freaks and all women are empty-headed prizes to be won. Give my ideas /some/ thought but don't just dismiss it because you're going for the extreme example! I am telling you the base instinct! Couple it with modern thought, rationalization and critical thinking! All I am saying is that the roles we have today didn't just happen 'randomly' or sporadically because one group of people decided that men are in control of everything and women are their servants.

 

And I said not counting modern society. I even pointed out that we should alter our patriarchal society /because/ modern society allows women to no longer worry about the problems of childbirth (abortion, contraception, adoption, etc.) So don't make it seem like I am claiming the old way is the only method - never once did I say that. I was simply pointing out that there is precedence. And you can't deprogram genetics so completely as to obliterate all differences between sexes until we are nothing but blank slates. Its just not possible.

[bostonbruins44]

Good post and shy guys should take note.Shy guys should forget about bars and cold approaches.A better idea is to place themselves in activities/environments in which one can socialize and get to know a woman in a relaxed setting.Shy men seem to beat themselves up about not taking the plunge and asking women out ,but cold approaching anywhere is very daunting and hard even for extroverted guys.Taking the plunge is obviously easier after you have gotten to know someone .

[bostonbruins44]

I would like to know how you came up with your 1 out of a 1000 statistic in regards to the ultimate success of a relationship in which the woman did the asking out.It may be the exception simply because ,unfortunately ,men are expected to be the initiators in relationships,today and obviously there are more men asking out women in the initial dating phase..Considering the divorce statistics it could be argued that this is a flawed way of going about things.Of course, that is only assuming that the divorce itself is the result of a man asking out a woman which would be a pretty fragmented way of looking at things.There are far too many variables to consider why a relationship worked or didn't work ,are you suggesting if a woman asks out a man the relationship is ultimately doomed??? You are also presuming that a woman who asks out a man must have far more interest in him than he does in her which it would suggest is a major reason why the relationship will not work .What about shy men who have a very hard time asking women out ?

[Batya33]

I think shy men who have a hard time asking women out should really think about whether they truly want to get married in the future and have a family because if they don't want that badly it might not be worth it for a shy guy to go through the effort involved in dating - if all that it's going to be is casual dating. If they truly want a long term relationship or marriage then I think it's worth it to do the work either by taking the plunge even though it's hard or getting some kind of counseling to improve confidence, social skills, etc. My husband was extremely shy the first time we dated -he finally got up the courage to ask me out and I could tell it was hard for him to do. Shy men tended to go for me - and so I had several experiences of being asked out by very shy men.

[greywolf]

But my point is that we are built like that genetically thanks to evolution. Women can't afford to be lazy when it comes to who enters their body or who gets them pregnant, we have a lot more to lose than the guy. Its that way in nature, its that way with humans. Its the prize we receive for bleeding every month, being accused of never being rational thanks to the constant flux of our hormones, and for dealing with childbirth (and how it utterly ruins the body permanently).

 

 

I think it is very ingrained into our society, but I would not say it is due to evolution.

[shaanlove]

well they will do if u r really funny n work around......... it happens to me ....

[BlueMilk]

Considering its true in the animal kingdom (animals can't afford to reproduce any time because it takes so much time, energy and is a huuuuge risk factor for the female) you can't really deny it. It's the whole idea behind sexual selection! I'm just connecting it to human behavior and explaining how western society eventually became what it is and why it is the norm, accross the board in the animal kingdom, that males chase females and rarely is it the other way around. There are two forms of sexual selection in the animal kingdom: intersexual selection and intrasexual selection - one is based purely on female choice and the other is based on male domination against other males to gain access to the females. None involve male selection or male's choice. I don't know of a single society or animal even in which the female chases the male (if you do however, /please/ correct me if I'm wrong as I find this fascinating.)

 

link removed

 

I highly doubt society evolved out of nothing - it came about as a way to deal with and contain our basic instincts in order to civilize ourselves, but in reality everything we do is so tied to our base animal nature that it becomes really obvious when you look.

 

All I'm saying is the whole 'males chasing females' is something a lot more involved and ingrained than simply claiming that we were raised that way - 'I'm a girl so my mommy told me to respect myself' and 'I'm a boy so daddy told me to sow my wild oats and chase women.' /Why/ do you think these things came about in society? Why is it a /global/ thing as opposed to constrained to just one culture?

 

(PLEASE NOTE HOWEVER THAT I DO NOT AGREE WITH NOR AM I PUSHING TO ENFORCE THE STATUS QUO. Just wanted to get that out there.)

[jonny15]

None of this is even close to being factual.

[bostonbruins44]

It was almost impossible for me to ask women out when I would go to bars/nightclubs.I just ended up being a wallflower all night.By concentrating on women that I work with I have turned things around.It is far less daunting to ask someone out after I have worked with them and gotten to know them .Some women that I have worked with have asked me out also . A different setting can make a big difference for someone who is shy or lacking in social confidence.

[FathomFear]

I was reading and thinking is he serious, then I got to the bold part and it made sense. I will stick to what I know about relationship in my sexual orientation (male & female) and will not talk about what I don't know, relationships for people with different sexual orientation.

 

Nothing what I said is invalidated by the fact that I'm gay. What we're discussing has more to do with gender expectations, not sexual desire. You'll often find that non-straight people tend to have a relatively good perspective on straight relationships, given that their judgment is not clouded by attraction and can analyze the elements from the outside. Remember, I was brainwashed with all of the same principles while growing up. Girls are princesses. Try to impress girls. Ask them out on dates. Buy them dinner. Treat them right. Etc, etc. Just because I don't need to follow these traditions due to my sexuality does not mean I'm not familiar with them.

 

I think the key here is that it does not matter that some people blindly follow rigid gender expectations. It doesn't matter if there are lots of guys out there who insist on being the "pursuer". That's doesn't somehow justify the stance that women should not express interest and take the initiative to be with someone they want to be with. If you or anyone wants to doll yourself up and wait around until some guy pursues you, that's completely your imperative. But that doesn't put you in a position to say that is the best or ideal approach, especially in this day and age. Personally I would find it rather tragic if a woman was interested in a guy but let the opportunity pass by just because he didn't initiate anything. I really have to wonder how many great relationships never got off the ground just because of this attitude.