She called me cheap and "too aggressive"!

[Wyldfire]

WTF Wyldfire?!

Are you actually trying to say we should pimp women?? Wtf is that all about. I don't even want to think about it that way or i'll spend the next couple months wondering whether i'm paying someone for sex or not when i'm buying them dinner/a drink/whatever.

I think the OP had it at the right end tbh! But i would have never taken her out on a dinner date for the second date. That's just asking for trouble imho. I avoid having to come to some sort of arrangement about who's gonna pay the bill at all costs because it does in fact make you seem cheap even if quite frankly it's honest. And having sex with someone for two consecutive dates to then disappear is kind of focked up, he was right to bust on her for that. But maybe the way he busted on her was just a tad bit rude. Like ok, if she had the right mindset she would have obviously viewed that as a joke, but the problem is that most people just aren't that laid back and you have to take the edge off a bit. C&f is great but sometimes it's better to mix a little 'nice' in it ;-)

That still doesn't mean he should have paid for dinner though!

And to comment on your 'i can't count the times i heard guys complain etc..'. Don't you think these guys are losers? I do, they need to get their head straight and stop trying to pimp women.

Being a gentleman and paying for the date you ask a woman on is NOT "pimping".

 

[picard]

I am already looking for a new girl. I drop the that girl. Is the bar still a good place to cruise for women? or is it becoming a politically charged site for feminist seeking to harrass men?

 

[Socialreject]

Being a gentleman and paying for the date you ask a woman on is NOT "pimping".

It IS if you expect to get laid afterwards ;-)

And if your not expecting to get laid... then you must really like her for paying her dinner. Since they only went on 2 dates how would he know if he really liked her?! Bit soon to know all that wouldn't you say? Like i said, i wouldn't have taken her out on a dinner date in the first place.

To me this would seem like we have a good thing going, she's attracted to me, i'm attracted to her, all is well. Let's just keep it that way and not start out with the 'date date' stuff till the relationship moves in to another phase... well that's how i'd handle it anyways. If i had to put a number on it... i'd wouldn't take her out on a 'date date' untill after about 5-6 casual dates (which don't involve me forking over a lot of cash and which doesn't have to mean we end up in the sack every time). If all goes well and we have a lot of fun, she shows me some qualities she has... THEN i would consider taking her out on a real date, where i buy.

Being a gentleman is about respect. Taking a woman out to dinner with the intent to get laid isn't respectful. Taking her out to dinner when you hardly know her at all and paying for her meal is just stupid and chummy. If you start doing that, you might as well open up a poor house with 5 star restaurant food for any and everyone.

Heck, it's not even about being cheap or making sure i don't have welfare painted on my back. Tbh, it's just plain about me not feeling comfortable paying for someones dinner who i hardly know... it works the other way around aswell!

To review the situation... If she expected him to pay for the dinner... she was wrong to expect that! Desdinova said it right. These days women have jobs, and if you are only at that casual level, you pay for your own food! So she overreacted. But i'll also say, in her defence, that Broham brought this one on himself by a) taking her out to dinner for a second date (yeah sometimes this is ok, but it highly depends on the person) and b) pushing the wrong buttons with his c&f (again highly dependant on the person). So yeah, all in all, i say Broham shot himself in the foot, but he WAS right about not paying for dinner, and that's my point.

 

[Wyldfire]

It IS if you expect to get laid afterwards ;-)

And if your not expecting to get laid... then you must really like her for paying her dinner. Since they only went on 2 dates how would he know if he really liked her?! Bit soon to know all that wouldn't you say? Like i said, i wouldn't have taken her out on a dinner date in the first place.

To me this would seem like we have a good thing going, she's attracted to me, i'm attracted to her, all is well. Let's just keep it that way and not start out with the 'date date' stuff till the relationship moves in to another phase... well that's how i'd handle it anyways. If i had to put a number on it... i'd wouldn't take her out on a 'date date' untill after about 5-6 casual dates (which don't involve me forking over a lot of cash and which doesn't have to mean we end up in the sack every time). If all goes well and we have a lot of fun, she shows me some qualities she has... THEN i would consider taking her out on a real date, where i buy.

Being a gentleman is about respect. Taking a woman out to dinner with the intent to get laid isn't respectful. Taking her out to dinner when you hardly know her at all and paying for her meal is just stupid and chummy. If you start doing that, you might as well open up a poor house with 5 star restaurant food for any and everyone.

Heck, it's not even about being cheap or making sure i don't have welfare painted on my back. Tbh, it's just plain about me not feeling comfortable paying for someones dinner who i hardly know... it works the other way around aswell!

To review the situation... If she expected him to pay for the dinner... she was wrong to expect that! Desdinova said it right. These days women have jobs, and if you are only at that casual level, you pay for your own food! So she overreacted. But i'll also say, in her defence, that Broham brought this one on himself by a) taking her out to dinner for a second date (yeah sometimes this is ok, but it highly depends on the person) and b) pushing the wrong buttons with his c&f (again highly dependant on the person). So yeah, all in all, i say Broham shot himself in the foot, but he WAS right about not paying for dinner, and that's my point.

Listen...you're a dude...you are ALWAYS expecting and at least hoping to get laid afterwards. We all know that is your goal everytime you ask a woman out or try to get to know a woman. That's no big secret.

Since the woman already knew when she accepted the date what your goal is she's not going to feel like a hooker if you pay her way. If your goal wasn't to get in her pants you wouldn't have asked her out in the first place.

If you want her to pay her own way then tell her that up front when you ask her for the date.

 

[micams]

I don't understand this trading between sex and money.
What is the societal accepted price of a lay?

 

[Desdinova]

Why do you guys consistently pursue women that treat you like crap? Because you look no further than how they look

Because they're plentiful, and it's difficult to judge a woman when you've just met her. I've given women a chance to show that they're decent. When they show that they're not, they get tossed out the door.

Also, it's natural for men to want women who look good. If a woman looks good, the man gets a boner. Good looks are stimulating for men, and unless you have a penis, you'll never understand that. Ugly women don't stimulate men. That's why we're attracted to good looking women.

Again...there's nothing wrong with asking to go dutch...but you have to ask BEFORE she arrives. She might not have any money with her or might not be able to afford to go out.

...and what if the man only has enough money to cover his ass only? It's a goddam two-way street, and it shows respect for the other person. More than once I offer to take a woman somewhere and she says "Well, I don't have any money right now". I then make alternate plans that don't cost money. I EXPECT a woman to cover her own ass and if she can't, I EXPECT her to tell me. She would expect the same from me.

the problem occurs when a man picks a trashy woman and expects her to behave like a lady.

Again, it's hard NOT to pick a trashy woman when they're plentiful. You can only find a four leaf clover by weeding out the three leaf ones.

Both men and women have changed...society has changed. Back when I was a kid there were less divorced parents. Even those parents who were divorced...the fathers were still involved in their children's lives.

This is normal among the baby boomers, and my father is no exception with his daughter. I'm sure there are others on here who's fathers abandoned them.

I'm seeing the complete opposite with today's fathers. They genuinely want to be part of their kids' lives even if their relationship falls apart. This is a backlash on the baby boomer fathers who didn't give a damn. Here's an article for you to read:

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/magazine/articles/2005/01/16/gen_x_dad?pg=full

You've got a very, very small minority of radical feminists who manipulate society through fear tactics and convincing women they are mistreated by men. Most women couldn't give two sh*ts about feminism and don't consdier themselves feminists.

It may be a small group of feminists who manipulate society, but girls today are growing from infancy with this influence and accept it as the norm. Therefore, the movement is producting more feminists without these female children being consciously aware of it.

 

[Socialreject]

Listen...you're a dude...you are ALWAYS expecting and at least hoping to get laid afterwards. We all know that is your goal everytime you ask a woman out or try to get to know a woman. That's no big secret.

Since the woman already knew when she accepted the date what your goal is she's not going to feel like a hooker if you pay her way. If your goal wasn't to get in her pants you wouldn't have asked her out in the first place.

If you want her to pay her own way then tell her that up front when you ask her for the date.

I really think you are seeying things a bit to black and white here Wyldfire. It's not true that (atleast for ME) i ALWAYS expect to get laid after a date. This is totally NOT true.

And 'hoping' to get laid well... I'm not sure about that one, let's just say it will always cross my mind at some point in the date (isn't that the same for women though?) but to say i'm really clinging any 'hopes' to it, no i wouldn't go that far at all. Course, if you ask me up for coffee, to check if there are burglars or whatever else excuse and then put me in a situation where your open to kissing and petting... errr. Yeah at that point i'm starting to really hope to get laid and if it keeps going yes i'm definitly expecting to get laid!

But that is still a long frickin shot away from calling up a woman, asking her out on a date and all the while thinking 'she better give me some ass after this'. That's like a whole nother world as far as i'm concerned and when you enter that world you are up for disappointments and tbh i think it's a bit sad.

The whole point here is that you are essentially generalising. I know that for atleast a number of men, the number one goal of dating and mac'ing isn't to 'get laid'. While that's a great, not to say necesairy part of it all.. the ultimate goal (for me and i recon a lot of guys) is to find someone truly worthwhile. And when your doing that, there is no need for all the paying dinners and hoping to get laid, nah, it's just fine if you have fun for a while, maybe make out but nothing ever comes from it.

There is just a difference between starting from the idea of trying to get laid and starting from the idea of dating and mac'ing as a preselection for finding someone for the long run. If a woman told me... Pay my dinner and i'll have sex with you... tbh i'd be a little freaked out!

 

[Wyldfire]

Ah-HA...so it doesn't matter if I pay, right? ...she knows I want sex, and paying the dinner tab doesn't guarantee it...she ultimately decides if she wants sex...then what difference does paying for dinner make?

All I am asking WF is for you to admit your shallowness...

BTW, you're actually right--for once--implying it's the woman who chooses sex...

Damn right I'm shallow...and I've said that about myself quite frequently on this forum. I'm not shallow about money, though. I AM shallow about looks and I won't date a man with foreskin.

That being said...whoever invites someone to go out should be prepared to pay for both people. I've asked guys I've been seeing to do things before and if I asked, I paid, or at least tried to. And again...IF the guys lets me know up front that he wants to go dutch and he does that at the time he asks me out, I'm cool with that. But if he were to spring it on me at the ticket counter or when we sit down to dinner...I'm outta there.

 

[Marlimus]

Wyldfire's frame is that he should feel grateful because the female, in her benevolence, condescended to allowing him the esteemed honor of having sex with her. Its as though she was doing him a favor instead of indulging her own passions. They are not in any exclusive relationship, I take it, and if both parties are working or equally unemplyed then there is no reason for her to feel as though she is entitled to anything special. Even if she thinks that he should pay for her, it is in bad taste to bring it up in such a fashion.

 

[Socialreject]

Damn right I'm shallow... I AM shallow about looks and I won't date a man with foreskin.

Hey that's interesting... so at which point do you find out if they got foreskin or not? Do you actually ask them this like "hey dude, before we go out on a date, i need to ask you this... do you still got your foreskin?"

What do they answer? ^^

"yeah i got it in a jarr on my bedside" lol!

Anyways, sorry for the OT ;-)

On a more serious note... Yah i see your point in 'whoever makes the invite has to pay the date' and i would agree to some extent with that. The problem is ofcourse that these days guys are still expected to do the asking for dates thing. So it's not really fair that way. Very few women ever ask a guy on a date, so yeah. Like i said, i prefer it my way. Either there is no question that each will pay his own food OR i don't do the whole date date thing till i'm really comfy with that person and i just WANT to buy them a meal cause i think they are great to hang out with.

 

[Wyldfire]

Because they're plentiful, and it's difficult to judge a woman when you've just met her. I've given women a chance to show that they're decent. When they show that they're not, they get tossed out the door.

There's an easy solution to this...don't go out on a date that costs money until you determine if she's decent or not.

Also, it's natural for men to want women who look good. If a woman looks good, the man gets a boner. Good looks are stimulating for men, and unless you have a penis, you'll never understand that. Ugly women don't stimulate men. That's why we're attracted to good looking women.

I don't date ugly men, either. I'm extremely shallow about looks and don't have a problem admitting it. However, looks alone doesn't cut the mustard. There needs to be substance and quality. Men need to look beyond the tip of their dyck when choosing to pursue a woman and date her.

...and what if the man only has enough money to cover his ass only? It's a goddam two-way street, and it shows respect for the other person. More than once I offer to take a woman somewhere and she says "Well, I don't have any money right now". I then make alternate plans that don't cost money. I EXPECT a woman to cover her own ass and if she can't, I EXPECT her to tell me. She would expect the same from me.

Then he tells the girl that at the time he asks her out...NOT as they are sitting down and he asks for separate checks. You guys keep ignoring this point I'm making. Why can't you tell her when you ask her out that you expect her to pay her own way? Is it because guys are afraid she will say no if you do that? I honestly don't understand why you can't just say "hey, do you mind going dutch?"

Again, it's hard NOT to pick a trashy woman when they're plentiful. You can only find a four leaf clover by weeding out the three leaf ones.

Des, come on...I can spot a trashy man in about 5 minutes. I can spot a trashy woman in about 5 minutes. The problem men have is that they ignore how trashy a girl is if they are physically attracted to her. A lot of women do the same thing.

This is normal among the baby boomers, and my father is no exception with his daughter. I'm sure there are others on here who's fathers abandoned them.

Oh, I'm sure there are some who did. However, that doesn't change the fact that it wasn't the norm for a father to completely abandon his children and shun his responsibility to them if the relationship with their mother didn't work. Today, however, it IS the norm. Both men and women today expect instant gratification, are incredibly selfish, have a sense of entitlement and not much in the way of a sense of responsibility. Everyone blames everyone else for their problems, mistakes and misfortune. There is very few people who hold themselves accountable for those things. Yes, women have changed...and men have changed right along with them.

I'm seeing the complete opposite with today's fathers. They genuinely want to be part of their kids' lives even if their relationship falls apart. This is a backlash on the baby boomer fathers who didn't give a damn. Here's an article for you to read:

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/magazine/articles/2005/01/16/gen_x_dad?pg=full

Men who lived with their children and wanted them intially ARE improving somewhat about wanting to be involved. The same can't be said of men who end up having children they didn't want to have. That is what is so different now compared to when I was growing up. If a guy got a girl pregnant when I was growing up he took responsibility for that child more often than not. Today, the majority of men shun that responsibility.

It may be a small group of feminists who manipulate society, but girls today are growing from infancy with this influence and accept it as the norm. Therefore, the movement is producting more feminists without these female children being consciously aware of it.

Those girls aren't feminists. They are just as much innocent victims of those radical feminists as men are. Just like boys are influenced by this stuff when they are growing up so are the girls. They don't know any better...boys or girls...unless they are taught differently. It's not okay to view the boys as mere victims of their circumstance in this situation while blaming the girls who are just as innocent of any wrongdoing.

I've discussed this stuff with my older children. My little one is too young to understand right now. Most kids growing up don't have anyone explaining all this stuff to them. I've talked about the influence of feminism with a lot of young women...and many of them get really angry when they realize the way they have been manipulated into fearing men. Educate these girls...don't treat them in a way that just reinforces those screwed up messages society sends them.

 

[The Juan and only]

Wyldfire's frame is that he should feel grateful because the female, in her benevolence, condescended to allowing him the esteemed honor of having sex with her

Absolutely. She's back-tracked on it slightly throughout the conversation but if her first post is any indication, then it simply goes to show how women are conditioned to believe they are more important than men -- and that having sex is something they provide as a gift, something a man should have to work hard for, rather than the mutual expression of the emotional connection between two people; or just a bit of fun they BOTH enjoy.

 

[Broham]

Wyldfire- You sure have a lot to say. I can just imagine what a first date with you is like.

This is my final word on the subject at hand:


My issue with paying for the girl on the first date is that if I don't like the girl, I just wasted my hard earned money on someone I'll never speak to again. A guy wouldn't pay for a new female friend or business contact the first time he hangs out with them. How is a date any different besides the fact that there might be a physical connection?

In response to the whole "traditional" thing. Guys picking up the tab is a traditional custom according to who? Let me ask you this- do girls still want dinner & a movie as a first date because its "traditional"? I'd hope not since its a boring first date. I think girls use the traditional line as an excuse for their shallowness. Is it not 2006 where girls have money and want to be independent?


- B

 

[Wyldfire]

Wyldfire's frame is that he should feel grateful because the female, in her benevolence, condescended to allowing him the esteemed honor of having sex with her. Its as though she was doing him a favor instead of indulging her own passions. They are not in any exclusive relationship, I take it, and if both parties are working or equally unemplyed then there is no reason for her to feel as though she is entitled to anything special. Even if she thinks that he should pay for her, it is in bad taste to bring it up in such a fashion.

No, that's not my "frame". You simply are not actually reading what I am writing and are assuming an awful lot. Lay off the conjecture and stop trying to find something hidden between the lines. My statements have been quite clear.

 

[Wyldfire]

Hey that's interesting... so at which point do you find out if they got foreskin or not? Do you actually ask them this like "hey dude, before we go out on a date, i need to ask you this... do you still got your foreskin?"

It's actually one of the first things I ask a guy when I'm determining if I'm interested in him or not. I just say, "Hey, are you circumcised?"

What do they answer? ^^

Usually they just say either yes or no and give me a questioning look...and some ask if it matters to which I say that yes, it does. If they answer no I will immediately lose interest in them because I am pretty repulsed by foreskin. As a very visual woman, it does matter. I can't be with a man whose penis I find repulsive. Yes, it's shallow...but oh well...it's no different than a guy who won't date a woman whose body turns them off.

On a more serious note... Yah i see your point in 'whoever makes the invite has to pay the date' and i would agree to some extent with that. The problem is ofcourse that these days guys are still expected to do the asking for dates thing. So it's not really fair that way. Very few women ever ask a guy on a date, so yeah. Like i said, i prefer it my way. Either there is no question that each will pay his own food OR i don't do the whole date date thing till i'm really comfy with that person and i just WANT to buy them a meal cause i think they are great to hang out with.

Listen...going dutch is perfectly acceptable IF that is cleared up prior to actually going on the date. The point I am attempting to make that essentially all of you are completely ignoring is that I'm saying it's unacceptable to wait until it's time to pay to let the person you asked out know that you aren't paying for them. Most men do pay for the woman they invite out and most women are going to assume you will do the same. If you don't do that you really need to let her know ahead of time to avoid her feeling embarassed or misled and uncomfortable...or worse...without any money to pay for herself.

 

[Nighthawk]

Wyldfire, as someone who has agreed with you many times, your double-standards have been thoroughly established. 'She treated him well by having sex with him' ha. The free food has blinded your logic

I have dated about a billion quality women and none have them have ever expected me to pay for all the meals, and the ones that did either changed their tune or were shown the door. Anyway I've always been the type to suggest running off before the bill arrives.

And am I the only one who thinks the chick in the original email exchange is desperate for it?

 

[Socialreject]

In response to the whole "traditional" thing. Guys picking up the tab is a traditional custom according to who? Let me ask you this- do girls still want dinner & a movie as a first date because its "traditional"? I'd hope not since its a boring first date.

Couldn't agree more, dinner dates are seriously boring unless you got some serious fire cooking with your dinner partner, but that takes time to develop imho. So yeah, that's me still wondering why you DID take her out on a dinner date

 

[Unregistered]

My own opinion is that if a woman meets a guy on the internet and fornicates with him on the first date, she shouldn't expect to get treated like a lady.

 

[Wyldfire]

Wyldfire's frame is that he should feel grateful because the female, in her benevolence, condescended to allowing him the esteemed honor of having sex with her

Absolutely. She's back-tracked on it slightly throughout the conversation but if her first post is any indication, then it simply goes to show how women are conditioned to believe they are more important than men -- and that having sex is something they provide as a gift, something a man should have to work hard for, rather than the mutual expression of the emotional connection between two people; or just a bit of fun they BOTH enjoy.

Not at all...I have never experienced a man not expecting to pay for the date. Never. I was actually shocked by the original poster's behavior...and I do find it to be seriously lacking in class and taste. Take into account that I am pretty old fashioned as well. To me...this practice you are speaking of is completely BIZARRE.

Now, upon getting more information about this it became clear that he didn't even warn the girl that she had to pay for herself. That is what I'm focused on now because I just think it's blatantly wrong not to be honest about that policy up front at the time you ask her to go out.

 

[Broham]

Couldn't agree more, dinner dates are seriously boring unless you got some serious fire cooking with your dinner partner, but that takes time to develop imho. So yeah, that's me still wondering why you DID take her out on a dinner date

Dude we had sex the first night together. Basically I went to dinner with her because I WAS HUNGRY. Not because I wanted to try to impress her and set some sort of mood. The place we went to was one of my favorites and had good beer. She didn't say anything to me at the time and seemed cool with having casual sex without the going through a traditional dating process.

My new theory is that someone (maybe a friend, family member or ex) told her that I was cheap and that she shouldn't waste her time on me. I could be wrong, but her behavior during the "dates" were definitely not indicators of her future actions.