Modern Dating: The Evolution of Courtship for Men and Women

[boltnrun]

4 hours ago, Coily said:

'strong and independent woman who doesn't need a man" parts of radical feminism.

I am strong and independent and don't "need" a man and I am not a "radical feminist ". I love men, find them fascinating and interesting and of course attractive, but I don't "need" a man. I've had relationships with men because I wanted to, not out of need. 

I'm not currently looking for a relationship because my mental health needs work and I'm not going to drag some poor innocent man into my issues. But someday it would be nice to meet a good man and have a relationship. And some sex. I really miss sex...

[catfeeder]

6 hours ago, Coily said:

the "strong and independent woman who doesn't need a man" parts of radical feminism.

6 hours ago, Coily said:

I would be really curious, if there were a comparison of dating attitudes from the 1920s to the 2020s. See where things really went off the rails...

I think these two quotes go well together, and I hope you'll indulge me. It was the 'radical' feminists in the US during the 1910's who galvanized the support of men to gain women the vote (finally!) in 1920. It's also some of the most radical US feminists today that have mobilized men in movements to equalize our pay and make important gains like 'parental leave' (rather than 'maternal' leave) to equalize our status in the workplace.

I raise this because the US is so far behind most progressive countries in terms of women's equality, and we have recently and speedily regressed in terms of women's bodily autonomy and overall health care, where women are not only being forced to carry unwanted pregnancies in nearly 26 states, but a recorded 520,000 rapes were associated with 64,565 pregnancies across 14 states with abortion restrictions, the highest number being in the state of Texas, at 26,313 as of this January. (PBS - Public Broadcasting System )

Maybe whatever radicalism some men may sense from women is actually a life and death issue for women, during a time where one of childbearing years can actually be denied certain cancer treatments to avoid preemptively impacting the formation of a fetus, and lifesaving measures for consensually pregnant women bleeding out from miscarriage are being denied until the only treatment left is to remove her womb or otherwise cripple her ability to conceive again.

The men who recognize the importance of standing up for women are desirable candidates for dating and mating and marriage. If any degree of feminism might prompt some men to withdraw from the dating market, I would argue the likelihood that these men are rightfully screening themselves out from the rejection they would face from the moment they first open their mouths.

[Batya33]

5 hours ago, catfeeder said:

This is interesting. What did the text say that was rude?

She is planning a bday party  -in a few weeks -at her home - this is not a per person venue charge - for her son who is 2 years younger than mine.  We met through her husband and our sons at a local museum several years ago. Then I met her because we got the boys together again a number of times.  We became friends independently.  Our sons haven't seen each other in 5 years because she and I faded for a few years -plus pandemic.

We are back in touch for about a year now.  She asked if I wanted to come to the bday party so I assumed she was including my son (and my husband).  I said I wasn't sure if my son would come because he's uncomfortable at parties if he only knows the bday person (my son is 15).  Very clear it had nothing to do with her son in particular. 

So she replied that actually she wasn't inviting my son - because her son wasn't sure he wanted to invite my son given how long it had been since they'd seen each other.  But "I" was still invited to her kids party.  (Also she lives about a 40 minute trip away since she moved in the past few years).  She also didn't mention my husband being invited. (They've met briefly). I believe I'd told her husband likely was away on business that weekend but she made no mention of anyone else being invited except me. In my view you make it clear "oh that's too bad that he is away and can't come!"

I think it is rude to ask me to come to her child's birthday party on a weekend without my son especially when my husband is away.  I would never invite in the first place unless I was going to include the person's child who knows my child.  (No I don't leave my son alone for many hours at a time). 

My husband and my close friend -our age-agreed that it was rude- my close friend lives out of state, doesn't know this family nor did I mention names, etc.  I asked no one else but my sense is that there's a more loose way of inviting people maybe these days so you don't have to include the family in that situation and you don't have to include the child who used to hang out with your child if your child "isn't sure".  Whole thing is odd but made me think of our generational difference.  And the analogy to being more loose about planning dates, etc - 

Sorry if that was too long a response!

[yogacat]

7 hours ago, boltnrun said:

I am strong and independent and don't "need" a man and I am not a "radical feminist ". I love men, find them fascinating and interesting and of course attractive, but I don't "need" a man. I've had relationships with men because I wanted to, not out of need. 

I'm not currently looking for a relationship because my mental health needs work and I'm not going to drag some poor innocent man into my issues. But someday it would be nice to meet a good man and have a relationship. And some sex. I really miss sex...

Cosign. I have difficulty balancing wanting to feel independent and strong, while also wanting that romantic connection. The former always seems to overtake the latter.

I was so supported in relationship (albeit that relationship had it's own issues) but he took care of me, he did things for me that I still look back in awe upon – not because they were grand gestures but simply because they were beyond the expectations that I had.

It was like I suddenly had a new idea of what was possible in a relationship. He's the one who taught me that relationships can and should be based in consciousness and awareness, not just simple daily pleasure or comfort. Even though these things in themselves are also good and important. I know I will have so many connections, but, it was swept from under my feet so I had to relearn how to stand.

[rainbowsandroses]

I ask this question sincerely but is there something wrong or bad with "needing" a man?  I am perfectly fine and happy on my own but when I am in love and in a relationship with a particular man, I need him and he needs me.

Not to the point I cannot survive without him and vice versa, that's an unhealthy need.  But don't we all need each other at least on some level and to varying degrees?  Is that not what being in a relationship is about, loving each other and needing each other?  For support, for comfort during times of stress or after a hard day, someone to open our hearts to, who listens and cares?

I am not ashamed (if that's even the right word) to admit I need men.  

I am not referring to anyone here but I have heard some women get downright insulted by the mere suggestion that she might need a man.  Like, oh the horror!  I need someone.

Wasn't it Barbra Streisand who sang the lyrics:

People
People who need people
Are the luckiest people in the world
We're children, needing other children
And yet letting a grown-up pride
Hide all the need inside
Acting more like children than children

Lovers, are very special people
They're the luckiest people in the world
With one person
One very special person

A feeling deep in your soul
Says you were half now you're whole
No more hunger and thirst
But first be a person who needs people
People who need people
Are the luckiest people in the world

---------------------

Sorry guys, I am in a weird mood tonight. 

 

[Coily]

9 hours ago, boltnrun said:

I am strong and independent and don't "need" a man and I am not a "radical feminist ". I love men, find them fascinating and interesting and of course attractive, but I don't "need" a man. I've had relationships with men because I wanted to, not out of need. 

I'm not currently looking for a relationship because my mental health needs work and I'm not going to drag some poor innocent man into my issues. But someday it would be nice to meet a good man and have a relationship. And some sex. I really miss sex...

 

2 hours ago, yogacat said:

Cosign. I have difficulty balancing wanting to feel independent and strong, while also wanting that romantic connection. The former always seems to overtake the latter.

I was so supported in relationship (albeit that relationship had it's own issues) but he took care of me, he did things for me that I still look back in awe upon – not because they were grand gestures but simply because they were beyond the expectations that I had.

It was like I suddenly had a new idea of what was possible in a relationship. He's the one who taught me that relationships can and should be based in consciousness and awareness, not just simple daily pleasure or comfort. Even though these things in themselves are also good and important. I know I will have so many connections, but, it was swept from under my feet so I had to relearn how to stand.

Bolt and YogaCat,

“Strong and independent woman who doesn't need a man" more of a meme on the internet at this point, to describe women who hate men. I would say our age differences probably play a role in our perceptions of that phrase. Radical Feminists like Andrea Dowrkin, Clementine Ford, or Bell Hooks; who made a huge splash in the public sphere with their man hating rhetoric in the 90s through 2010s.  The radicals who had this weird Eugenic mentality to get rid of men that didn’t conform to their kooky beliefs.

Being self-contained and content is one thing, many people are like that. It’s a few women, like a few men; who have disdain for the opposite sex that I’m calling out. I don’t think you hate men from all of your posts through the years. I don’t think you’d go WGTOW, which would mirror MGTOW; a movement which I view as treating women as sex objects due to personal damage.

[Coily]

7 hours ago, catfeeder said:

I think these two quotes go well together, and I hope you'll indulge me. It was the 'radical' feminists in the US during the 1910's who galvanized the support of men to gain women the vote (finally!) in 1920. It's also some of the most radical US feminists today that have mobilized men in movements to equalize our pay and make important gains like 'parental leave' (rather than 'maternal' leave) to equalize our status in the workplace.

I raise this because the US is so far behind most progressive countries in terms of women's equality, and we have recently and speedily regressed in terms of women's bodily autonomy and overall health care, where women are not only being forced to carry unwanted pregnancies in nearly 26 states, but a recorded 520,000 rapes were associated with 64,565 pregnancies across 14 states with abortion restrictions, the highest number being in the state of Texas, at 26,313 as of this January. (PBS - Public Broadcasting System )

Maybe whatever radicalism some men may sense from women is actually a life and death issue for women, during a time where one of childbearing years can actually be denied certain cancer treatments to avoid preemptively impacting the formation of a fetus, and lifesaving measures for consensually pregnant women bleeding out from miscarriage are being denied until the only treatment left is to remove her womb or otherwise cripple her ability to conceive again.

The men who recognize the importance of standing up for women are desirable candidates for dating and mating and marriage. If any degree of feminism might prompt some men to withdraw from the dating market, I would argue the likelihood that these men are rightfully screening themselves out from the rejection they would face from the moment they first open their mouths.

While I disagree that those two quote of mine are in parallel, I do agree that it’s a discussion worth having in terms of dating. I also disagree with feminism being the baseline between all female-male interactions should be measured. Then again I also draw a very distinct line between feminism and suffrage.

The Suffrage movement really is difficult to compare with the Radical Feminist movements of the 70s/80s and beyond. It’s also a lot more complex than it is usually reported in the history books, then again the world from 1900 to 1920 is where I spent a lot of my historical research. Kind of blew my mind that some of the most ardent detractors of suffrage were women.

I would also venture to say that some men (not all) going along with other radical feminist movements since then were of a malicious compliance; you know the trope of the predatory male feminist up to no good.

I would be curious as to what nations you are comparing the US to. To put such a blanket statement out I think is deceptive in the details of where things differ. You mention abortion, which have legislation variances across the globe. It’s a hot button topic for many, but this isn’t a “gotcha” moment for our discussion.

I reject your framing of ‘radicalism” being in regard to life and death circumstances. You want to paint giving a dam about women as only viewed through a feminist lens; I think this is grossly unfair and specious way to go about this discussion. If one thinks men only care about women as a provider of offspring, I don’t think you understand most men.

With this last paragraph’s argument, you poisoned the well. I think this is a horrifically bad faith position to take. Just as not all men are anti feminist, not all women are feminist; your position is so sadly narrow, that a woman who is a anti-feminist would be under worse scrutiny than any man.

[Batya33]

7 hours ago, Coily said:

While I disagree that those two quote of mine are in parallel, I do agree that it’s a discussion worth having in terms of dating. I also disagree with feminism being the baseline between all female-male interactions should be measured. Then again I also draw a very distinct line between feminism and suffrage.

 

The Suffrage movement really is difficult to compare with the Radical Feminist movements of the 70s/80s and beyond. It’s also a lot more complex than it is usually reported in the history books, then again the world from 1900 to 1920 is where I spent a lot of my historical research. Kind of blew my mind that some of the most ardent detractors of suffrage were women.

 

I would also venture to say that some men (not all) going along with other radical feminist movements since then were of a malicious compliance; you know the trope of the predatory male feminist up to no good.

 

I would be curious as to what nations you are comparing the US to. To put such a blanket statement out I think is deceptive in the details of where things differ. You mention abortion, which have legislation variances across the globe. It’s a hot button topic for many, but this isn’t a “gotcha” moment for our discussion.

 

I reject your framing of ‘radicalism” being in regard to life and death circumstances. You want to paint giving a dam about women as only viewed through a feminist lens; I think this is grossly unfair and specious way to go about this discussion. If one thinks men only care about women as a provider of offspring, I don’t think you understand most men.

 

With this last paragraph’s argument, you poisoned the well. I think this is a horrifically bad faith position to take. Just as not all men are anti feminist, not all women are feminist; your position is so sadly narrow, that a woman who is a anti-feminist would be under worse scrutiny than any man.

 

I'm not a feminist -meaning I don't use that label and I want equality in wages/salaries for all people doing the same work which is also a feminist value.  I'm not sure if I "need" a man because I think about what need vs. want is regularly.  Hard line to draw. 

Example.My husband gets bad headaches. He also knows how badly I "need" enough sleep.  I'm not a nice person when I'm sleep deprived (or hangry) -at least I don't feel like one and no I don't act like a witch just because I feel gross -it's just harder to regulate my crankiness). Anyway I've told him many many times -please wake me if you have a headache and cannot sleep.  I will try to help you. I don't care at all if I am woken up I want to help you. 

So far he never has but I happened randomly to wake up middle of the night to find him struggling with a headache and he told me.  I stayed up with him. I comforted him, got him another pillow -till he fell back asleep.  I told my son yesterday in the morning because I want him to be a person who cares for others who need him. I didn't brag -I was matter of fact. And when my husband thanked me the next morning I said - oh of course I took care. 

He needed me.  This is a good thing IMO that he let me take care of him briefly.  I am strong, independent and a bad [behind word] as my son says - AND I love being a wife and mother in all the tradtional ways.  I guess I do need my husband, my family, my marriage as opposed to just "want" - it is part of who I am, part of my identity, and they are not replaceable. I do need him to open my pickle jar, and is it so bad to love being complimented by my teenager?

How many times do we as humans say out loud or to ourselves "wow I really needed that today."  It's not a bad thing. All in moderation.  Independence and a healthy marriage can coexist, no? Independence and wanting (sometimes feels much like a need or is a need!) to meet that special someone can too -yes?

[Jibralta]

On 3/21/2024 at 2:30 PM, yogacat said:

So I have a question. I was thinking about this the other day and that nowadays some men no longer feel the need to court women. Instead, the norm is to hang out and "chill" at someone's house or go to a bar for drinks. 

Let me preface this by saying that men that I have dated in the past, have been traditional in the sense that they were more traditional with their approach to dating. Though it may not be the case for everyone, this has been my experience.  

However, I have noticed that with some men in today's dating scene, the expectation is to just "hang out" and see where things go.

This is NOT a dig towards men, not in the least, I feel that some men have chosen not to put in the effort to court say due to bad past experiences like he got his heart broken or something terrible like that, thus explaining the change in behavior.

How can we be more cognizant of this and cultivate more meaningful relationships?

Do you think the lack of courting has changed the way men and women approach dating?

It's an interesting question to me because courtship was an idea that always annoyed me when I was growing up. I hated when guys would try to open my door for me, or help me up or down from somewhere or something. Hated it. I found it ridiculous and embarrassing. Worst of all, people didn't understand my embarrassment and urged me to feel flattered instead. But of course, I didn't.

As an illustration of how intensely I disliked the courtship behavior, I give you this anecdote:

On a camping trip to Lake Placid in my early 20s, we visited a cliff where we could jump off into the lake below. The cliff was probably 25 feet above the water. Some of the people I was with had jumped off of this cliff every summer since they were children. They jumped right in. But it was my first time there, and I hesitated. One of the guys who had jumped off, a police officer, looked up from the water and saw me hesitating. He called up to me, "I'll jump off with you!" I watched in horror as he ran up the steep, rocky slope to 'save' me, and as he drew near--just so he couldn't save me--I jumped off the cliff by myself. Yes, that day I learned that I'd rather risk my own life than be 'saved.'

When I was in my early 30s, I came across this haiku poem online that summed up my feelings quite well:

My macho boyfriend
Runs to open my car door
Are my arms broken?

But not long after that, my attitude changed!

I'm not sure why. I think I was finally tired. I was certainly done with dating losers.

So, when my now-husband came along and blatantly courted me, I was a much more docile and gracious recipient.

[mylolita]

On 5/3/2024 at 2:48 PM, Coily said:

I would be really curious, if there were a comparison of dating attitudes from the 1920s to the 2020s. See where things really went off the rails with dating attitudes, and where things improved. Sadly that will be impossible, sure there are those little articles that pop up on dating advice from back in the day that ranges from quaint, to sexist, to still remarkably valid.

 

I find Coils the best and closest way to tap into any real, solid, long lasting relationship advice is to talk to your Grandparents, or anyone who is in a very long lasting, happy marriage. Key words long and happy!!! 
 

I ask my husbands aunts and uncles and I did, just before they all recently passed, ask my own Grandparents a lot. I found it very calming, assuring and comforting. In those days, this idea of modern perfection didn’t seem to weigh on the average guy or gal - people seemed both practical and romantic all at the same time, and also, because they were in survival mode worrying about food being on tables and a massive world war, family and friends dying - people simply seemed more grateful.

 

That’s just the perspective I got from them. They all had an amazing sense of humour and marriage meant marriage to them as well - you made that decision with extreme gravitas. Women and men didn’t leave unless there was major abuse. For better or for worse, there were obviously pros and cons to that old school mentality.

 

These days I wonder if anyone even dates with a serious mind for marriage or once married, or engaged, people also don’t seem to take it seriously anymore. People seem to get engaged on whims as well and break it off. Even saying “I Do” to the near prospect of getting marriage and being engaged is very serious to me, but in modern life it seems quite throw away.

 

x

[mylolita]

33 minutes ago, Jibralta said:

It's an interesting question to me because courtship was an idea that always annoyed me when I was growing up. I hated when guys would try to open my door for me, or help me up or down from somewhere or something. Hated it. I found it ridiculous and embarrassing. Worst of all, people didn't understand my embarrassment and urged me to feel flattered instead. But of course, I didn't.

As an illustration of how intensely I disliked the courtship behavior, I give you this anecdote:

On a camping trip to Lake Placid in my early 20s, we visited a cliff where we could jump off into the lake below. The cliff was probably 25 feet above the water. Some of the people I was with had jumped off of this cliff every summer since they were children. They jumped right in. But it was my first time there, and I hesitated. One of the guys who had jumped off, a police officer, looked up from the water and saw me hesitating. He called up to me, "I'll jump off with you!" I watched in horror as he ran up the steep, rocky slope to 'save' me, and as he drew near--just so he couldn't save me--I jumped off the cliff by myself. Yes, that day I learned that I'd rather risk my own life than be 'saved.'

When I was in my early 30s, I came across this haiku poem online that summed up my feelings quite well:

My macho boyfriend
Runs to open my car door
Are my arms broken?

But not long after that, my attitude changed!

I'm not sure why. I think I was finally tired. I was certainly done with dating losers.

So, when my now-husband came along and blatantly courted me, I was a much more docile and gracious recipient.

Cheers from the rafters that Juliet swung from herself 🤣 

 

❤️ 💗 💕 

 

x

[mylolita]

17 hours ago, catfeeder said:

I think these two quotes go well together, and I hope you'll indulge me. It was the 'radical' feminists in the US during the 1910's who galvanized the support of men to gain women the vote (finally!) in 1920. It's also some of the most radical US feminists today that have mobilized men in movements to equalize our pay and make important gains like 'parental leave' (rather than 'maternal' leave) to equalize our status in the workplace.

I raise this because the US is so far behind most progressive countries in terms of women's equality, and we have recently and speedily regressed in terms of women's bodily autonomy and overall health care, where women are not only being forced to carry unwanted pregnancies in nearly 26 states, but a recorded 520,000 rapes were associated with 64,565 pregnancies across 14 states with abortion restrictions, the highest number being in the state of Texas, at 26,313 as of this January. (PBS - Public Broadcasting System )

Maybe whatever radicalism some men may sense from women is actually a life and death issue for women, during a time where one of childbearing years can actually be denied certain cancer treatments to avoid preemptively impacting the formation of a fetus, and lifesaving measures for consensually pregnant women bleeding out from miscarriage are being denied until the only treatment left is to remove her womb or otherwise cripple her ability to conceive again.

The men who recognize the importance of standing up for women are desirable candidates for dating and mating and marriage. If any degree of feminism might prompt some men to withdraw from the dating market, I would argue the likelihood that these men are rightfully screening themselves out from the rejection they would face from the moment they first open their mouths.

We also have to remember historically, in England, when women were petitioning for the vote, working class men also could not vote. It was the gentleman and upper class men who could vote. So men had it bad too, but you just didn’t hear them complain about it.

 

They have gone off decade after decade to die for our freedom and never complained either. They let the women and children go first on the Titanic and still, never complained, they helped them into the life boats.

 

Women need to accept they are the weaker sex in my opinion and just accept the fact we need men’s protection, support, and unique masculine skills. And we should be thanking them. 
 

Feminine energy and unique skills are also vital. What we don’t want is the illusion or notion that men and women can be just, mingled together and can be the same in all and most things. Men and women can never be equal because we are not equal - physically, mentally, we are very different, biologically. And that’s actually a great thing, in evolutionary terms, it’s helped our survival for about 300,000 million years. We shouldn’t knock it and since the 70s we’ve been trying to change a routine that always has worked.

 

If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it, is my motto! 
 

x

[Kwothe28]

50 minutes ago, Jibralta said:

Yes, that day I learned that I'd rather risk my own life than be 'saved.'

So you are the one that is choosing a bear over a man in those hypothetical scenarios. 😆

There is a whole internet thing about it right now. And whether if a woman walks in the woods alone, would rather encounter a man or a bear. There are some very interesting takes about it. It exposes how some of the women, whether it was because of valid reasons or not, would rather choose a dangerous animal then a man. Was planning on opening a separate thread because I think it would be fun. But can stay here. 

[mylolita]

6 minutes ago, Kwothe28 said:

So you are the one that is choosing a bear over a man in those hypothetical scenarios. 😆

There is a whole internet thing about it right now. And whether if a woman walks in the woods alone, would rather encounter a man or a bear. There are some very interesting takes about it. It exposes how some of the women, whether it was because of valid reasons or not, would rather choose a dangerous animal then a man. Was planning on opening a separate thread because I think it would be fun. But can stay here. 

That would be a curious thread! 
 

x

[mylolita]

Just now, mylolita said:

That would be a curious thread! 
 

x

I would obviously rather encounter the man; get him on side, and then he can handle any future bears in the rest of the wood - LOLZ! 
 

x

[mylolita]

As an exception to the modern female rule I would just like to add as once again, the alternative (🤪) that I absolutely need a man, and I need men in general. I need my husband to be a father for my children (without him, they would experience much less and much worse). I need my husband for protection (what if someone breaks in at 2am? Am I going to be wrestling them to the ground and kickin’ a** like in the movies?!). I need a man for support, I need him to be my masculine minded best friend. I need a man to park my car (LMAO), and I needed my husband at so many points in my life I couldn’t make the time to list all the small and large but always vital ways, I need love and someone to love. That is, to me, the human condition. 
 

I am actually not independent. I need and accept and acknowledge my requirement for help. I cannot live this life alone and do not want to! I would be desperately unhappy. I am not that woman. And I have found, strangely, great power and freedom embracing that feminine side, and in turn, have found help and acceptance round mostly every corner! I take great pride actually; in needing a man, and specifically; the husband 🤣 and so have absolutely no qualms saying that and I also feel absolutely no lesser to any woman else who claims to not. 
 

It’s the way I’m wired and I don’t think it’s a weakness - I find it an unusual type of strength and that’s okay by me. Every woman is different. But no, I can’t do it all, I’m not amazing at everything and sometimes ya just need a capable MAYNN and there ain’t nothing wrong with that ladies!!!

 

x

[catfeeder]

11 hours ago, Coily said:

While I disagree that those two quote of mine are in parallel, I do agree that it’s a discussion worth having in terms of dating. I also disagree with feminism being the baseline between all female-male interactions should be measured. Then again I also draw a very distinct line between feminism and suffrage.

The Suffrage movement really is difficult to compare with the Radical Feminist movements of the 70s/80s and beyond. It’s also a lot more complex than it is usually reported in the history books, then again the world from 1900 to 1920 is where I spent a lot of my historical research. Kind of blew my mind that some of the most ardent detractors of suffrage were women.

I would also venture to say that some men (not all) going along with other radical feminist movements since then were of a malicious compliance; you know the trope of the predatory male feminist up to no good.

I would be curious as to what nations you are comparing the US to. To put such a blanket statement out I think is deceptive in the details of where things differ. You mention abortion, which have legislation variances across the globe. It’s a hot button topic for many, but this isn’t a “gotcha” moment for our discussion.

I reject your framing of ‘radicalism” being in regard to life and death circumstances. You want to paint giving a dam about women as only viewed through a feminist lens; I think this is grossly unfair and specious way to go about this discussion. If one thinks men only care about women as a provider of offspring, I don’t think you understand most men.

With this last paragraph’s argument, you poisoned the well. I think this is a horrifically bad faith position to take. Just as not all men are anti feminist, not all women are feminist; your position is so sadly narrow, that a woman who is a anti-feminist would be under worse scrutiny than any man.

Thanks for the discussion, Coilly. My point was not about "gotcha". It was about those who want to hold up the word 'feminism' as a dirty one and use it as their reason to justify dropping out of today's dating pool. I think that's fine, because if they want to imbue that word with hostility, and then broadly apply that hostility toward every woman who exists within that dating pool, then there they are--not likely to impress any woman who doesn't appreciate the hostility.

I don't view that as a collapse of dating or mating. Humans have the widest spectrum of any mammal in terms of male participation in mating and child rearing, ranging from donating a teaspoon of sperm all the way up to becoming a baby wearing, bottle feeding, softball throwing Dad. Some women's definition of a 'powerful' man today has become a man who will power a stroller. And plenty of men are even willing to call themselves a 'feminist'.

Yet I get that there are some men who must automatically couple the word 'feminist' with 'radical' or must find ways to somehow separate it away from 'suffrage' starting with control over women's bodies, or will equate it to some imagined perverse desire for an 'abortion' or are otherwise only willing to charge the word with negativity and use it as a slur. And where that's the case, those men are welcome to keep it as their blanket for whatever they want to project onto it. I just don't have to buy into the idea that this creates some kind of dating and mating crisis for the women of the world and the men who love and support us. 

[yogacat]

3 hours ago, Jibralta said:

It's an interesting question to me because courtship was an idea that always annoyed me when I was growing up. I hated when guys would try to open my door for me, or help me up or down from somewhere or something. Hated it. I found it ridiculous and embarrassing. Worst of all, people didn't understand my embarrassment and urged me to feel flattered instead. But of course, I didn't.

As an illustration of how intensely I disliked the courtship behavior, I give you this anecdote:

On a camping trip to Lake Placid in my early 20s, we visited a cliff where we could jump off into the lake below. The cliff was probably 25 feet above the water. Some of the people I was with had jumped off of this cliff every summer since they were children. They jumped right in. But it was my first time there, and I hesitated. One of the guys who had jumped off, a police officer, looked up from the water and saw me hesitating. He called up to me, "I'll jump off with you!" I watched in horror as he ran up the steep, rocky slope to 'save' me, and as he drew near--just so he couldn't save me--I jumped off the cliff by myself. Yes, that day I learned that I'd rather risk my own life than be 'saved.'

When I was in my early 30s, I came across this haiku poem online that summed up my feelings quite well:

My macho boyfriend
Runs to open my car door
Are my arms broken?

But not long after that, my attitude changed!

I'm not sure why. I think I was finally tired. I was certainly done with dating losers.

So, when my now-husband came along and blatantly courted me, I was a much more docile and gracious recipient.

I appreciate that. But I also appreciated how my ex flew 3000 miles so that I didn't have to drive home alone...

It didn't change the outcome of our relationship, but I'll never forget that gesture. That's courtship to me. I think the song really sums it up (though I wouldn't go so far as "Be thou my vision").

He took care of me and my emotions. When he first brought me breakfast in bed, I didn't scowl at him for making me feel guilty for not doing it for him. I was happy and grateful. When he held the door open for me, I didn't roll my eyes and cringe with embarrassment. I smiled and said thank you.

When he helped me with my jacket, I smiled and waited patiently until he was done.

[Batya33]

 

I didn't feel docile when I was "courted" or when a man holds the door for me especially if I'm carrying heavy packages. It's just -nice, mannerly, depending on the context.  My teenager was scared to do something at a game place for his bday so his two male friends offered to do it with him.  I thought that was wonderful.  He did it! (Referring to Jibralta's example) - I wouldn't have assumed anyone thought you were "weak"

[catfeeder]

3 hours ago, mylolita said:

We also have to remember historically, in England, when women were petitioning for the vote, working class men also could not vote. It was the gentleman and upper class men who could vote. So men had it bad too, but you just didn’t hear them complain about it.

They have gone off decade after decade to die for our freedom and never complained either. They let the women and children go first on the Titanic and still, never complained, they helped them into the life boats.

Women need to accept they are the weaker sex in my opinion and just accept the fact we need men’s protection, support, and unique masculine skills. And we should be thanking them. 

Feminine energy and unique skills are also vital. What we don’t want is the illusion or notion that men and women can be just, mingled together and can be the same in all and most things. Men and women can never be equal because we are not equal - physically, mentally, we are very different, biologically. And that’s actually a great thing, in evolutionary terms, it’s helped our survival for about 300,000 million years. We shouldn’t knock it and since the 70s we’ve been trying to change a routine that always has worked.

If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it, is my motto! 
x

I have no quarrel with biological or evolutionary distinctions between sexes, and my point certainly has nothing to with advocating for either female or male supremacy. Whether a system wants to segment people by sex or by wealth or by any other means, there have been, as you point out, and there will always be, people who will push for progression past their own marginalization. 

None of this is new, so I simply don't buy into the notion that there is some sudden and dire collapse in the dating world because of it. If there is a segment of men who are pulling out of dating and mating, they are well within their rights to do so. And if there is a sub-segment of those men who also want to regard the entire population of women with hostility, then they have effectively self-screened and have done each woman a favor if she wants to date a man who is not hostile toward her.

There is nothing 'radical' about the idea that humans seek mates that match their values and share their goals and desires. Where women have made progress in equality of rights as human beings, we could not have done so without the expanding number of men who share, respect and uphold such equality. Those who don't agree with such progress will find one another, as will those who agree.

This isn't rocket science, and it's also not a crisis.

[rainbowsandroses]

4 hours ago, mylolita said:

That would be a curious thread! 
 

x

I concur!!!  

[rainbowsandroses]

3 hours ago, mylolita said:

I need a man for support, I need him to be my masculine minded best friend.

I love this!! ❤️ 

[Jibralta]

5 hours ago, Kwothe28 said:

So you are the one that is choosing a bear over a man in those hypothetical scenarios. 😆

There is a whole internet thing about it right now. And whether if a woman walks in the woods alone, would rather encounter a man or a bear. There are some very interesting takes about it. It exposes how some of the women, whether it was because of valid reasons or not, would rather choose a dangerous animal then a man. Was planning on opening a separate thread because I think it would be fun. But can stay here. 

Well, to be fair I wasn't really looking for a relationship. I didn't even begin to settle down until I was in my mid 30s. But--despite all of the attentive behavior--nobody seemed to actually care about what I wanted 🤣 It was really all about what they wanted. So, I had very little compunction about cashing in on that. I was quite mercenary. 😉

I didn't feel like I needed to be saved, or like I needed help getting out of a car, or stepping down from a ledge or anything like that. I liked to do those things by myself. Not wanting unnecessary assistance doesn't mean I prefer dangerous animals to nice people. I just prefer people who see me for what I am, respect my feelings, and who don't have ulterior motives. 

My husband was direct about what he wanted and literally told me, "I am courting you." And it was great. 

[LootieTootie]

Happily married here and I know my husband and I would never say we need each other. We express needs as in something you can't live without. It doesn't mean we are not in love, don't support each other, don't do things for each other, aren't intimate, etc. I think if you're expressing your "needs" in a lover/partner, its the same as expressing your preferences in a partner. Both my husband and I have always been independent and introverted - loners, you can say. We enjoy each other's company but we like our own company. We both have big families so it's not like we have no one - we sometimes say we have too many people in our lives, too many functions every weekend! Our life wouldn't be full without the other but that just means we have to find a way to fill that void. He's gone on long work trips and I make the most of my time with hobbies and with family. 

4 hours ago, catfeeder said:

There is nothing 'radical' about the idea that humans seek mates that match their values and share their goals and desires. Where women have made progress in equality of rights as human beings, we could not have done so without the expanding number of men who share, respect and uphold such equality. Those who don't agree with such progress will find one another, as will those who agree.

This isn't rocket science, and it's also not a crisis.

I also echo catfeeder here. We all have our likes and dislikes... and I can tell you as much as my husband and I are different (think conservative Southern Gentleman meets liberal Cali girl who never liked getting flowers or getting doors opened for her), we do share the same values and desires. If you need a man to take care of you, theres a man out there who wants to take care of his woman. If you want a woman who is docile, there's a woman out there for you. If you want a man who can protect you, theres a guy out there. There's no wrongs or rights. 

 

 

[rainbowsandroses]

6 minutes ago, LootieTootie said:

Happily married here and I know my husband and I would never say we need each other. We express needs as in something you can't live without. 

That's interesting LootieTootie but if I may ask, if your husband stopped being supportive and caring and loving you, would you be able to live with that in your marriage? 

I know I wouldn't, I'd leave.  I would imagine most people would. 

So in that sense would you not say you "need" those things from him?   

It's healthy and normal to need other people imo.  People also need to feel needed!  Not in an unhealthy codependent way, but a human healthy need to feel supported and loved in your relationship.

And no for me I could not survive in my relationship without it, I would leave and survive on my own.

Apologies, I am extremely independent and self sufficient as well but this whole "not needing a man" when in a relationship with him feels quite foreign to me.