Philosophically, why should men make the first move?

Post Reply New Topic

To deadeyexx, Jannisy, idiocratik and ToadOfSteel: I would quote and respond separately to each of your last posts but it would get muddy deciphering who said what, so I will say what I have to say as it relates in general to what each of you has said:

Aspie men, not being the best of communicators, when they fail to act CORRECTLY in trying to interact with a woman they're interested in (hint: about 95% of the time), will, by their failure, allow her to lump them into the :"yep, another failure; my REAL man is due any minute now" syndrome, without having to feel bad or anything for these "losers" at all.

This is why it's important that SOME (not all) women respond to a man at times, even if it is not obvious to her that he might care, as frequently Aspie eye contact is not going to allow his true feelings to be broadcast, and his "technique" is guaranteed to be faulty to some degree.

Besides, just one more failure in him is going to drive him that close to never acting. So instead she might wind up with the player who can talk her socks off (literally) and then dump her later, while the Aspie never recovers enough to ask again (this was me at 18 - gladly I've moved on since then and gotten some tougher skin).

So if you are a woman with lots to offer and have your emotional self together and can spot players, best wishes, things will turn out ok if you never ask a man out the rest of your life; for the rest of you --- maybe not.

P.S.: I am not blaming this on anyone except stupid societal rules set up by "idiots".

P.P.S: to Granite: I beg to differ with your scenario of the 300 hot chicks all ready to pounce on you. If you DO blow it there (a high probability, especially with sensory overload and possible shyness and angst over the possible negative outcomes) with the first chick, you will be ridiculed by the majority of the women there, who, seeing you fail, due to peer pressure, will not be caught DEAD trying to go for you (because you as the man have been proven to have no Mojo and women do not go out with men their peers despise). If it were me I would not even think about going there being outnumbered so badly and I'm an artist/musician.

Yea just make the first move if you think you should. Remember one thing; just because she's pretty doesn't mean you have to be with her. Just because she rejects you doesn't mean you have to be with her.I know its tough out there, but just keep your heads up guys.

I think I screwed up. I'm a female who has been pursuing a younger man who says on his profile dates only younger women. Add to that, he is an aspie who is old-fashioned. God, I must have screwed up in so many ways!

I believe I have a 1% chance with this guy, but he feels ideal for me. Very sad!

To MikeH106: I think you are a very intelligent person and although some of your logic is a little rough around the edges a lot of what you say makes sense. Also, dude, not to be preachy, you need to realize (I'm 100% straight BTW) that you are not bad on the eyes if you would only tune into that fact. You have more ammunition than a lot of men when it comes to being seen in a positive light physically by women in general.

Addressing your original Thesis: I'd say men have to ask because #1: someone has to and #2: women en masse know they don't have to, because for the most part women's need to satisfy sexual urges is strongly tied to survival over the long-term and not directly tied to urgency over the short-term time-frame (with exceptions of course, more so now than in the Victorian past), but for men the need for sex is an URGENCY as their hormones prompt their sexual behavior to DEMAND satisfaction ASAP. This makes men the weaker sex as they cannot generally withstand abstinence.

Not that you actually, blatantly, called for what follows in my statement as a solution, but if you are expecting women to all of a sudden reverse roles and start pursuing it would take a 3-year embargo with every man on the planet denying sex to all women without exception, and frankly, men are the weaker sex and couldn't go two collective weeks IMHO.

If you do indeed want this sea change (which I doubt could actually transpire), first of all you have to stop blaming either sex, as we are both held prisoner to the cultural past; you have to start by becoming calm and knowing it to be right without exhibiting any enmity, and then continue by passing on all but the most appropriate women for you to be with, regardless of what peers might say about your "sexuality" (like they've done to me). I think in that way there might be more prompting by women to start making some first moves if a significant number of men abstained from loose (casual) sex and only held out for someone who was in tune with them in other ways too, only you should not expect it to ever become a massive shift of tendencies towards role reversal, because that is never going to happen.

And in summation, let me say, especially in consideration of our Aspieness, that even though the status quo smacks of injustice, men must necessarily still toil away and stand tall. And NEVER assume all women are trying to make you squirm under the spotlight of your perceived (inflated) inadequacy, because there are plenty of nice women out there, trust me. In fact, some of them would LOVE to meet a man IF ONLY one would approach them in the first place. Some of them are shy and can't approach - so why should they be thrown into the lake of fire? So be sure to save your wrath for a real enemy and not for an unwitting tool of the present status quo.

To CrinklyCrustacean and Idiocratik: I doubt seriously if your friends represent most men on the planet, which is the point: that this discussion is about MEN and WOMEN not about your friends/acquaintances on the small scale. Many studies have been done on people's sexual/religious/political affiliations and how their friends are usually the same, whereas this is NO indication of the tendencies of the population at large, hence extrapolating ones' friends' opinions to the opinions of the population at large is a dangerous flaw in logic.

Second of all a virgin has no power over a woman in his life to "punish" her by abstaining. That role would go for the men who do have women in their lives. Such men would not be able to go two weeks abstaining from sex for the mere reason of trying to consolidate control over women in general. This makes them weaker, as some women can frequently go all their lives without it, as concomitantly case after case proves that women can survive desert/wilderness deprivation scenarios much better.

Men are the weaker sex you better realize that now.

BTW I am not suggesting nor am I even in favor of such a "revolt" by men - it's a misguided and ridiculous notion.