tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29763791.post7381848974431642069..comments2023-10-31T05:07:19.353-04:00Comments on Delenda est Carthago: Feminists and the Alpha MaleDr. Φhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14086783503820477029noreply@blogger.comBlogger36125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29763791.post-18390527758606045222007-05-13T13:26:00.000-04:002007-05-13T13:26:00.000-04:00The "Sex and Liberalism" premise of this post is f...The "Sex and Liberalism" premise of this post is false (that socialism and libertinism only recently came together). Marx in the <I>Communist Manifesto></I> acknowledged that Communism would bring "community of women". Socialists of the early 1900s advocated "free love". Communists in power turned puritanical, but libertine artists such as Picasso stayed Red as tomatoes.Rich Rostromhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13262703348236110420noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29763791.post-67843478747943030142007-05-12T14:35:00.000-04:002007-05-12T14:35:00.000-04:00SomeGuy says "The pendulum has swung a little too ...SomeGuy says "The pendulum has swung a little too far in my opinion to the point that men feel that they are not needed by women anymore."<BR/><BR/>I don't think you understand what I'm saying. Women need more from men now, not less: they are looking for not just financial support but emotional support, parenting support, etc. It's not as if an egalitarian relationship means the partners exist as completely separate agents, who can take or leave each other. They are more deeply connected, because they can honestly express themselves and ask for what they need, rather than play roles (the paterfamilias and the "angel of the house") which don't reflect them as unique individuals.<BR/><BR/>This sort of relationship benefits men just as much as women. Think how exhausting it would be to be solely responsible for your family's wellbeing: there's no space for men to take a lower-paying but more enjoyable job, express fear and doubt, cut back on their working hours to spend time with their children. When women are freer to express themselves and pursue their interests, so are men.Gracehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09570841904308934998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29763791.post-6035467049985751962007-05-11T19:37:00.000-04:002007-05-11T19:37:00.000-04:00It has a corrosive effect on men's egos? I don't t...It has a corrosive effect on men's egos? I don't think I want the guy who needs someone who needs him. It really sounds like power issues. In a long-term relationship, of course you grow to need that person, equally. But what kind of guy would NEED to start off a relationship where he is clearly in the driver's seat, in order to feel, well, like being in a relationship at all? <BR/><BR/>You're right. We're not going to agree on this.Because I don't want what you seem to think I'm too stupid to understand that I should want.Lizhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11765709902686717379noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29763791.post-12817871888064699482007-05-11T15:58:00.000-04:002007-05-11T15:58:00.000-04:00***Natalia: may I assume that "short dude" has . ....***Natalia: may I assume that "short dude" has . . . other qualities?***<BR/><BR/>Obviously.<BR/><BR/>But I don't think of him as an "alpha male," because, and this might seem strange to someone else but feels perfectly natural to me, I don't apply those categories to men. <BR/><BR/>Like I said, I think you're pushing a false dichotomy.Nataliahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01995697364352031578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29763791.post-15982227637202921362007-05-11T12:15:00.000-04:002007-05-11T12:15:00.000-04:00Well, as you can see from these posts there will n...Well, as you can see from these posts there will not be a meeting of the minds with this discussion.<BR/><BR/>My point is not that we should go back to the grand old days of women as chattel. In the abstract, it is a good thing that women can buy homes, buy cars, have a career, have a child without a man, divorce to get out of a bad situation, save for their own retirement, etc.<BR/><BR/>But as Phi has said, this has come at a cost. I do believe (most women posting here seem to disagree) that there was some good aspects of the prior social structure. The pendulum has swung a little too far in my opinion to the point that men feel that they are not needed by women anymore.<BR/><BR/>While in the abstract that may be true, it does have a corrosive effect on men's egos. Rather than going in with the attitude that "I don't really need you", at least pretend that you do and know in your heart that you have options if things don't work out.SomeGuyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14111169150425874457noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29763791.post-51083227141744202842007-05-11T11:46:00.000-04:002007-05-11T11:46:00.000-04:00Other people have said this better than me, but he...Other people have said this better than me, but here it goes:<BR/><BR/>The evolution of pair-bonding required a formula that would persuade men to stop living like chimpanzees, settle down with one woman, and provide for a family. One of the components of that formula was that the man was <I>o rei da casa</I>. Sure, Dizzy, there is no rational reason why men should not settle down to a more egalitarian formula . . . except that egalitarianism cuts both ways, and many men now expect women to bear their "fair share" of breadwinning. Most of the time, this comes at the expense of the children. Marital egalitarianism also appears to weaken a man's attachment to domesticity. It shouldn't, but it does.<BR/><BR/>I don't want to fall into the <A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/Way-We-Never-Were-Nostalgia/dp/0465090974/ref=sr_1_3/103-7294297-9674257?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1178898104&sr=1-3" REL="nofollow">nostalgia trap</A>, and idealize the <I>ancien regime</I>. Yes, different men bore their responsibility more and less well, and wielded their authority more and less benevolently. And I can understand how Spungen would not want to trade her life for what was available in the past.<BR/><BR/>However, the legal and social changes of the past decades were not cost-free: they benefitted some men and women at the expense of other men, women and virtually all children.Burkehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14252946969701576139noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29763791.post-60876055987218612252007-05-10T21:17:00.000-04:002007-05-10T21:17:00.000-04:00I agree that people who don’t like themselves find...I agree that people who don’t like themselves find it impossible to maintain a relationship, and, I suppose, people who like themselves too much are equally intolerable. Spungen, as to your question, I can’t offer much insight. I don’t know you or how you looked/behaved in you 20’s, I don’t know the guys you went out with or how similar they were to me in personality or situation, I doubt very. I’ve always been an unique case, and not in a good way.<BR/><BR/>Anyhow, I can’t believe how whiney I sound here, the whole pseudo-point of my original post was that I’m genuinely happy these days without the female company I used to desire. My life had it’s problems, but I’ve figured something out and I’m going good. If I was still a ‘looser’ sitting on a workstation doing crap I hated for a fixed wage I’d probably be very depressed at this point, but I have my own company, we’re having a lot of success and it’s amazing what that does for your sense of well-being. That’s probably a guy thing, ego-vindication or something. <BR/><BR/>People like me don’t deserve any sympathy for being shallow jerks who won’t settle for a so called “beta-female” nor should we ask for any. Since I won’t have kids my genes are going to be edited out of the human story anyway, so that’ll sort itself out, long term.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18335487404732363350noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29763791.post-41990428946079643562007-05-10T21:05:00.000-04:002007-05-10T21:05:00.000-04:00I like you Amanda. :)I like you Amanda. :)Lizhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11765709902686717379noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29763791.post-77420331260030954172007-05-10T21:00:00.000-04:002007-05-10T21:00:00.000-04:00Like Dizzy says, SomeGuy is confused about what th...Like Dizzy says, SomeGuy is confused about what the past was like. How can a relationship be honest when one party has all the power and the other cannot leave, regardless of their true feelings? Remember that until quite recently, married women couldn't own property and couldn't divorce (and if they did lost all their money and their children, and could not be employed except as prostitutes). In such a situation, interactions are based on lies and manipulation, since that's the weaker party's only way to accomplish their goals. Read almost any Victorian literature (Ibsen, Balzac, Trollope) for a description of this.<BR/><BR/>Women had to put up with their husbands' behavior, regardless of how they felt about it. Now they don't and can ask for more. This is better because relationships are no longer based on silent resentment, lying, and long-suffering women: we can relate as independent and equal human beings. I think most men would see this as an improvement too.Gracehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09570841904308934998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29763791.post-10011269662789251662007-05-10T20:28:00.000-04:002007-05-10T20:28:00.000-04:00And isn't what you said, "Now I think many men fee...And isn't what you said, "Now I think many men feel that women can take or leave them unless they conform to what the women want them to be." exactly the situation women have always faced with men? And what do you think the women want, that is so sinister? I mean, emotional honesty doesn't sound so bad, right?Lizhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11765709902686717379noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29763791.post-87767545329900988302007-05-10T20:25:00.000-04:002007-05-10T20:25:00.000-04:00I said this at Bobvis too... I'm just wondering, w...I said this at Bobvis too... I'm just wondering, why are you basing your ideas on a romanticized view of the past? Why not just say, "Men should live up to their responsiblities?" There doesn't seem to be an obvious reason why that claim should have to be based on an appeal to a period when, as Amanda put it so well, "husbands used to have complete legal, financial and physical control over their wives."<BR/><BR/>It sounds like you think men have been the victims of something. But I dont' see what. So they can't beat their wives anymore? They are still perfectly free to step up and take care of their family. I don't see why you think women having jobs holds them back.Lizhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11765709902686717379noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29763791.post-5728304749137095002007-05-10T20:19:00.000-04:002007-05-10T20:19:00.000-04:00Amanda:I would take issue that society ever define...Amanda:<BR/><BR/>I would take issue that society ever defined a good husband as only being one that worked and didn't abuse his wife. <BR/><BR/>A good husband was loyal, devoted, made sacrifices, worked hard, didn't cheat, provided for his family, became a devoted grandfather when the time came, planned for the future. For this he received a loyal devoted wife.<BR/><BR/>There was honesty there, just a different honesty, an unspoken one.<BR/><BR/>My point is that while much has been gained on one side of the scales, much has been lost on the other. Men were given most of the power and with that came a great responsibility. While they have lost much of that power they have also let go of the responsibility that defined their behavior.<BR/><BR/>I think many women may be chasing something that doesn't exist - the stability and security that came when men accepted certain responsibility - along with the freedom to have their partners play the roles that they as women want them to be.<BR/><BR/>I am not saying 30 years ago things were "better", men were just less confused. I really think much of a man's self worth came from accepting the responsibility for his family. Now I think many men feel that women can take or leave them unless they conform to what the women want them to be.SomeGuyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14111169150425874457noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29763791.post-1476707993910925392007-05-10T19:53:00.000-04:002007-05-10T19:53:00.000-04:00Phi: I didn't say that you weren't suitable dating...Phi: I didn't say that you weren't suitable dating material! In fact, I was saying that women have different tastes in men and for many women (including those in their twenties) a man's looks/wealth/suaveness aren't that important. <BR/><BR/>But people who don't like themselves (or who perceive themselves as inferior) are not attractive. Also, most women don't want to date men who aren't obviously enthusiastic about them. Since very shy people are often emotionally reserved, this restraint can appear to be a lack of interest: so women will think you aren't enthusiastic and won't be interested, even if they would otherwise find you attractive. <BR/><BR/>SomeGuy: I think women expect a lot more from men in relationships than they used to. In the past, a husband that worked regularly and didn't beat you was a good one. Now women want to have egalitarian and emotionally honest relationships. I think a lot of divorced/single men aren't willing to make this change, and that's why they're not in relationships. I really think in successful relationships, there's far more intimacy than ever existed in the past. Remember that husbands used to have complete legal, financial and physical control over their wives: do you really think the wives could be truthful in such a situation?Gracehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09570841904308934998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29763791.post-82803466343004993212007-05-10T19:21:00.000-04:002007-05-10T19:21:00.000-04:00What do you think of my "men put out of a job" the...What do you think of my "men put out of a job" thesis, and how this has led to male confusion about their roles?SomeGuyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14111169150425874457noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29763791.post-66884941016341630232007-05-10T18:27:00.000-04:002007-05-10T18:27:00.000-04:00I agree with your first paragraph. Different men ...I agree with your first paragraph. Different men will react differently to this. My sense is that most get married eventually, some will become "confirmed bachelors" as their blood cools, and a few will withdraw into bitter despair. But as you have read, our female contributors are convinced that we were NEVER suitable dating material in our twenties.<BR/><BR/>Clearly, the economic emancipation of women that occurred in the last century has benefitted a woman like Spungen, who has it all: great husband, wonderful baby, AND a successful career. But many women have not been so fortunate.<BR/><BR/>I can't really speak to the intimacy issue.Burkehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14252946969701576139noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29763791.post-14429907350437237592007-05-10T17:36:00.000-04:002007-05-10T17:36:00.000-04:00I posted this on Bobvis blog page. I am intereste...I posted this on Bobvis blog page. I am interested in your comments.<BR/><BR/>I think the dynamic for beta males in their 20's is that the alpha and beta females chase the alpha males for ten years and the beta males experience occasional intimacy but no real long-term relationships since they are not prized by most females of that age range.<BR/><BR/>What follows is a gradual withdrawl by the beta males who become more self centered (or male centered) and who devote their lives to work, hobbies or their male friends. By the time (early 30's) the females realize that the alpha males aren't going to be caught the beta males may have developed carreers and financial stability (which are now prized by the 30-something females at this point), but have socially regressed to the point that the females find them ill equipped to have a fulfilling relationship with women.<BR/><BR/>I think a lot of this has to do with the changes in the roles of men and women in the 70's. Women, rightly so, felt that their options were limited in regards to the roles they were allowed to play in society and made a break with the past. The interesting thing for me is that women wanted the same opportunities as men, but men didn't necessarily want what women had.<BR/><BR/>The end result was that, to a certain extent, men were put out of a job. Their prior job being the breadwinner, protector and family leader. While this exclusively male role may have been unfair to women, I believe that most men took this responsibility very seriously. I also believe that many men, while dreaming about getting that alpha female, understood that the beta female was more realistic and because most beta females believed (prior to these social changes) that creating a stable family was a priority, the beta male was the best option.<BR/><BR/>Fast forward to today. Men no longer feel this historical responsibility since women have taken on the responsibilities that were once exclusively male. While this is great for women, I really think that many men today feel like women don't really "need" them anymore. This feeling is reinforced by the beta male experience I mentioned previously and once the beta males are approached in their 30's a decade of resentment has already built up.<BR/><BR/>Finally, I think the sexual freedom of today has come at a cost. There may be more sex but I believe a lot less intimacy. The disconnect between love, sex, commitment has led to a sexual bartering system between men and women which may have existed before, but I think women got a lot more in the deal 30 years ago than they get today.SomeGuyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14111169150425874457noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29763791.post-13379752172875910842007-05-10T17:08:00.000-04:002007-05-10T17:08:00.000-04:00Basically I just wasn’t that into them and we got ...<I>Basically I just wasn’t that into them and we got together because they were the only option I had available and, I assume, I was the only option they had available. </I><BR/><BR/>I'm curious: Did they seem as if they wanted to have a relationship with you? Were they disappointed when you didn't stick around? Or was the lack of enthusiasm mutual?<BR/><BR/>I'm also curious as to how you got together with them. Did you ask them out, compliment them, act as if you found them desirable? Or did they just sort of glumly drag you into bed when no one else was around?<BR/><BR/>Like I said, I got together in my 20s with a few guys who, like you, were trying to get into the industry but weren't big shots. They were also in their 20s. They seemed to find me attractive and interesting at first, but things fizzled quickly. And it wasn't even a deal of, they scored then dumped me, because usually we never even got around to having sex. There were maybe a couple tepid makeout sessions where I just couldn't understand their lack of enthusiasm. Since they had been the ones who wanted to get together in the first place. It was as if they'd found something to turn them off aside from my looks or personality, but I couldn't figure out what. It was perplexing. By this time they'd found out more about my background and general circumstances, so I had some suspicions but was never sure.<BR/><BR/>I suppose it's possible they never *really* found me attractive in the first place, but just wanted a shot at playing the role. Observers tend to gauge these situations by assessing whether the woman's more attractive than the man, and what his other immediate options are. But maybe those aren't the only factors. I suspected that they might be comparing me with supermodels or "It Girl" actresses (I would lose), and thinking that was in their future once they hit it big. But I never found out for sure. All I know is none of them got married yet, and none have hit it big.<BR/><BR/>You say you're unattractive. That could mean a variety of things. These guys were considered "unattractive" in the way Jason Alexander or "Spence" from "King of Queens" would be. Like, still cute, although not tall or handsome. I know it gets worse than that. But guys who look like that often do pretty well with women if they're in entertainment, even if they're not stars.Sheila Tonehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02353632937706232702noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29763791.post-22100055922365471682007-05-10T15:30:00.000-04:002007-05-10T15:30:00.000-04:00"Is sex just something women want to do with you....."Is sex just something women want to do with you..." (if you're successful)?<BR/><BR/>Um, no. And really, is Monique some sort of prize? she is a good looking girl who sleeps with people she thinks can help her. So I don't think you moved up in status. If anything, you were feeling more confident and so recognized an opportunity that you may otherwise not have seen. There are probably plenty of girls who will use you, right now. You just don't want them. You're holding out for an alpha girl. Which is your choice.Lizhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11765709902686717379noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29763791.post-55715322964309240372007-05-10T08:03:00.000-04:002007-05-10T08:03:00.000-04:00I'm having trouble logging onto this thing, I hope...I'm having trouble logging onto this thing, I hope this post doesn't appear three times, that's a total newbie move.<BR/><BR/><BR/>I dunno why it ended with them exactly, except that it just wasn’t right. Basically I just wasn’t that into them and we got together because they were the only option I had available and, I assume, I was the only option they had available. It felt dishonorable, I felt bad about it, which is an impressive amount of guilt for a non-Catholic. <BR/><BR/>I knew plenty of girls who were smart, funny and good-looking and guess what? They could get smart, funny and good-looking guys. All I had was smart, and when you use your intelligence to be an annoying, know-it-all dick, it doesn’t exactly work in your favor. Sleeping with someone you fundamentally don’t like is shameful, for me it was worse than sleeping with nobody at all and that’s what I ended up doing.<BR/><BR/>I had a weird experience about 6 years ago, before my current business partner and I started up our company and got our lives in order. I was working on a movie script with a friend and it got picked up by Columbia Tristar for development. This means nothing, big studios option hundreds of small projects, very few make it through to becoming films, especially if you have no prior experience and no leverage. So I was realistic about our chances, but what was weird was that everyone around us suddenly went nuts, they acted like we had hit the big time. Suddenly we had a hundred new best friends. I was like, “It’s an option, not a green light, it’ll go nowhere, stop humping my leg’, but people in this business are so desperate to hitch themselves to anything that looks like it’s going somewhere they act like idiots. <BR/><BR/>Anyway, the producer the studio assigned had a hot little production assistant I’ll call Monique, not her real name, and one night when I was out with her and her friends at the height of the project’s optimism I suddenly realized I could sleep with this good-looking girl if I wanted to. It was really, really weird. It was like an invisible, but impregnable barrier that had been there all my life was suddenly gone. It’s not like she hung out a sign or anything, she wasn’t drunk or all over me, it was just obvious. I hadn’t got better looking, what had changed was my status, with a film project up I was suddenly a winner, I had power, I was an alpha male. I went home with her and it was like there was no doubt or discussion about it, we were going there to have sex, which we sort of did, after a fashion, the details of which I won’t go into. <BR/><BR/>What happened next was predictable, Tristar distanced itself from the project, and Monique distanced herself from me so fast it was like she was terrified she’s get loser stink on her. But I found the experience as a whole fascinating, I remember thinking, ‘Is this what it’s like for those guys all the time? The tall, the handsome, the charming?” Is sex just something women want to do with you? Needless to say, I don’t recall this episode with much pride, but it was a brief glance into an utterly different world, it was really, really weird.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18335487404732363350noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29763791.post-71506309304101571182007-05-10T02:58:00.000-04:002007-05-10T02:58:00.000-04:00Shotyourdog, I appreciate your candor. I will res...Shotyourdog, I appreciate your candor. I will restrain my usual tendency to offer encouragement and (probably worthless) advice to the romantically unpaired since you clearly aren't seeking it.<BR/><BR/>I am curious about the women you hooked up with in college, though, and why you didn't stay with them. We are the same age, and I got together with some guys who fit the general profile you provided. I was always perplexed when it ended fairly quickly, and I always wondered what became of them.Sheila Tonehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02353632937706232702noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29763791.post-81311063854066726982007-05-10T00:18:00.000-04:002007-05-10T00:18:00.000-04:00This is an interesting conversation, (I got here f...This is an interesting conversation, (I got here from Ace’s page), I’m 36 now, male and probably will never marry or have kids. The reason is simple, I never reconciled my lowly position on the sexual totem pole with my expectations, I was never able to come to the compromises necessary for beta category males to settle for someone of their own status and I never will. Let me say in my own defense that, although I may have my failings, I am and never was an abject freak of the kind Dizzy describes who exhibit behavior so clueless I almost find it hard to believe. My problem is basic- I’m just not physically attractive, it’s that simple. I did a lot of body building when I was younger to try to offset this, but I just turned into an awkward, weird-looking, bulky, gym dork instead of a spindly, spotty-faced computer dork. Some people just don’t look good no matter what, it’s a fact.<BR/><BR/>I had brief, sporadic sexual relationships during my college days, then almost decades of celibacy once out into the cold, grown up world of work and career. It used to get to me when I was younger, the biological urge is strong to be with the opposite sex and the frustration and rejection that comes with the opposite sex’s contempt and clear dislike of you is hard to take. <BR/><BR/>But that fades, and you get more engrossed in your work. I run my own production company now with a business partner (who’s the opposite of me, women LOVE this bastard, I count eight girlfriends over the last five years alone- and those are the ones I know about), and our ambitions to make films are the main focus of our lives. If I looked at my life now I’d have to say I feel pretty content, I work long hours, but on what I want, I earn my own money, I’m not some wage-slave, and we are in a business where there is no upper limit to which hard work, talent and luck might take us. What I have achieved so far I have achieved because I had to, there was no married comfort zone, I was debarred from whatever happiness sex and female companionship might bring me and had to make some sort of life for myself that gave me some meaning and purpose without those things.<BR/><BR/>I dunno what my point is exactly, I guess I’m just responding to the weirdly confessional urge internet anonymity confers. But in the end, I can at least say I never became some lame, whining pussy or resentful misogynist because my sexual ambitions ran aground on a reef of female indifference, and I’m not such a hypocrite I can’t acknowledge that I myself apply exactly the same shallow physical criteria to them. In the end we each chart a strange and weaving course through the no-rules Mad Max land of the modern sexual scene and hope for the best. I think I’ve done pretty good with my zero-sex option, but everyone is different.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18335487404732363350noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29763791.post-14368173780106323842007-05-09T20:47:00.000-04:002007-05-09T20:47:00.000-04:00Spungen: As I said on Bobvis, we seem to be worki...Spungen: As I said on Bobvis, we seem to be working from different data sets. As I said here, mine comes from my experience among the college-educated twentysomethings I met at the churches I attended as I moved from major city to major city. I can testify that <I>we</I> were certainly marriage-minded, seeing as how our faith forbade extra-marital sex. (Not that we were immune from temptation, only that we tried to fight it.)<BR/><BR/>Amanda: if a man asks for date, is he not pursuing? But truth be told, I always sought out a sign that such pursuit would be well received. Such signs were seldom forthcoming, and were usually misleading anyway.<BR/><BR/>Natalia: may I assume that "short dude" has . . . other qualities?Burkehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14252946969701576139noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29763791.post-44711252278901460752007-05-09T18:52:00.000-04:002007-05-09T18:52:00.000-04:00That blog was retired a long time ago.Oh, and I've...That blog was retired a long time ago.<BR/><BR/>Oh, and I've been with a short dude for nearly 4 years now! So there goes your theory. ;)Nataliahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01995697364352031578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29763791.post-33845641421462104142007-05-09T17:57:00.000-04:002007-05-09T17:57:00.000-04:00I just posted but it looks like it didn't work; pl...I just posted but it looks like it didn't work; please forgive any double posting.<BR/><BR/>I am a woman in my twenties and know lots of other women in their twenties. I honestly don't understand your theory, because women do date fat, poor, short, ugly or socially awkward men all the time. I know this because I've done it and so have all my friends, including those who are really beautiful. <BR/><BR/>Women like men to pursue them though, so very shy men don't experience a lot of dating success. Maybe that was your problem.Gracehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09570841904308934998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29763791.post-87306840219849564372007-05-09T16:00:00.000-04:002007-05-09T16:00:00.000-04:00Both Dizzy and Spungeon, having reached their thir...<I>Both Dizzy and Spungeon, having reached their thirties, broadened their dating pool and had a number of negative experiences as a result.</I><BR/><BR/>Um, no, my experiences and tastes were the same in my teens and twenties. I didn't turn 30 and decide I was going to "lower my standards." If anything, I raised them, because I started realizing the falsehood of the Duckie myth.<BR/><BR/>One thing you seem to be missing is that most guys don't want to settle down when they're in their early- to mid-20s. If you did, you were an anomaly. This is at least as much a part of why women stay single into their 30s as their "standards." What most men complain about in their 20s is their inability to get attractive young women to <I>sleep with</I> them, not to marry them.Sheila Tonehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02353632937706232702noreply@blogger.com