Responding to the call from ‘nice guys’ for ethical pickup advice, Amanda Marcotte offers six tips for sustainable dating success.
Recently, Clarisse Thorn admirably tried to pick through the sewage strewn all over “pickup artist” (PUA) communities and find a handful of gems that could be plucked out and proffered to the socially awkward man who finds that he’s not getting laid as often as he’d like. (To which I say, who is?) Clarisse is less cynical than I am on this issue; I think the PUA mentality is too toxic to be polished into something non-misogynist. Even in its best forms, it’s still based on the sexist model of dating where women are selling and men are buying, an inherently sexist model that poisons even the occasional glimpses of common sense.
Still, Clarisse is right to say feminists haven’t really responded to the plaintive cries of self-described “nice guys” who claim they want non-sexist dating advice that works, but are forced to look to PUAs because there is no one else speaking to them. So, in the interest of good faith, I have concocted dating advice for men who swear up and down they are only drawn to misogynist PUA forums and seminars out of desperation and not sexism. Fair warning: this isn’t dating advice for everyone, but aimed at those who claim that they have to use tricks and traps to get laid, because they’re too socially awkward to get laid honestly.
♦◊♦
Be generous about women’s motivations.
PUA communities spend a lot of time disparaging women with words like “shallow,” “gold-digger,” and “childish,” for having what they deem to be incorrect desires. But often, women’s choices make much more sense if you assume women date for fun and companionship, just as men do. If you don’t judge men for wanting sexiness, fun, and ego-boosting from women, then don’t judge women for wanting the same.
♦◊♦
Believe that sex is not a battle.
The PUA model of dating is one where men are buying and women are selling, and therefore men’s job is to try to get as much sex out of women for as little a “price” as possible. This is not only sexist, but exhausting. You have more fun when your friends are having fun, right? Apply the same attitude towards dating, and you’ll become immediately hotter.
♦◊♦
Make a list of traits you’re looking for in a woman.
This doesn’t have to be just for a long-term partner, though you might want different lists for different occasions. Be excruciatingly honest, even if it means writing down embarrassing things like “submissive” or “sexually inexperienced.” Physical characteristics are OK, but it’s more important to talk about stuff she can control, like her self-presentation. Be as specific as possible. If the ideal woman in your mind has a job in a creative profession and knows how to cook, write that down.
Next: Be more like The Situation
About Amanda Marcotte
Geez, did we really need another smug, snarky diatribe from someone who clearly has nothing but contempt for guys, nice or otherwise? Who the hell keeps asking Marcotte to contribute to this site, or who approves her articles? Give it a rest and go away already.
I was personally swept off my feet at a college party by a guy who noticed that I was a non-drinker (at the time, anyway), and without me asking, went to make me a cup of tea. He spent the whole night talking to me about books and making me feel comfortable, given that I knew very few people there at the party. Sure as hell I hit that later on – and still am hitting it to this day. He’s not in any way out of the ordinary: he makes a pretty middle-of-the-road salary, he only wears Target clothing, and he detests going into nightclubs. And that’s the way I like my men: with enough character and personality to not need the fancy trimmings.
The whole “women don’t like nice guys” thing is hokum as a general rule. Plenty of us like dudes who are perfectly average looking, or introverted, or not particularly well-dressed. Some of these things don’t matter much to us because – shock and gasp – we are, ourselves, average, kinda introverted, and pretty lazy about fashion.
So you have to cop to that. If you’re average, that’s sweet. Aim for finding an average partner. We totally exist and those who are zen with their averageness are at least confident enough to own it without hangups.
I think there are plenty of men and women who are under the spell of illusory superiority: namely, they’re irrationally convinced that somehow, they are above average in terms of desirability, personality, intelligence, and thus deserve someone entirely outstanding. I think it’s the reason we have a lot of doofus guys and idiotic women complaining about a woman/man drought, or “women not knowing what they want”, or there being “no decent men available”. I think that for the most part, people who are reasonably honest about their own personal failings are pretty likely to be in the sort of romantic situation they want to be in.
Behold the condescending belief that feminists have all the answers for men when it comes to dating.
Wasn’t this article just written? Isn’t this the exact same thing except meaner, more insulting and less interesting? And I’m sorry, but stop with the “getting laid honestly” crap. I don’t care if you use so-called tricks or gimmicks to get laid. Unless you’re a criminal who drugs someone or physically coerces them, it’s all fair game. If a woman sleeps with you because you claim to be a famous NASCAR driver or an astronaut, so be it. Next time pull out your phone and do a Google search before jumping in the sack. But please stop blaming guys for what Bill Belichick would call a “competitive advantage” when it comes to landing a woman.
This is getting ridiculous!
Unless you’re a criminal who drugs someone or physically coerces them, it’s all fair game. If a woman sleeps with you because you claim to be a famous NASCAR driver or an astronaut, so be it. Next time pull out your phone and do a Google search before jumping in the sack.
It is indeed true that all this stuff is perfectly legal. But I thought this was called the *good* men project.
djw: So you can’t be a “good man” if you have use pick up techniques to land a one night stand at the bar?? What other rules do you have that would disqualify men from being considered “good?”
What’s so controversial about the idea that dishonest men != good men? Isn’t honesty something you’d consider part and parcel of goodness? Seems like a no-brainer to me.
The whole cosmetics = lies analogy betrays a very confused attitude to the concept of reality. If a woman shaves her legs, then her legs are actually shaved. If she gets breast implants, then her breasts are actually larger.
If you claim to be a NASCAR driver, you are not, for any accepted meaning of the term, a NASCAR driver.
Do you see how that’s not the same thing?
In fact Amanda clearly states taking care of your appearance, hitting the gym and so on as some of the advice she gives to men to *replace* the lies and manipulation. So you’re well off base in more ways than one here.
Honest question: If a man gave that same advice to a woman (hit the gym, take care of your appearance, etc) would the feminists not call him “an entitled asshole” or fat-phobic, or say he’s perpetuating a negative standrad of beauty, or something?
I mean, I wish I could run this article gender-flipped and see what the reaction would be.
No, not if it was written like this article. If you tell a woman she can’t get a man (period) because she’s fat, you’re an entitled, fatphobic asshole. If you tell a woman she won’t get a well-muscled hard body (specifically) because she doesn’t work out herself, then you’re just laying down some hard truths. Word choice matters a lot here.
I don’t think you understood that point in the article. She didn’t say that men need to hit the gym and take care of their appearance in a vaccuum. She stated that a man who expects to attract a woman who hits the gym and takes care of HER appearance should do the same. It’s just about being realistic and fair. Don’t expect perfection in a partner and then expect them to be attracted to your beer gut, sweaty pits, and sloppy stained t-shirts. If you’re a chubby video game nerd boy who is looking for a chubby video game nerd girl, then you’re on the right track! But if you’re a chubby video game nerd who is looking for a tight-bodied, highly manicured, super sexy, long, lean bombshell, you’re being unrealistic and unfair. You can’t expect the women you meet to be so much more above physical attraction than you are yourself.
The key is that your expectations for your partner’s appearance and your efforts to improve your own appearance should line up. All Amanda is saying is that a guy who wants to date a woman who’s very physically attractive, he has three options: (1) find a way to make himself very physically attractive so that hot women will be interested in him (2) do a reality-check on his expectations and go for women who are roughly the same level of physical attractiveness as himself (3) come to terms with being on his own. All of that applies equally to women. The reason feminists don’t spend a lot of timing reminding women of options #1 and #2 is because women get reminded of this stuff all the time. Mass media and regular people are always telling women they need to become more physically attractive to get a man, and how they need to settle for men who are good-enough but don’t live up to their impossible ideals. In fact I believe there are many people saying those things in this thread, even! Feminists do spend time on reminding women of #3 though – that a person can be perfectly happy on their own, especially if the alternative is becoming someone you don’t want to be or settling for someone who doesn’t make you happy.
Is it really necessary to explain that “don’t lie to or mislead people in the service of your own ends” isn’t “good”?
Not all pick up techniques are dishonest. Some, like the aforementioned “freeze out” are just mind games used to turn the tables on women. Do you consider these tactics dishonest? I certainly don’t.
I’ve had one night stands and not called someone back. Does that take away my “good man card” for all eternity? No, absolutely not. My point is your narrow definition of a good man is much too restrictive. As I understand it, the GMP is committed to creating a conversation about what makes a good man. You, on the other hand, are committed to narrowly applying your definition of a good man and excluding people who use pick up techniques in bars.
I was specifically responding to the following statement: “If a woman sleeps with you because you claim to be a famous NASCAR driver or an astronaut, so be it.” Perhaps I’m misreading you, but that sounds like an endorsement of deception to me. I’ve never made the claim that all “pick up tactics” are dishonest, nor do I have any interest in defending that particular claim.
And as far as I know, there is no agency issuing “good man cards”, so there’s nothing to take away. I simply made what I thought was an utterly commonsensical statement–that lying with intention to manipulate in the service of your own ends doesn’t sound like the behavior of a “good man” to me (or good woman! or good person! or good space alien! the emphasis here is on “good”, not “men”). Is it really controversial that being a good person involves not lying and manipulating?
Have you ever told a woman she looks good when that wasn’t the case? Have you ever pretended to be interested in what someone was saying even though it was dreadfully boring? Have you ever doled out compliments you didn’t really mean because you were hoping to get lucky?
If not, enjoy sainthood. If so, then you’re a normal human being who has lied and used manipulation. Can you honestly say you’ve never done something like that?
My point is we all just need to relax. Men and women chase each other with varying intents. Some want something long term, others don’t. But I think it’s more than a little insulting for feminists to attempt to tell men there’s a “right way” to pick up women.
Are those actions really so common that not doing them constitutes “sainthood”?
It’s absolutely fascinating to me that you seem to think an elaborate, absurd lie (I’m a NASCAR driver!) is basically the same thing as normal, minor social acts of politeness. Yes, I’ve pretended boring people are more interesting than they are–but out of basic politeness, rather than an effort to trick them into sleeping with me. Becuase, you see, I have a radical, wacky approach to dating–I only try to date people who I think are actually interesting! I am polite to boring people, but I don’t try to date them. It never occurred to me that such a policy makes me a saint–I always throught it was a sane, normal thing to do.
What about if you’re only looking for something short-term? Obviously it’s not a good policy to lie to someone if you’re looking for a long-term relationship. But if you’re looking for a one-night stand (which there is nothing wrong with by the way) then it’s a totally different story.
I agree, there’s nothing inherently wrong with one-night stands–but why pursue them with fundamentally uninteresting people? Life’s too short.
There’s honesty, there are lies, and there’s a bit of a gray area in-between, which is what I would say in agreement with Daddy Files’ message.
I don’t think it’s a nasty deception to be on your best behavior, dress better than you ordinarily do, avoid talking about certain subjects, and generally put your best foot forward on a first date or when you go out to meet new people. Brutal, unflinching honesty and totally full disclosure in the first five minutes is a little unrealistic. (“Hi. I was abused as a child and my apartment is a total mess and I have herpes. Wanna dance?”)
And really, is acting more politely or sensitively than you usually do really a horrible crime?
I’m not sure this article is as much condescending to men as it is condescending to people who are shy and/or socially awkward. The underlying message seems to be, if your life experiences and personality have not blessed you with the ability to talk to people easily or the knowledge of how to conduct yourself on a date, then it’s obviously because you are a horrible human being…
I’m unclear what the specific objections are to my advice that can be summed up as, “Don’t demand more than you’re willing to give.” What is wrong with that?
Amanda: My problem is your advice is predicated on the belief that any guy who engages in PUA is engaging in something that is sexist and “toxic.” I think you’re wrong. So to solve this non-problem, you enter the conversation from the point of view as a feminist who has to come in and set things right by offering the “correct” way to pick up women. Even if that’s not what you meant, that’s how it came off.
Frankly I don’t think women need to be protected from these socially awkward pick-up artists. Most women are smart enough to see through the bullshit. If they sleep with one of these guys, it’s probably because they wanted sex. Not because they were bamboozled.
But you haven’t presented an argument for why it’s not. I think it’s predicated on the notion that women are selling and men are buying, which is sexist. It also promotes a highly unethical approach to this “market”—again, I think dating is more fun when not treated like a market, but even if you are, you shouldn’t take a caveat emptor approach. It’s simply cruel.
This advice is basically all stuff I learned myself and apply to myself. I had a very strict rule on equality. I’d never tell men to do something I’m not willing to do. It bothers me that everything I said is expected of women, especially the advice that you have to be genuinely attractive to attract, but causes so much kicking and screaming if asked of men.
Your comment that “to solve this non-problem, you enter the conversation” is patently wrong. She was asked to join the conversation because believe it or not, there are guys (like me) who believe that the entire PUA community is pure bullshit and would rather hear from women about what they want.
Blake: Pure bullshit? Is that way it has spawned books and a lecture circuit? I have never used pick up artistry and I’ve never attended anything of the sort. But even the most ardent critics have admitted that it works. So while you may not agree with it, you have to at least pretend not to be so naive as to think it’s not effective.
Amanda: My best argument for why I don’t think it’s sexist is to point to Dave’s comment below. A good man by all accounts who isn’t given the time of the day in the romance department because he’s too nice. I can relate. Until college I was Dave. And when I stopped being such a pushover, I did much better with women. You call it sexist, I call it reality.
Nice guys do not finish last. In the end, nice guys usually win. But until we get older, nice guys certainly do feel like they’re coming in last. While some do want those nice guys, the FACT is many go for the idiots. The bad boys who need fixing. The nice guys are there to heal broken hearts and provide a shoulder to cry on. So then the choice becomes, as Dave succinctly put it, change or stay alone. Is it sexist of Dave to change and want to be happy? To do what is proven to work? I hardly think so.
Pure bullshit? Is that way it has spawned books and a lecture circuit?
Wait wait wait,—did you just suggest that because books and a lecture circuit exist, we can infer that something isn’t bullshit? You don’t really understand how con-artists work, do you?
It probably makes sense to think of PUA techniques as placebos; they “work” insofar as the people who are using them expect them to work, and are able to do something they probably could have done anyway (ultimately, getting laid occasionally isn’t really that hard as long as you’re not self-sabatoging, and believing you’ve now got “tricks” or a “system” is a way people might overcome self-sabatoge). At the end of the day, most common human ailments heal themselves, and most people who keep trying get laid–the key to a good con-artist such as a snake-oil salesman or PUA “expert”, is to trick people into giving them credit when it finally happens.
She was asked to? By whom, and when?
As I recall this whole conversation is predicated on the observation that feminists and feminism have never fffered any useful advice on men approaching women for sex. That was not necessarily a request for infrmation so much as a simple comment on the limitations and internal incoherence of feminist analysis on the subject.
How silly is it to ask a woman like Amanda for advcie on picking up women? What experience of picking women up, what successes can she base any advice on? Amanda has and c annot have any understanding of what men face when they approach women. She really has nothing to offer here. She doesn’t even reference any experience of approaching men for sex, which would only be a start anyway.
The men looking for advice here ought to be asking women like Norah Vincent, who have exactly the same experience as they do and understand the issue and alone are in a position to offer wrthwhile, effectual advice.
Hahaha. So only men and female reporters who go undercover as a man can offer dating advice on what women like? Amanda’s experience of being a woman who dates does not provide any relevant information on what women like or how women experience the dating process? How absurd to think that only people who have successfully picked up women know what women want, while dismissing what actual women say they want. It’s like you’re assuming women are incapable of self-awareness. To you assume men have no idea what they’re talking about when they describe what they and the men they know like in women? This is where that whole “treating women like people” thing comes in handy.
I think the problem is that PUA (and PUA-style treatment of women) has a visibly higher success rate (at least in the short-term). I think your advice actually results in a more realistic and stable relationship in the long-term, though–and we’re a culture focused on the short-term. It’s a gamble for men to treat women with respect (and vice-versa).
Really, I think the problem is that both genders are somewhat attracted to shallowness and drama (if for no other reason because it’s how you get ahead in the social hierarchy). So a lot of “nice guys” don’t end up going for nice girls, or at least girls who actually value respectful guys–the “nice guys” are unwittingly playing the social hierarchy too.
“Just be confident.” Oh, great advice! Perhaps the most useful thing I’ve ever heard. It ranks up there with other extremely useful gems of advice like “just split the atom.” The problem here is that I honestly think you really have no idea what you want. I was raised by feminists and had ZERO men in my life and I’ve never been able to get a date or a girlfriend. It isn’t because I’m unattractive or unintelligent or unfunny or unkind or ungentlemanly, I could have written the book “How to be a Gentleman,” yet women have absolutely no interest in me EVER. It’s because I learned what women want in a man from women. I’ve got more female friends than I know what to do with but women won’t look at me twice romantically. Inevitably, I try to win a girl over my being charming and generous and spontaneously gifting but that just makes me a sucker that they can lead on — and I’ve been lead on dozens of times — because they know they can get something out of me for nothing.
Do you know how many times I’ve had to sit there and hold a crying girl that I like because she’s got a garbage boyfriend? Do you know how many times I’ve been told, “you’re such a good friend I’d never want to ruin that?” Dozens.
You know why I’m going to go to those less-than-savory tactics used by PUAs? Because they work and I am, quite frankly, sick and tired of being alone. I’m tired of never having sex, I’m tired of being alone all the time, I’m tired of not getting to cuddle — yeah, I’m a romantic I like to cuddle and show affection in non-sex ways — and I’m tired of being completely taken advantage of by women.
We need more gems like “just be confident.” In fact, I’ve gotten that advice from numerous of my girl friends who just flippantly say, “you just need to be confident” like there’s this giant confidence no confidence switch in my head that I can flip. You know what makes someone feel confident? Being successful romantically. You know what doesn’t? Doing all the right things and never having been successful ever.
That was just one piece of advice among many, dude. Chill – the whole point about this article is that, in direct contrast to PUA brainwashing, it doesn’t purport to offer an iron clad and fail proof check list of steps to take on the way to having a sex life. They’re just ideas, and if one of them doesn’t work for you, that’s cool.
If you think of women as human beings like yourself, then you’ll immediately see that, like yourself, they sometimes have self confidence issues and that leads them, like it did you, to have a problem with looking self confident, and, just like you can, they can probably recognise and empathise with this problem in others. Almost like they were human beings who you could have an honest interaction with, y’know?
Oh, of course, how could I forget about the “Think about them as human beings”.
Silly me.
No, this article doesn’t offer anything. It essentially says, “if you have trouble with women, it’s because you’re an inferior male.” Whether women have self confidence issues is almost entirely irrelevant as they don’t have to ever march into the buzzsaw that is initiating contact. I have to stroll in and get ground to pieces by women who get to choose — and all women get to choose — and then get up and do it again with a smile on my face saying, “thank you, can I have another.” Unlike women, I don’t have the opportunity to derive sadistic pleasure from crushing suitors and seeing how horribly I can screw them up by leading them on and rejecting them in the most vicious of ways.
“Unlike women, I don’t have the opportunity to derive sadistic pleasure from crushing suitors and seeing how horribly I can screw them up by leading them on and rejecting them in the most vicious of ways.”
Dave, I’m sorry but, if this is really how you see the dating world, and women in general, then you are not actually a nice guy, you are playing the Martyr (which is not the same thing, and people can sense it a mile away).
Everything written in this advice column could be turned around and applied to any gender, interested in any other gender. It boils down to: 1) Be honest with yourself about what you are looking for; then 2) Be honest with yourself about how you truly stack up in comparison to what you want; thus 3) Consider how you might improve your own life first, as a single person (positive thinking, self-awareness, good health, etc.), which will in turn increase the probability of a attracting the kind of people you are most interested in.
None of this advice claims to be a guarantee of success, just a way to increase one’s chances of positive (and realistic) dating interactions.
Wait a few more years, when you’ve had more experience and are around a larger variety of people of both genders, before you claim that every attempt you make on any woman is a failure. Or at least stop trying to date women who cry on your shoulders over their current boyfriends — that is just a recipe for disaster from any view point (hers, yours, and the BF). Trust me on this, healthy people of both genders learn to stop finding themselves in these situations as they get older and wiser.
Well, If you believe that every kind of tactic is toxic or sexistic when it comes to dating, you run out of things to advise very fast. I mean if you rule that much out, all that remains is “Hit the gym”, “Find someone on your niveau” or “Be more confident”.
At least Amanda didn’t add “be yourself” to the list and she did earn a brownie point for that from me.
Are you for real? Really, absolutely no success ever? Never a date? Never a girlfriend?
Either you are eight years old or you are completely wrong in your assertion that you aren’t unattractive, unintelligent, unfunny, unkind, or ungentlemanly. Maybe not, but you are coming across as unaware.
Your patience is obviously getting tested, but you’d actually go with techniques you find unsavory just to get a woman? That’s not gentlemanly. Either embrace that you’re willing to be an asshole or don’t, but know that you’ve already said you’d trade your standards for pussy. I’m not certain women will all catch on right away, but you’re certainly walking a slippery slope there.
No success. Ever. I’m not 8, I’m 22, and I’m not completely wrong in my assertions. I’m not Matt Damon but that doesn’t mean I’m not better looking than the vast majority of guys I see on the street. Yes, I would. Why? Because you probably don’t know what it’s like to continue to be completely alone and to not get laid when doing all the right things. Being good is great but when being good means you get nothing but misery, you will no doubt consider jettisoning your goodness when you see douchebags getting exactly what you want easily.
I think, Dave, it’s time to consider the possibility that *you* might be one of those douchebags.
Of course it is. Because holding doors open without fault, walking on the outside, being always complimentary and never mean is definitely the hallmark of a douchebag. You’re right. So is spontaneously gifting. Definitely EXACTLY what a douchebag would do.
Dave, old boy, I really think you should take the whole “treat women like fellow humans” line to heart.
You seem to view the distaff side as something of an equation to be solved–as if the women in your life are mere concepts. Simply performing the barest physical expressions of chivalry (and there’s nothing wrong with that whatsoever, of course) do not replace actual intellectual and emotional connections. In other words, it doesn’t follow that you’re going to have a roll in the hay because you held the door open for someone and bought them a present.
Try, I dunno, talking. You’re still young. Don’t let this mercantile view of male-female relationships corrode you. We’re all people.
Douchebags hold doors too. They just expect to get laid for it.
I’ve learned that guys who tend to complain about women all the time, how they can never get a steady girlfriend, how they’re always dumped by women, often have faults with themselves, or are ALWAYS dating the wrong kind of woman without having learned from the previous relationship to know the warning signs of a less-than-savory woman.
Same with women who complain about guys all the time. One of my male friends, who used to complain all the time, recently had an epiphany that the reason girls always broke up with him was because he was far too clingy in the beginning. Perhaps you need to reassess yourself and stop blaming women.
I think there’s a small possibility that “spontaneous gifting” comes off as creepy.
As a general aside, maybe the problem, Dave, is that you aren’t making it clear enough, in a direct and verbal way, that you are interested in the particular woman you’re interested in. Maybe you are a very nice, gentlemanly, decent guy, but you’re a bit frightened to risk rejection? On some level, I think that’s what the question of “confidence” might be circling around. It sounds like you want a relationship to fall to you. If the reason it doesn’t is because you aren’t risking rejection and humiliation, maybe that’s something you have to live with, or do something about.
So what about spontaneous gift-giving? Who cares? Of course you’re going to get walked over, because people are generally unscrupulous and greedy. The same thing happens everywhere else; if you offer something out of generosity too many times, a certain percentage of people *will* just see you as a meal ticket.
It’s a horrible thing and I don’t do it. But at the same time, if you are going to make a martyr of yourself, don’t be surprised when people turn up to watch you being eaten by lions.
My advice to you would be to keep on trying, but really listen to what Ms. Marcotte said: be willing to give as much as you want to get. And no, your good feelings and good will and good intentions are not tangible things that women will notice. You could be the most pleasant person in the world, but how do you sell yourself? You are your own commodity and obviously want to sell it. What are you doing?
I had times when I was depressed and waited for someone–preferably a pretty woman who would give me instant social status–to save me from my mediocre life. But that doesn’t work. You have to work for it. And yes, most of it will end in failure or just blah. Most of the time that’s how it will work out.
You’re an ordinary-looking guy who tries. I did that for years. Had many girlfriends, a wife for thirteen years, many more girlfriends, and that’s life. You say you aren’t special? Well, neither is anyone else.
I was a lot less happy in the dating world when I was your age. I’m now 40. At your age, you are seeking a life partner for the future. As you age, you’ll realize how silly you are being. You can only find a partner for now. What can you offer someone? If you can’t figure that out, then all the pick up artist techniques can do is get someone’s attention. You have to figure out how to keep it. Until you have something to offer, don’t bother. Figure out what that is, and you’ll be confident.
@Dave
Don’t put too much emphasis on it.
Being romantically or sexually unsuccessful is nothing wrong or to be ashamed of.
Just don’t listen to people who try to declare you a defunct person, like jon one post above, and you are pretty much good to go.
Dear Dave,
I write to you from the female perspective with a quote from The 40-Year Old Virgin:
You’re putting the pussy on a pedestal. You seem to have the impression that women need to be courted a la fairytale princess. I’m not saying that’s bad (and I’m not saying that you NEED to do it), but I advise you to hold the wooing until you’ve established an actual romantic relationship. Too much upfront can come off as desperate or creepy. Neither of which is a turn-on.
You actually sound like you have enough confidence—you’re open and upfront about your perceived traits. And you’re positive. That’s key. It sounds like you’ve accepted that you have something to offer, and that’s important too. So act like it. Stop trying to buy girls’ affection with gifts or attention. Just treat them like ‘one of the guys.’ Stop seeing them as people you have to do something for.
I guess I’m trying to say “treat them like people,” which just sounds dumb. You’re obviously treating them like people. But don’t treat them like a special class of people. There are different levels of friendship—don’t be the best friend *unless that’s all that you want from her.* Girlfriends are for shoulder-crying and commiseration. Guy friends can be that close too, but only when both parties are on equal footing… which you aren’t if you want more from her than she does from you.
Someone suggested spending less time with your coterie of females, instead hanging more with your guy friends. That’s probably a good bit of advice. Take a short vacation from all the confusion, get your bearings, and then return when you can enforce healthy boundaries. It’ll be worth it.
~DS
Was this reply written by a computer program? I mean, wow. Really hit all of the major “Poor Poor Misunderstood Yet Secretly Ragey Nice Guy” points.
Reading this, I am forced to conclude that you are a self-absorbed sap. “It isn’t because of me, it’s because of you! I am a gentleman! I buy you things! Why will you not have sex with me!”
I actually denounced the “just be confident” advice, if you read the paragraph. I outlined a way to be confident that doesn’t rely on tricks and traps. Confident people have something to be confident about. PUAs resent men they claim are “jerks” because they have confidence, and then accuse women of being shallow for wanting men who are accomplished. But here’s another thought: accomplished men are more confident, therefore more attractive.
I’m serious. It’s pointless to sit around feeling sorry for yourself. Doing things that you can be proud of does wonders for the self-esteem.
I actually denounced the “just be confident” advice, if you read the paragraph. I outlined a way to be confident that doesn’t rely on tricks and traps.
Actually, you did not. You bullet-pointed a list of “just be confident” tricks that really do not work. It is very easy to tell someone to just feel better about themselves and people will like them. However, that flippant “advice” ignores the underlying issue that causes these men to look to PUAs for help: they are shy and socially awkward. If having concrete things to be proud of actually got people’s attention, it is doubtful that shy and socially awkward people, who often are very proud of their accomplishments, would have such a difficult time.
More so, your “advice” consists of telling men to date women they have no interest in or change themselves to garner the attention of the women they want to date. How does it build anyone’s confidence to tell them they are not worthy enough to date certain people or that they have to pretend to be something they are not just to get a date? Better yet, how is that any different PUA advice?
I’m serious. It’s pointless to sit around feeling sorry for yourself. Doing things that you can be proud of does wonders for the self-esteem.
That is a bit of the pot calling the kettle black.
That is not what she said at all. Try reading it again and see what it says.
I read it several times, and it is very much what she wrote:
“You can’t fault women for giving you a pass if you’re not what they want, even if they’re very much what you want.”
“If you like women who spend a lot of time on their bodies or women who keep really nice house, why not hit the gym or pick up the mop yourself? If you want a self-starter or an independent woman, find ways to be more proactive and independent yourself.”
“You may not want to have a certain trait you want in women, because you think it’s demeaning. Or you may not be able to achieve it, as is the case for men who want to date much younger women. In these cases, I advise that you either rethink your desires or accept that you’re likely to have a lonely existence. “
That reads a lot like “Date women you have no interest in or change yourself to garner the attention of the women you want to date.” That is not very good advice.
Why is “change yourself to garner the attention of women you want to date” bad advice? It’s simply a suggestion to invest in self-improvement, rather than manipulation and tricks.
If that is true, why do feminist view the advice to women to change their looks, interests, and behavior to woo men as oppressive and sexist rather than a suggestion to invest in self-improvement? You cannot have it both ways.
Because that advice is typically given in the context of “you must catch a man or you’re worthless” rather than “figure out what you want and go get it”?
Except the advice given by Marcotte is in the context of “you’re a bunch of worthless losers, but you want to get laid figure out what you want and go get it”. Even as you gave it is still condescending “you don’t know what you want, loser” advice. But I do appreciate the nuance of how calling women worthless is wrong while calling socially awkward men worthless, mocking them, and telling them to act, dress, and look like the Situation is perfectly fine.
Some girls love awkward. I would be very single right now if that wasn’t true. Ya gotta find the girls that love awkward. Treating ‘Women’ as some monolith is the real problem most women have with PUA’s (that and it’s adherence to the economic model of sex).
Hey, at least here you’re honest about needing sex to prop up your ego and being ready to manipulate and demean to get it. Props to you. Now if only you could be this authentic in real life.
God, you’re 22? So? I didn’t get into my first relationship until I was 22. I wasn’t stoked it had taken so long, but if I take a nice, long look in my rear-view now, about ten years after all that, I also wasn’t really ready for a boyfriend before then. I was immature and not ready for sex and I would have had to deal with that if I had a boyfriend, even though at the time I thought it was what I wanted all through high school and college.
Next: Letting yourself be an emotional body pillow for oblivious, crybaby female friends isn’t helping you in any way shape or form, so why do you do it? Why do you ask a women out and then when she says “no, let’s be friends” take her up on it and let things go back to what they were but still pine over her? They are not doing these things to you. You are doing it to yourself. If it makes you unhappy, say I can’t do this anymore and bail. That doesn’t make you a bad guy. Continuing it and seething about it and making a few women responsible for the increasingly mean opinions of all women will, eventually, make you a bad person.
So I’d posit that you’re definitely not really ready for a relationship, maybe not ready for a real, mature sexual relationship, and absolutely need to learn to stick up for yourself when people use you, emotionally or otherwise. Do the work and maybe you’ll be ready to find someone to cuddle with.
PS I went through the emotional punching-bag stage, too, with guys I liked. Then I asked myself why I would listen to someone complain about other girls when I was into them. I also met the girls and realized these people I’d written off as horrible human beings weren’t; the couple were just two young college students trying to figure out what it means to be in a relationship with each other, and the growing pains of that sometimes cause people to be absentmindedly cruel. You also learn when you get older that you NEVER really know someone else’s relationship. You see what you see, and you hear what they tell you, but you aren’t there for any of the real stuff.
Dave,
Just a cold, amoral philosophical approach here from someone who doesn’t know you and isn’t trying to judge your character:
I get the sense that you may be oversimplifying the choices. I get the sense that you’re reducing all male dating personalities to only two choices: either a doormat or a douchebag, either a nice guy or an asshole. What I hear you saying is you’ve tried one approach over and over with terrible results, so that just leaves one other option. Are you thinking that if one method works horribly, then the opposite method must be awesome? I understand the temptation borne of frustration, but that’s really not a logically valid conclusion.
I think what many of the responses are trying to tell you is that there are third, fourth, fifth, nth options besides those two. A great catch can be neither of those two, and I’m guessing most great catches are neither of those two.
Your friendship relationships with these women you’re attracted to are relationships of a sort. You may feel like they’re using you, and to some degree they are, but it would be really useful for you to recognize that you’re getting something from them as well. Or at least, there’s something that you want from them but aren’t getting. I don’t know if you’re saying you’re being totally selfless, but it’s just not accurate to say you’re giving them everything and getting nothing in return. There’s nothing wrong with wanting more from those relationships. You have to be willing to recognize that your approach to getting what you want out of a relationship is not working, and it sounds like you see that.
Just trying to suggest a practical, pragmatic look at what you’ve been doing. Trust me, I am not in the habit of quoting Dr. Phil, but I am reminded of his common question, “How’s that workin’ for ya?”
Now, some of the more judgmental two cents’ worth:
Some of the more critical responses to your situation seem to suggest that it’s also possible to be BOTH a doormat and a douchebag. Sometimes men who call themselves “nice guys” really are not so nice. Self-identifying as a “nice” person is a VERY inexact science, I think we could all agree. Like the movie says, everyone thinks he has great taste and a good sense of humor, but we can’t all have great taste and a good sense of humor. Same with niceness. I guarantee some of those BF’s driving those women into your arms are convinced that they’re nice guys, too, and they’re thinking to themselves, why are nice guys like me always stuck with the crying ones?
Dave,
You can file this under the “take my advice, I’ll never use it”:
This is going to sound counterintuitive and illogical, just putting it out there: maybe it would help to spend LESS time around women, especially if you’re going to be surrounded by women who you are attracted to but who see you as strictly a friend. I’m not saying shun women or end all friendships with them, just that maybe a little distance would be useful.
You may be giving a particular impression to all those other women out there who see you with your women friends. You may be getting typecast within a larger social circle. Maybe you have become the go-to guy who watches the purses and coats at the club. (Yes everyone, I know, that’s a stereotype, it may not be literally true, but I think most people understand the basic concept.)
As someone else suggested, if you’re hanging around your women friends hoping that being nice to them will lead to sex, you’ll be waiting a loooong time, in the meantime selling yourself short.
Blunt, offensive, unfair, simplistic summary: you are surrounding yourself with cockblockers.
I’m here on this thread too. You had to know I’d read this article as well…
“measuring the contribution of women to the subject against that of the pua community seems to me support that.”
Wait, the fact that there are few if any women trying to make money off the back of men in emotional distress, seeking dating advice, means that they are to be trusted less on the matter? How does that work? Or has the phrase “trying to sell you something” changed its meaning since last I checked?
You could be right, but when a confused guy looking for advice has a choice between snarky feminists throwing insults and blame at him, and PUAs telling him they’ve got the answers, guess where he will go…
That’s not really fair. Sure, pickup artistry has as many hucksters and snake-oil salesman as any industry, particularly service industries. But there are free websites and blogs on the subject. There are genuinely good teachers (“Good” as in “capable of getting across a point in a way that the student can put to good use,” not necessarily as in “morally good”).
That there are so few (I’ve only heard of one) female pikcup artist instructors does not indicate that the women with the mindset and talent to be an instructor (whether that number is roughly equal to the number of men or not) are any more considerate of men’s feelings. If they were, they would be starting their own free blogs and websites, or offering pro-bono instruction. Or, heck, just sleeping with more lonely nerds instead of Situation clones.
But they’re not. Marcotte is right in pointing out that feminists offer very little in the way of dating advice to lonely young men – and almost nothing of use. I agree that it’s morally right to treat women as equal human beings in every respect; unfortunately, women respond more positively to dominant, alpha-male behavior. At least, that’s been my experience. I don’t hold women’s preferences against them, but any reasonable person has to work with reality, not deny it. If reading PUA literature and adapting it to my own moral code makes me happier and makes women happier to be with me, it’s better than being a nerd and hating women for liking non-nerds.
Not one of “the ladies”, but curious as to what counts as “deceptive female PUA techniques.”
Okay, so pretty much the Hamlet rant.
I really haven’t seen feminists complaining about peacocking, or guys stuffing socks in their pants, or “Just For Men” hair dyes, or flattery, or anything else that strikes me as equivalent.
Wow. Disingenuous much? As if products for men are anything like the huge industry that products for women are , or women’s fashions. Even feminist acknowledge that, by complaining about it.
Socks in pants? Really? Bullshit. Guys don’t even do that crap in leather bars. Find a new lie.
Flattery? Like women never flatter? What’s all this I read on feminist blogs about how women are “socialzed to please”? All just hot air?
Wait, what?
I wasn’t making a “just as bad” argument, but the opposite; taking steps to look attractive and acting pleasant toward potential partners isn’t manipulation or deception.
Wait, really? So if I wear a suit, am I using deceptive PUA techniques? After all, the jacket is designed to emphasize the broadness of my shoulders (some of them have padding!), in relation to my waist, and all my dress shoes have a slightly elevated heel, which makes me appear taller than I really am. Am I being dishonest when I shave in the morning, deceiving people into thinking that I don’t have a beard just waiting to spring from my jaw? Is it unethical for me to put a button-sized dollop of product in my hair, fronting like my habit of shampooing every day hasn’t made those little bastards want to just frizz up away from my coiffure?
What about when I take pleasure from seeing a woman (or anyone, really) smile in repsonse to a compliment I’ve given? Does that make the compliment off sides?
What I’m getting at, here, is that this stuff you’re describing as “deceptive techniques” look a lot more like “being a contemporary social human” to me. But when women do it, you seem to assume that they must automatically be acting in bad faith. This is where the whole crazy idea of assuming women are people becomes useful: if we’re acting in good faith, if we think love and/or affection is pretty great and want the opportunity to share it with someone we like, if we’re not actually manipulative telepaths, then it makes sense to assume that women, who are also people, are the same way. As a bonus, it’s a whole lot less stress-inducing, too.
Actually, I would put those things in the same category as shaving, wearing a tie, working out, etc. That women have more grooming demands put on them is really not evidence that men are oppressed. You are always free to date someone who isn’t worried about dressing to the hilt. Many women don’t wear make-up or fancy bras, you know.
I’ve never known a woman to play hard to get. I have encountered women who actually weren’t interested. That’s only the same thing if you’re either too narcissistic to believe that a woman might actually not be interested, or too … let’s call it “old-fashioned” to understand why her being interested or not is relevant.
I don’t know if devastatingly-accurate insight is considered a PUA technique, but right now I am actually swooning with how bloody right this comment is…
Just wanted to add that “playing hard to get” is not the same as not being attracted to the first impression but revising that opinion later.
Women who “play hard to get” are really the female version of male PUAs—consciously trying to manipulate the situation in their favor using tactics that seek to undermine the other person’s right to make a personal decision.
My rule of thumb: if they act disinterested, I’m going to assume they’re disinterested and find something better to do with my time. If they were actually interested, I don’t want to date/fuck anyone that obnoxiously disingenuous anyway.
DAVE – THIS IS YOUR MOMENT SO LISTEN UP !
It sounds like you have bombarded yourself with information on the topic. Firstly, well done for being active and seeking help. That’s not to be taken for granted.
BUT, you are letting yourself become a victim. You are gradually giving up on yourself. You think you are picking up a new weapon – PUA – but in actual fact, you’re just lowering your standards because let’s face it, who really wants a chick that will go down on a guy because he managed to mentally outdo her with cheap tricks (yes, i know that sounds good now, but again, aim higher bro – the sex will be better too )
You gave a great example man – holding a girl as she cries about her bf douche. Umm, hello, she has a BF! That’s not something you can count on and judge yourself on either – sexually active guys don’t consider taken girls as game. If it does happen that I sleep with a girl who’s “taken” it is always treated as a surprise and shock and that’s without even going into the moral side of things. Have you ever asked yourself about the reason behind going after impossible-to-score girls?
Dave, I think this is your problem – you are tripping yourself up. It’s only you. You are the source of your failure. We all are the source of our own failures. In general, women enjoy sex and look for it. It’s biological. What’s left is to present yourself and take a shot. Shoot – miss/score. Even if you suck at 3-pointers, throwing enough will lead you to sink one.
So what’s the solution?
Well, like any real solution, it’s not “magical” or “quick-and-easy” because that’s for scoring prostitutes (always an option but, again, why lower your standards, let alone health).
The solution is actually very basic in its essence – be the “Dave”. I know this sounds wishy washy but it’s the only thing that will really work.
Just lead the life you want to lead. If there’s a girl you like and you find she has a BF then seriously consider what you as Dave want from her. It’s not selfish. It’s honest!!! Just say “hmmm, she’s not available now. Do i want her as a friend? No, I have enough female friends” That’s it. Walk away. When you see her again, ask her “Still gong out with _____ ? No? Oh I’m sorry to hear that. What happened?” Boom!
You see, when you’re true to yourself, you actually open up doors that you couldn’t have thought about logically. Sticking onto a crush at the time seems logical because you equate being near her as getting closer. That’s just very primitive thinking. Also primitive is the idea that choosing who you spend your time with and choosing the nature of thos relations is “wrong”. You can be a good guy and also want sex. You can be a good guy and also not give gifts. You can be a good guy and also say no to a girl when she asks for a favor. That’s confidence – believing that you’re good anyway.
Bottom line advice: stop being so desperate. Iet go of the “I must score now” motto and put yourself in the best possible lifestyle you can – go out, be fit, learn a musical instrument. These activities will expose you to females who are drawn to the same things as you.
hope this helps
Ian R.
Just wanted to like this comment twice.
hehe – yay!
Ian R.
Wow, so it’s possible to write a genuinely good and helpful dating-advice article without taking snide potshots at the people you’re purporting to help. Who’da thunk it? Not Amanda Snarkotte, apparently. Thumbs up I.R.
Ian, this is such a great comment. I was a nerdy kind of girl and I always had a lot of male friends who were quieter, nerdier, “nice guys.”. So many of these guys in college would develop crushes on me, but never try to initiate anything. They would just want to hang out and give me puppy dog eyes. I guess they hoped that someday I would just spontaneously pull my top off and invite them to have sex. That is just never, never going to happen. I know it’s a male fantasy but it just doesn’t exist in the real world.
Women have lots of friends. We aren’t looking for more friends. Friends are nice, of course, and we won’t object if friendship is offered. But really we’re looking for a man. You are so right, Dave shouldn’t be wasting time becoming friends with girls who have boyfriends or who clearly aren’t interested in him. When he meets a woman he shouldn’t act like he wants to be her friend, he should act like he wants to be her date. This is the fundamental mistake that so many “nice guys” make.
Though it could be said you perpetuate the marketplace mentality by never initiating anything yourself, as you imply they SHOULD’VE done something, meaning you liked them too.
(just letting you know how it sounds; I can’t speak to your experience).
What makes you think that when a woman makes herself look good she is doing it to attract you? “Deceptive female PUA technique” for you, just another day surviving the patriarchy under the male gaze for her.
Uh also in the past women were forced to wear whalebone corsetry that completely changed their figure. (In addition to making it nearly impossible for them to do any kind of physical activity.) It’s not as if drawing attention to ones self is a new thing women just invented to make you poor men cry.
It’s an artifact of a historically patriarchal system that encouraged men to treat women as property, and encouraged women to compete for the best available mates, because they were unable to have jobs or own property and were completely dependent on the will of the men they could attract. The Pick Up Artist mentality is pretty close to this, it moves further away from sexual equality.
I like you, lots. We can’t bloody win. I don’t do the push-up-bra or makeup thing. I am straight-forward. But I forgot – because I don’t fit their definition of beautiful, I’m a man-hater. Which is some warped logic right there.
Despite working every day to actively and directly better the lives of hundreds of teenage boys? Despite having healthy and positive relationships with dozens of male friends, parents and future spouses? I don’t hate men in the slightest. I’m realistic about human failings that show up across both sexes – narcissism, illusory superiority, idiocy. The vast majority of dudes are pretty awesome people; the minority (especially the ones who complain about women not liking nice guys) are the ones who are vocal and persistent about letting me know to my face that I’m hideous and have no value on earth. The nice ones are the ones I go and have a beer with every so often.
One study actually showed that women who identified as feminist actually held fewer hostile or benevolent-sexist opinions about men than women who refused to identify. That certainly matches my experience and the observations I’ve made about friends, mentors and co-workers: if you are only able to view men positively if they are breadwinners, as per the anti-feminist traditional gender-role model, then of course you’re only going to be able to form superficial and transactional relationships with them. If you believe they are capable of doing anything and that they deserve to carve out whatever individual niche they want in the world, then you are able to form genuine and deep relationships with them. Common sense, really.
This is the equivalent of Peter-Andrew Nolan giving dating advice to women.
Except that would be comical. This is just sad.
Oh for the love of… guys, here’s the secret to dating, courtesy of Saturday Night Live:
1) Be handsome
2) Be attractive
3) Don’t be unattractive
Basically, if a woman is attracted to you, there is little you can do wrong. If she isn’t, there is little you can do right. If you’re hot, it doesn’t matter what kind of personality you have. She’ll rationalize it away, ignore it, convince herself that you’re really a good guy on the inside. I’ve seen this over and over. Otherwise you can be smart, funny and a perfect gentleman but if you’re not attractive, the most you’ll end up as is ‘just a friend’. Then you’ll be comforting her as she cries about her latest abusive, cheating asshole boyfriend, only to get back together and screw his brains out the next day while you feel warm and fuzzy in the knowledge that you’re a ‘good friend’. I’ve seen this too.
So forget techniques and tricks. Pick up a magazine and look at the men around your age who are considered ‘hot’. Do what it takes to become one. That’s it. A halfway decent personality isn’t required but it helps, or can be substituted with large amounts of money, success or popularity.
Most of this stuff applies to both genders, btw. People are shallow idiots. You can complain about it or take advantage.
This is an interesting theory that only applies to superficial assholes. The truth is, SOME women do only care about looks, but SOME of us also care about personality. I suppose it is up to you which kind of woman you want to attract. If you want to date and bed women who think you’re super hot and as soon as you stop going to the gym every day will drop you like a hot potato, then go for it. If you want to actually find someone who likes you, you might want to work on not being a jackass.
Sorry that I’m too busy working hard to support myself and my unemployed boyfriend to remember all of the possible ways that some women can choose to be shallow bitches.
Johnny B you are brilliant,
I am going to grab my GQ and mens health mags and get to work……
I am not sure which Pick up artists she was was reading about, but the ones I have been reading say basically the same thing as Johnny, be interesting, look interesting, dont be a pushover, if a woman is not interested in you move on.
Hm. Weird. I must have some abnormal mechanism that allows me to differentiate between aesthetics and attraction. Here are a few things that make hot guys unattractive to me:
~ Stupidity
~ Ignorance (not the same as stupidity)
~ Self-centeredness
~ Wedding ring
~ Excessive drinking
~ Absence of culture outside of NASCAR/sports
~ Uninteresting conversation
~ Lack of common interests
Even if a guy has all of these ‘faults’, I can still find him aesthetically pleasing. There’s just no way I’d fuck him, let alone have a relationship with him.
Now, assuming a guy was intelligent, composed, confident, and interesting, I miraculously don’t care about a lot of other ‘faults.’ A few things that plagued my exes:
~ Gap in front teeth (really noticeable)
~ Obesity
~ Weird hair texture
~ Atypical body shapes (not related to obesity)
~ Relationship/family baggage
~ Facial scarring
~ Low sex drive
~ Unemployed (but trying, which is key)
~ Lack of ambition
Oddly enough, none of my exes have even come close to fulfilling my physical wishlist, but I loved them (and slept with them) anyway. Attitude and personality matter a hell of a lot more than the shell they’re housed in.
Did you not read my post? Being a jackass doesn’t matter as long as you’re the handsome, ‘cool’ guy. That’s what most people want. If you’re fixated on a certain woman or you want to find a soulmate or something that’s a different story, but this is what will work 90% of the time, and I have yet to be proven wrong on this.
dude, you’re right that very physically attractive people have the ability to have more sex, but you’re completely missing the point!
Your argument is the equivalent of telling someone who is looking for financial advice to “get a rich parent”. Obviously that would help but reverse-adoption is not really possible!
Not really the same thing. Having a rich parent is something you’d have no control over, but being attractive is actually not that hard. Time-consuming and tedious maybe, but not hard. Take a look at some male models or professional athletes – they seem like geniuses to you?
Here’s the thing – all that ‘be yourself’ advice is nice and dandy but the cold hard truth is that it’s like finding religion. You pray all the time, and when something finally goes your way you say “God has listened to me!” and when it doesn’t (i.e., usually) you say “well, He works in mysterious ways” or “I’m being tested” or something. Screw that. How about looking at what works, and doing that instead? Hasn’t steered me wrong yet.
couldn’t be further than the truth.
1. Being attractive falls into what I said – do what makes you feel good. For most of us, that inlcudes investing at least some amount of time/energy/cash in our physical appearance.
2. Being oneself is the complete opposite to religion. Religion is searching external sources for truth. It is human-made and therefore usually flawed. It also aims to be the answer for us all, ignoring the fact that we are all different. Being yourself means finding your own truth – this can never be the wrong thing to do. The problem is being brave enough to allow the real, deep voice within to take the lead.
1) is actually in agreement with me, so I’m not sure what ‘couldn’t be further (from) the truth’ there.
2) They’re similar in that both are mental constructs people invent to feel good about themselves but that don’t really work in the real world. “Be yourself” works if your ‘self’ is someone who’s already attractive. But if that were the case, they wouldn’t be asking for advice in the first place, so it’s really worse than useless. “Constantly improve yourself” might be better. And I don’t know what ‘real, deep voice within’ you’re hearing, but I’d see a therapist about that…
Yeah hang on a minute while I go alter my genetic code to make my face more symmetrical and my body a naturally hourglass shape.
I’m going to have to agree with Johnny on this one. For both genders, getting really in shape, learning how to dress well, and getting a good hairstyle will work about ten times better than any other technique they could use. And I’ve seen lots of guys go from schlubby and losing in the dating game to getting some muscles and a tan and a haircut and having girls all over them.
The Jersey Shore guys are NOT at all my type, but you have to admit that they do very well with the ladies, and it’s not because they’re smart, charming, or rich. It’s because they spend all their time focusing on being “hot” (or at least, what qualifies as hot in their social circle).
Good-looking people never have a problem dating, regardless of how rich or poor they are, how stupid or smart. And women are just as shallow and looks-oriented as men, they’re just not encouraged as much culturally to focus on looks. This is changing.
All the other dating advice is good and people SHOULD strive to become better, more interesting people (regardless of whether they’re on the market or not), but if you want to be efficient, the single most useful thing you can do is make yourself better looking. This is not a happy truth, but it’s true nonetheless.
Oh, and if you’re solely focused on getting laid, the second most efficient thing you can do is drink alcohol and hang out with other people who drink alcohol.
If you’re looking for a long term relationship or marriage, it’s a very different ballgame.
“The Jersey Shore guys are NOT at all my type, but you have to admit that they do very well with the ladies, and it’s not because they’re smart, charming, or rich. It’s because they spend all their time focusing on being “hot” (or at least, what qualifies as hot in their social circle).”
Thanks for pointing that out Blixa, because it’s important. While being generally good-looking definitely helps (that means being in decent shape, well-dressed, well-groomed), it works even better if you know who you’re going after. Now let’s say you’re into goth/emo/punk chicks – you probably won’t have much luck if your look says ‘nerdy businessman’. You have two choices here – change your look (kind of dishonest and won’t hold up over the long term, unless you really are into that scene) or start looking for women who are a better fit for you, and who you are. The Jersey Shore guys seem to have taken the second option and it’s working well for them.
Also definitely agreed on the alcohol, taken in moderation it’s the best social lubricant there is. Too much of it just makes you sleepy and stupid…
Are you kidding? Nerdy businessman is HOT.
Well, I decided to change my hairstyle for the first time as a result of this… I regret it. I went from looking pretty good to looking like a total idiot. Definitely change for the better…damnit.
Wow. I’m stunned–I shouldn’t be, I guess, but I am. It’s like there are people out there who think that half the human population of the world are sexual Rubik’s Cubes–twist ‘em right and they dispense pussy.
Women don’t have to walk into a buzzsaw? Are you kidding me? We *live* in the buzzsaw. We have to wonder if this new guy who seems so nice is just playing us to get some and really doesn’t give a damn about us at all–and from this thread, the answer to that is “No. It’s all about getting some.”
Let me show you how it’s done–I’ll break it down Barney-style with a little real-life anecdote:
A year ago, I was asked out on a date by a guy I didn’t know at all. His ex and my ex went to the same bar–that’s about the extent of my knowledge of this man. He’s quiet, introverted, never married, no kids and a HUGE nerd and I <3 me a nerd so I said yes. (1. Pick a woman who likes your type. Supermodels aren't big into D&D as a rule, but nerd girls are.) He showed up at my home and took me out to dinner to spend some time to get to know me. (2. THAT'S why you take a woman out, to spend time getting to know her, not in a "I bought you dinner, now you owe me beaver" exchange. I've never been hungry enough to whore for an Appleby's entree, I promise.) We spent the night talking and finding out that we had all kinds of things in common and that there really was a spark there. (3. That's why you talk to a woman, not to appease her so that eventually she'll spontaneously decide she's punished you enough with her incessant chatter and take all her clothes off.) Then, he knocked my socks off with an amazing kiss, and it was amazing b/c we had that spark–it's called chemistry, and then *he went home* because I said I wasn't ready for anything else at that time. (4. Now, he could have gone the PUA route and pushed for more and probably gotten it because I was really attracted to him and I was really horny but I wouldn't have ever gone out with him again because I have this fetish about guys who listen to what I say and respect that–and the hormones wind down eventually. Of course, had I said I wanted it and he decided he knew what was "best" for me and left anyway–same result b/c he *didn't listen to me and respect what I said.* [Now, if HE said he wasn't ready and left, that's a different story and perfectly legitimate b/c, you know, respect goes both ways.])
Next day, he texted me, we talked a bit, he mentioned he was tired and I asked if he wanted to come over and take a nap with me. He went home 3 days later.
That was year ago and I've fallen madly in love with him and it keeps getting better. He's one of you guys–5'9", not rich, doesn't have all the toys but does okay, not young, not a Brad Pitt look-alike, hasn't gone to the gym since he left the Guard, still looking for a good 2nd ed. D&D game at 39…you get the idea–average, white and nerdy guy. But *I* think he's gorgeous and amazing and wonderful and nearly-perfect.
Long story short, gentlemen: what Amanda is telling you works and it boils down to this. If you want people to be interested in you, be interesting. And pick a woman who is likely to be interested in the things you think are interesting.
I would be perfectly fine with this, if I didn’t at the same time have to listen to young women complaining about the beauty standards young men hold them to. If you want an example read Hugo’s article on GMP about how women blame themselves for their boyfriends not paying attention to them. Why don’t these women get the same advice? ‘He would pay you more attention if you were more interesting’.
I’m pretty sure Amanda intended for the advice in this article to not be gender specific…
Se parent
“Long story short, gentlemen: what Amanda is telling you works and it boils down to this. If you want people to be interested in you, be interesting. And pick a woman who is likely to be interested in the things you think are interesting.”
When are women ever given that advice? When have women, as a group, EVER been told to improve our MINDS to attract and/or keep a man?
Shoot, women are still being told not to be “too smart” or “too successful” or “too picky” if they want to attract or keep a man–but they’d better make sure to hit the gym and, if necessary, the plastic surgeon.
You don’t have to look far, either. Just take a gander at this thread.
Why aren’t we given that advice? I wish I knew. History? Tradition? Habit? Remnants of the idea that women just aren’t “made for that”? I don’t know. But we aren’t–we’re told that our looks and the state of our hymen, and then whether the vag is available or not, is what is important–is ALL that is important.
Loved the “Be more like The Situation” bit!
Lord, could I tell stories about men who can’t seem to figure that one out…
My favorites involve the guys who come down here to Rio looking for women because “American women have been perverted by feminism into a bunch of gold-digging, man-hating harridans”. OK, fair go. That’s not my experience with American women, but to each his own beliefs, right?
So these guys are supposedly so traumatized by American women’s mercenary, self-absorbed ways that the first thing they do when they get to Rio is run down to Copacabana and fall in love with the first beach prostitute who stammers some English at them.
Now, prostitutes are women and deserved to be loved, too. No doubt at all about that in my mind. But one thing I feel safe in saying is that most prostitutes I’ve met have vanishingly little patience for the kind of male self-delusions most men’s egos can’t seem to live without. Most pros are REALLY quick to put their male lovers in their place if they try any bullshit. Finally, most pros are VERY aware of what they are or aren’t getting out of a relationship at any given moment and will dump a jerk in a split second if they feel he’s not in their best interests.
So, OK, these guys are so traumatized by American feminists’ independent ways that they run to the arms of a group of women who would have no trouble picking their bones at the slightest provocation and who are, collectively speaking, among the most cynical women on the planet when it comes to men…?
Yeah, that makes sense.
When you talk to these guys, they rant on and on about “how all women are whores” and that is, indeed, precisely how they go about picking up women. These are the guys who’ll tell you, hand on heart, that women are biologically “motivated by money and security”, that you need to show “bling” and spend cash to get a woman’s attention, that they know this for a fact because that’s what they’ve been doing all their lives and it’s always worked for them (ignoring, for the moment, that their description of their sex lives up to this point has been one long complaint about how women have taken them to the cleaners, time and again).
“So let me get this straight,” I’ll say. “You think women are all whores because you’ve always used cash and bling to attract women and it always works, right?”
“Yeah.”
“So what about the other possibility? How about this hypothesis: if you act like a john, the majority of the women you attract will act like whores. I mean, if you’re out there dripping your bling and acting like you’re Mr. High-Roller, well, then what kind of person do you think you’re going to attract, exactly? Could this possibly have anything to do with the fact that you claim to only have dated whorish women in your life and your subsequent belief that all women are whores?”
“….”
If this conversation is virtual, it’s as good for getting one banned from most masculinist sites as remarking that men suffer from oppression, too, for getting one banned from most feminist sites. There’s simply no response to be had to it, other than to utterly damn the quesitoner.
So a corrolary to “Be Like the Situation” could be “If you don’t want to attract women who act like whores, don’t act like a punter”.
THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU. It’s like watching someone knowingly and willingly jump into a shallow pool, and then having to hear them kvetch all the way to the emergency room after they’ve broken their back.
Can somebody other than me please point me to how this article differs in any way from the standard advice handed out by feminist women, that basically sums up as, if you are not getting laid it is because you have deserved to not getting laid, you have no right to feel sad you have to seek attonment.
The article is saying, 8of10 that if you want to engage with members of the sex you are attracted to, you should treat them like a) humans b) as you’d wish to be treated and c) consider the entire interaction not just getting your dick wet.
I am a proponent of sex work (to be legalized). If all you want is to get your dick wet, why not pay for it
Why not pay to get that which you want? You can even pay them to cuddle and listen to you. If that is not what you are after, if it is a relationship including sex, then you may need to do what it takes to treat people as you wish to be treated.
In order to get something you have to either earn it or be entitled to it. Do you feel men are entitled to sex from women? Because you’re overtly rejecting the notion that men have to earn it by doing something to deserve it.
What are you talking about? I believe that you have a right to feel sad about always being rejected and that is a legitimate sadness despite feminists calling out and saying that the only reason you are getting rejected is because you deserve to get rejected. This has nothing to do with actually getting laid.
You have every right to feel sad of course. I don’t know if you deserve to be rejected or not. Or whoever you are referring to. If a person goes out for something over and over again and is constantly rejected….maybe what they are doing isn’t working. Could be looks, could be attitude. Feeling sad and frustrated is normal. But what I see in the PUA community is taking that cognitive dissonance (I’m not getting what I want it can’t be ME that’s doing it wrong) and turning it into “fucking bitches/gold diggers/manipulate them into giving up pussy” and that doesn’t seem right either.
I think there is also a difference between being sad about rejection and being pissed about not getting (sex) that you think or may believe you are entitled to get.
I believe that you have a right to feel sad about always being rejected
Of course! But Amanda’s advice was for people who wanted to do change the status quo that was leading to outcomes that were making them sad, rather than just keep doing what they’re doing, getting the same results, and feeling sad about those results. If the latter is where your interests lie, you don’t need any advice at all.
And desert is really the wrong register to think about this sort of social interaction. When I express interest in someone, I don’t deserve to have that interest reciprocated, nor do I deserve to have it rejected. It’s the wrong concept for thinking about this kind of social interaction.
I am not defending Amanda Marcotte in any way, but some of the things she mentions (self-confidence, self-esteem, going to the gym yourself, etc.) are some of the very same things that pre-PUA advice (i.e. Doc Love) and PUA (David D’Angelo) mentions. I bought, studied and internalized those two manuals while some advice from other dating sites. I also read “the game” by Neil Strauss. I simply took the best advice, figured out what I wanted and what type of relationship and sought her out. I avoided the bars, gimmickry (palm reading, peacocking) and just got into physical shape. I remember some of the advice was to always be honest with someone and to be transparent (don’t lie, don’t deceive.) I think the author and everyone who posted here calm down and go read some of the good materials out there. A lot of these PUA guys are just using psychology and applying it to dating.
I am sorry but being a nice guy does not always work, otherwise some of my “nicest” guy friends would be married by now. One is a little over 40 and overweight. Women like him “as a friend” and he is nice but no one is attracted to him. Another is in his mid 30′s, has several engineering degrees and is still not married. I’m sorry but being “nice” can lead men to a lot of pain afterwards (ever sit in divorce court? Child support hearings? Child custody hearings?)
Woman have been empowered through the feminism movement. Men need to even the score. Some of the principles of PUA and pre-PUA (Doc Love) can be used by nice guys in an ethical manner and even those who consider themselves conservative. This is one of the only empowerment tools men have left. We lost everything else (jobs, money to biased to courts, etc.)
Btw I am now happily married to a non-feminist, non-gold-digging, non-psycho wife who has integrity, is giving and flexible.
I disagree. I’ve read those writings, and they are about faking confidence and using tricks. My advice is to learn confidence. That’s a dramatically different thing, the difference between actual self-esteem and being a narcissist.
The notion that men need to “even” the score because of feminism assumes, incorrectly, that feminism was a response to men and women being equal. In reality, feminism is a movement that addresses male dominance over women. The PUA model that holds that men are entitled to sex and that women are just being stingy and therefore need to be punished is a form of patriarchy. It just happens to be one that hurts men as well as women. PUAs would, I promise, be much happier if they saw sex as a mutual pursuit of pleasure instead of a contest where they “win” if they “trick” women into bed.
Word, word word.
Real confidence about sex and how to get it? Or real confidence about just them (hobbies, work etc) and letting that lead into a) sex and b) relationships?
I was actually asking a clarifying question about confidence and not game. I don’t think I’m a hypocrite for wanting to know how you were differentiating that. I actually believe people use those techniques all the time, you’ll get no disagreement from me there. All people want connection in some way, you won’t get disagreement from me there either. The commercialized sites though do seem (seem) to encourage misogyny which I can only imagines engenders a strong dislike from many women in response.
There is a big difference between using techniques to increase attractiveness inside and out, as to attract a mate (short or long term) and using techniques to “get your dick wet” or just “win” or so forth.
I don’t think women should be going to sites to learn how to gold dig or manipulate anymore than I think men should. Is men’s sexuality demonized and misunderstood? Yes it is. But is women’s sexuality also demonized and misunderstood? Sure thing.
I find this interesting. I dislike the economic model of sexuality. I don’t disagree that it exists, especially it seems in foiks in their early 20s. I’ve read Regnarus’s stuff and I dislike it.
Women are penalized by their own female peers for “selling low” just as many young men are penalized by their male peers for “seeking relationships” instead of just sex. Chicken or the egg issue.
I’m 42. I’ve had casual sex and I’ve had long term sexual relationships, and as an open relationship person, I’ve had casual sex WHILE IN long term sexual relationships. I prefer the long termfor several reasons, even though I’d really like to be able to enjoy casual sex when I’m lucky enough to find it. (Cue men calling me a slut? Or women calling me a slut? More women probalby would find me to be a slut and that slut shaming for selling low is part of the problem)
1) casual sex has rarely been physically ideal for me. Men in question work hard to get you in bed, then go for their own goal. Why would I sleep with a man unless I was also hoping for a good time? Men who work hard to make sure their partner has orgasms probably get more play over all.
2) afterward the casual sex partner often has acted weird and the friendship has been strained. If it ‘s just sex, why not treat me nicely afterwards? Because the man was out for the goal not the process. And because I “sold low” perhaps, they’ve lost respect for what they themselves see as a cheap good. So men are harmed by this economic model.
Right now we are in a flux point between men and women (I’m being heteronormative here, but that’s what I know).
I wish at times that more men were cool with bisexuality because then they could get their rocks off SO MUCH easier. I know so many gay men that have tons of casual and anonymous sex.
Ultimately, we all want connection but none of us are truly entittled to get laid. I’ve been rejected plenty, and I’ve been accepted. I’ve done LOTS of heading into the buzzsaw.
You say we can pick up casual sex whenever we want it….maybe that is true (though I’ve had nights at bars that didn’t work out so well), but most women want a good damn time if it’s casual and you cannot guarantee orgasm, pleasure or or a truly good result from that casual sex. We have more to risk and less to gain I guess. Anyway….FWIW, I think both sexes had more freedom to connect and more respect for each other when it happens.
Here’s how this all plays out for me. Let’s say I go to a bar and I see a guy. We hook up. Chances are good that if the sex is good (he was sure I had a good time) I’d want more of it. Chances are better though, that he won’t. In fact, I’m pretty sure that either he’ll brag to his friends he “bagged” me, or dis me cause I have an A cup and am not traditionally “hot” like a model and am clearly a “slut” cause I fucked him.
So what’s in it for me? A quick lay, heading home, like eating a greasy burger and maybe indigestion later? That’s kind of the thing, isn’t it? Either treat your hook ups really well and make sure they enjoy themselves during and after, or maybe find a way that isn’t “work” like paying for it. That’s a clean transaction (or would be if it was legal). I mean….all relationships involve some work yes? They kinda do.
Why is being respectful after sex such a burden? Because what it always winds up sound like is dudes wanting to find a silent lady to masturbate into. And that’s just not appealing at all.
Not saying that’s what YOU are doing,…..but I’ve done my time on sites like this or MRA sites reading comments. I have a friend I sleep with occasionally. He’s kind of flaky but he’s never disrespectful. He’s kind to me in bed and outside of it. He’s not “hot” but he’s good in bed and he doesn’t act like I”m a slut.
That would be a good start.
Looks like someone got burned by a PUA and has an Axe to grind.
I don’t know where or how you got the impression that ALL PUA’s are “entitled” to sex. Please quote which PUA said this and which manual. Doc Love, David D’Angelo et al does not encourage to “fake confidence”. Have you actually spent the 100 dollars to buy Doc Love the system or the 30-40 dollars for David D’Angelo Double your dating? Some of these guys talk about developing real confidence and some of the pitfalls of faking it.
Tell me, would you want a man to tell you on the very first date about his whole life story? DL teaches about being a “challenge”. Tell me what is wrong with a man not being needy/wuss/wimp. DL even actually cares about women, something you feminists would love, saying that if a woman’s interest in you falls below a certain number, the relationship needs to end. DD says not to drag out a relationship if it is not going anywhere. Categorizing PUA’s as all bad is a major mistake and a weak argument. Some women even want their men to read some of the advice given by DL. Also, women’s magazines (i.e. Cosmo) have been selling their wares to woman for years. Correct me if I am wrong but some articles advocate for hooking up, divorce, rules for casual relationships. A lot of the great advice from DL, DD cannot be found in mainstream magazines like men’s health. Woman have been giving relationship advice to men for years and where has this gotten us?
If you can read in between the lines, go back and read The game by Neil Strauss. A lot of these PUA are just looking for love and some of them have a lot of issues. Many of these men are just looking to understand woman and figure out their mind games. Without learning some of their mistakes and lessons, we will never be able to succeed in making our ladies happier. Feminism has made dating much more confusing. Unless you are a man, you will never know how Feminism has made our lives much more difficult. DD, DL and some of the other PUA’s are talking about the truth. Not just all about sex. Do you know how much DL covers in his manual about sex? Less than one page. Patriarchy is not a punishment. What do you advocate instead? Misandry? That all men be banished and only women exist? Do you want us to just to roll over and be just door mats for woman? Men have a lot more to lose nowadays than woman when it comes to divorce, child support and alimony. Being a single mother is heavily subsidized by the federal government and other non-profits.
Please go back and spend the money and time to actually read many of the books out on the internet (DL, DD). They are not all that bad and some of them actually say (DL) how women should be treated (with respect, etc.) One can get some bits of advice and lessons from these PUA. You can actually kind of feel sorry for some of them.
Be honest about what you want and what you have to offer? Really?
Sorry for the sarcasm, but I was hoping to see some actual advice, some actual LINES men could use that indicates they’re interested in casual sex without suggesting that’s all they’re interested in.
Why not just say you are a fan of casual sex and then seek women who also are, for they do exist. Maybe they aren’t the hot hot girls you want, but at least you’d be having casual sex in an honest way.
Anyway, it still seems like the men who are commenting here are saying…what is the trick??? What if there aren’t tricks, guys, just people who all have individual responses. Be clean, smell good, be happy, don’t be a negative blaming dude, stay in decent shape, and don’t turn down “average” chicks if you are average.
Start there.
Wow, I wasn’t referring to you, but the other person and just suggesting he try honesty and use the same personal techniques ladies use. Like we all use them, I’ve said that. Why call me a bitch? Or whatever you called me. I’ve been perfectly respectful to you and I’m trying to engage in an actual dialogue not smacktalk back and forth.
It’s possible to discuss this without being jerks to each other isn’t it? Or is that just too much work?
Thanks for showing your true colors though. I’m pretty sure if you called me a condescending bitch after I had a one nighter with you I wouldn’t be back for me…but then you probably wouldn’t give a damn would you.
Thanks…My last comments back are still awaiting moderation up above and in this thread. One reason I hate forums of any kind is that the ease with which all people (myself included obviously) slide into defensiveness, assuming the worst about people and namecalling is well…easy. Too easy.
i’m actually on the side of anyone (male or female, gay or straight) to find connection in both short or long term ways, to find pleasure and to avoid conflict. I don’t know how that can happen though I do agree with Clarisse Thorn that feminists are more on the your side than not. There’s a lot of work to do, let’s try to be kind to each other while we do that work and I include myself in that request.
They don’t seem to be publishing my last long comment. Oh well. Peace to you and I hope we all find our way….
I’ve had remarkably wonderful lovers in my life both short and long term. Mostly because my intentions are usually about connection and mutual benefit and respect. The few men I’ve dated/slept with who didn’t care about my pleasure or treated me badly? well obviously I didn’t sleep with them again, but the bad taste lingered. But I have met men who behaved nicely, seductively, using those techniques and then were jerks. so…see? How do you know? You don’t, you just hope that people are being honest and real.
My A cup has never been a hindrance
Intention, for me, is key. Are you using game/social skills/confidence whathaveyou as a tool or a weapon? To connect or dominate? To bond or fuck with.
I’m quite sure there are PUAs out there who do it to connect and find love (or happiness) and there are golddiggers who use it for love too.
But there are a heap of fellas out there talking about how they deserve to get their dicks wet and to them I say, fellas? You have a few choices.
Pay for it.
Go bi.
Blow Up Dolls
Learn to actually like women (like them, not want them)
Follow PUA AND Marcottes tips.
Get a therapist and figure out your issues. Cause no one is entitled to get laid. Not me, not you, not Dave. Connection is vital, but you have to be willing to do some actually CONNECTING.
And so forth.
Off to tend to the children, male, whom I am incredibly in love with and teaching to have (hopefully, along with my husband) strong social skills, good hygiene
and positive outlooks about relationships with everyone.
So there
some actual LINES men could use that indicates they’re interested in casual sex
She gave you just that: be honest about it. I travel a lot. Often I’m in whatever town for just the night. Sometimes I go looking for a hookup. “I’m just here tonight”, “I’m just passing through” – and I meet people who are just fine with that. People who are looking for the same thing.
I’ve had a great time that way. I wouldn’t have it I was pretending it was something else.
The internet.
I don’t think this is a bad article. But I don’t know… in the end, it always seems to come down to physical attractiveness. Which makes sense, but it’s contributed to my depression because I feel like there’s really nothing I can do.
If I’m being brutally honest with myself, I think I’m more intelligent than than the average person. I also have a good work ethic. I’m at a real, real good university, and I’m on a substantial scholarship. I’ll probably be financially successful. But who gives a rat’s ass? I’m unhappy. Not just because of the sexual thing, but that’s a big part of it.
The problem is I think I’m kind of ugly. It’s not even obesity- I’m in good shape, I exercise regularly. But I have this perception that women just seem to find me inherently unattractive. Facially, or height-wise, or whatever, I don’t know, but that just seems to be the reality. So there’s not much I can do about any of that. I’m blind in my left eye and it has a weird appearance, a little smaller than my right. And honestly? That’s all that seems to matter. I could be the funniest guy in the world with an IQ of 200 and I don’t think it would count worth a shit to girls. They’re even more shallow than men, because to be blunt, it seems men are so horny they’ll take a wider variety of women. In terms of social skills- again, not super, mostly because self-consciousness about my eye makes it really hard to express confidence around- well, anybody, but especially women because I don’t have to worry about my appearance around male friends.
Whatever. I’m not really angry (I got over that a few years back), I’m just kind of depressed, pretty much all the time. Again, not just because of my sexual incompetence, but that’s what I’m focusing on given the subject of the article. Oh well…
I was with you up until the “women are shallower then men” thing–before that, it could’ve been me (though I’d like to think I’ve also got qualities that more directly answer the question “why would a woman enjoy being with me?”)
Dealing with unattractiveness is tough, especially on the Internet where people will often just armchair-diagnose you with dysmorphia, and tell you that you’re just a shave, shower and gym membership away from hotness. I think it’s because we like the idea of having control over our love lives, and are really uncomfortable with the idea of rejecting people for things they can’t help, especially appearance.
However, I don’t see one gender as more shallow than the other in this regard. If it seems that men are more open-minded about preferences, that’s probably because you have more first-hand experience with women rejecting men (specifically you), and may not even notice when men reject women on the basis of appearance. (Also, if you’re college age, you’re quite possibly looking specifically at an early-20s age cohort and ignoring the way sexism and ageism intersect.)
I’m only 19. Who knows, maybe I’ll be more successful in my 20′s. But somehow I doubt it. I have no confidence, no self-esteem, really nothing positive about me. And who the hell wants to associate with someone like that?
When I say women are more shallow I don’t really mean that per se, I just think that since men have a generally higher sex drive they’re more willing to “settle” physically, if a girl is funny or nice. But I’ve never been a woman so what do I know, maybe you’re right.
I did not see this before I responded-here is a tip, see about dating an older woman. Not saying Harold and Maude it but someone who is like five to ten years older than you are.
While working on that, spend your time working on yourself as a person as you will eventually be able to have confidence in yourself for being you who does this thing that you are really proud of.
Example: you like to take photos. Work on becoming a great photographer so you have the confidence that comes from being a guy who takes great photos. It does not cure all of your self esteem issues but it certainly will make you more confident of yourself.
Men are not likely to ‘settle’ more for a ugly chick than women are for an ugly dude.
Trust me on this one.
I’m sure you’ll understand if I don’t actually trust you on this one.
Physical appearance can be a starting factor but you know, find women who like the kind of appearance you have. If you do not have a standard appearance, find women who like guys who look different.
Get to know them online first if you are that self conscious about your appearance and follow the advice Amanda gives about making a list of traits you want. If you want a stellar example of physical human perfection, maybe aiming too high?
I don’t know why my last comment to you wasn’t posted, but I’ll say this. Self pity and depression are NEVER good signs in a mate, short or long term, male or female. Believing you are inherently unattractive or that people find you so is a mind game you are playing with yourself. Check out Zach Anner. He’s a comedian and successful tv person (now) and he has cerebral palsy. he’s tremendously sexy in my opinion, even though he is not classically “hot”. He’s assertive and positive and totally kicking his life in the ass and that’s sexy.
I’ve met many very physically attractive men before who “became ugly” in my eyes after I foun out they were somehow deficient in character. Conversely, I’ve fallen head over heels for guys who aren’t conventionally “hot,” or who considered themselves ugly, even, because they were amazingly witty, friendly, empathetic, kind, wise, and secure in their masculinity. I know for a fact they’re still not conventionally attractive, but to me, these men were handsome.
Your focus and despair over your looks is distracting you from working on the real problem – your anger, your depression, your negative outlook on women and life in general. I have been depressed myself so I can understand that you might think it’s easy to hide it and pretend you’re normal, but people who are not depressed or angry, whether by grace and good luck or by having done the hard work on themselves, can immediately tell you are not in a good place. I may be wrong, but I think women may be turned off by that more than any physical flaws you could possibly have.
It may be hard to imagine yourself happy and confident and positive now, but it’s never too late to start working on yourself. It will take time and effort, but unlike height or looks it’s much more within your control to become someone who can look into a mirror and say, “Hey, that’s a great guy I see there.” I strongly recommend the book “Feeling Good: The New Mood Therapy” to help overcome depression and replace it with positive thinking.
Good luck on your journey!
Okay, I will skip all the usual build-up-your-confidence advice and just take you at your word that you really are physically unattractive and that it’s mostly because of your eye. So here’s some practical advice: have you thought about wearing an eye-patch? It would take you from weird-looking to looking mysterious and potentially like a bad-ass. And girls will be dying to know what’s underneath it (which you don’t have to tell or show them until you’ve already gotten to know them and they like you).
That said, I work with a guy with one glass eye, and while it’s sometimes a little disconcerting (since it doesn’t always point in the right direction), it’s a very minor issue and hasn’t stopped him from landing a desirable mate. You’re probably grossly exaggerating this issue, and your pitiful attitude won’t help, since everyone likes to be around fun, happy, laid-back people, not the opposite. But most of us are overly insecure when we’re teenagers. The only thing you can do is fake it (being happy) until you make it. But don’t think your life is relegated to being forever what it is now. When you’re 30, you won’t even recognize your 19 year-old self.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ppd6LHfhkd0
Relevant professional Nice Guy portrait