Wanna date me?

Post Reply New Topic

If your standard is that the person should like you enough that your company is enough, you are entitled to have your standards, but if a person doesn't know you and hasn't formed a bond with you, how can they get to that point where they like you enough just to be with you despite your relative poverty?

I think it's unrealistic to expect that level of commitment from a stranger.

*Unless they are in a similar financial situation and have similar values about time/money/people etc. It is possible, but it's not very probable. Pretty much every woman wants to "date up," and have a partner that can be a provider and treat them to finer things in life than they might be able to afford for themselves.. as has been sly's experience that he's shared about women on disability rejecting him for his socioeconomic status, job/income. It's not impossible.. but it's easier to get in better shape and earn more money than it is to find that needle in a haystack.

Maybe. But (and correct me if I'm wrong sly) my impression is he is upset that the world does not work the way he thinks it should. I also think the world should work in a way different than it does and it also used to upser me but I've come to recognize that I was being unreasonable with my demands on humanity.

Based on his posts, I agree with your impression of what he thinks and is upset by.

Meanwhile, for myself, I've long since accepted that the world is the way that it is and I can't change the world - only myself. So, I got in better shape and earned some money, both by working for what I want. Some peers in the gay community asked my why I workout and I told them "Because I like hooking up with 21 year olds & I don't have a Million dollars." While it's intended to get a laugh, I'm also serious. People are attracted to people who are in shape and/or have money, and it's way easier to get in shape than it is to earn a Million dollars. Thing is, though, that the same habits that get people into better shape tend to make them more money, too, both by being able to work harder & smarter, and by spending time doing healthy things vs. spending the money you earn.

But sly seems to think that his one man crusade to convince all of the world's females to accept lower status men with poor health and no money is somehow a better option than simply deciding to work on himself in order to make him a more datable sly. Until he sees the error of his ways, he won't likely achieve much in the way of what he wants.

Men don't need a "buff bod," stand 6 foot 2, and weigh 205 lbs, in order to garner female attention.

Men don't need all that much money, either. Especially if both the man and the woman don't drink alcohol. Alcohol causes the cost of dates to at least double.

I'd rather not have a woman who drink quite a bit, by the way. And I don't drink at all.

And they don't need to be especially charming/confident, either.

Many times, just being one's self (and, yes, a full-time job/independent living situation would help), goes a long way. I'm 5 foot 5, 175 lbs, and definitely not a model in the "looks" department. What I have is a disdain for feeling sorry for myself. I feel sorry for myself quite a bit, actually---but I don't let HER know that I do.

I actually don't believe women, especially after a certain age, seek to "date up." What they seek is someone who can "hold his own weight" financially. Some even would resent it if a man lorded his "higher than her's" salary.

Many women, these days, possess that "spirit of independence." A few even disdain men who seek to pay for dates.

Wouldn't it be nice if Trump's policies could actually return us to the days where one could, say, work at General Motors, and get excellent salary, benefits, and a pension?

Men don't need it, but trust me, it helps. I've never even had any intention of attracting female attention (I'm gaaaAAAaaaay, after all), but I can tell you from experience that being 6'2" 202.5lbs and 12.5% bodyfat gets me a whole lot more female attention (especially when I'm naked in the Sun at the beach) than when I was 242lbs with a 38" waist and miserable. It's not necessary to get female attention, but ooooooh boy does it ever help.

No, they don't need all that much money - just some. As another poster here said, he dresses down for dates and doesn't let girls know he has a well paying government job because he's not interested in someone who's only interested in his money. Thing is, though, he can relax and enjoy being himself w/o the worry or anxiety of being flat broke. I know that's a thing, too. I can keep a mere couple hundred dollars in my chequing account and not stress at all about finances or others' thoughts of my finances because I know I have plenty more money in other accounts & it really is true that money is freedom. Freedom to do what you want with your time when you really have enough of it, but also just freedom from worry or judgement etc which contributes to a more relaxed and calm presentation of oneself vs. worrying in the back of your mind how you're going to pay off the credit card bill for a dinner date.

No, they don't need to be particularly charismatic - but again, it helps.

Yes, short dad-bod types can get plenty of women. But it's because they're either actually confident, or they can at least fake it like you pointed out by not letting on that they aren't confident. Fake it 'til you make it!

Most everyone wants to "date up," or "out of their league," by whatever criteria they measure by if they can. It's human nature. For me, that wouldn't be dating someone with more money, it would be about age/appearance/attitude/personality etc. For others it might be status/job title/finances and what they can provide. I'm sure there are non-materialistic women out there, but even among them (and I know many) I've yet to hear one complain that their partner started earning more money and their financial lives became easier. Even with women in the workforce, they still gravitate towards higher status higher income men. Fact. Alpha's still prevail.

Very few disdain a man paying for dates. On that note, if I ever dated someone that took offence to me paying for something because I wanted to pay, I'd take offence to that and it'd likely be a red flag that we probably aren't very compatible if they can't graciously accept being treated to something. Probably not an problem I'll ever encounter so moot point really, but just saying.

That might be nice.. except Trump's policies are designed to screw the working class further into the ground while enriching his top 1% buddies left, right, and centre. The whole world can see this. It's only very poorly educated Trump supporters who seem to still be drinking the kool aid & have blinders on.

I agreed with that. Was looking for a post someone say about this. Thanks for writing this down for me.

In my experience I have met people who are:
1. Boyfriend have lower income than the girlfriend
2. Boyfriend plays games a lot, girlfriend hangs out with her girlfriends
3. Boyfriend is physically good looking, while the girlfriend is not
4. Both are physically attractive
5. Both have low incomes
6. Both have high incomes

Everyone is different. The only way how to improve these attitudes is acceptance and understanding on personality and quirks like personal disability and/or mental health. It can be stressful for one's partner but the partner would have great self awareness and support. This is biggest influence in great relationships. Money and physical looks got nothing to do with this. It for shallow people who love creating dramas.

I am 27, never dated nor a relationship yet but still waiting for a women to accept who I am.

If you weren't into sex and you had a relationship with God, I'd date you.

Then maybe you should move to China, too.



I don’t know what kind of “equality” you want, but it doesn’t matter much—you can’t really force all women to change their interests and ambitions. In a free society, everyone treats everyone else the way they damn like. If women decide no man at all is better than a poor man, that’s their prerogative. We as a society probably should stop trying to enforce monogamy. This way, all women will finally feel free to flock to the successful minority of men they actually desire, leaving all the rest of us who aren’t really up to snuff to live and die without the luxury of experiencing any female company at all, ever.



There’s nothing “illogical” about it. Natural selection is doing its job; that’s all.



I consider myself a feminist, but I still think we should really pay attention to this famous sign, the first sentence at least:


What really matters here is that whoever paid to rub everyone’s nose in that message has succeeded enough in life, with their probably sexist views and all, to afford it. You should always count on being held at least to that standard.



I think most women are pretty fed up with being told what their mindsets should be. If most men don’t cut the mustard, so be it—more genes to weed out. But really, the cultural expectation of monogamy needs to go.

So what’s the problem? She wouldn’t be able to use the guy if he refused to pay for those activities for her. You can bet I’d have no qualms exploiting people like that if only I had something desirable to lure them with and weren’t afraid of ending up with a few broken bones or worse, so kudos to her!



That’s tantamount to rape, so no, I wouldn’t expect it to go over well, and I’d rather fear I’d be put in my place in prison by other convicts, giving me the customary beatings and ass-raping me like there’s no tomorrow. But more realistically, if I tried to brag about that, noöne would actually believe I even came close to having sex with a woman, and everyone would laugh at me.



So it’s a good way to quickly weed out poor suitors.

Saying you like good food sounds to me like a way to claim your taste is actually objective. You know, like it’s so often said these days that some large and heterogeneous groups of people are objectively more attractive than others.

You don’t get to decide what is enough for her; she does.



That’s up to you. If you’re happy staying alone, what’s the problem? Otherwise, you’d better pay. Simple as that.

There’s a point here that shouldn’t be neglected: you wish your own company were enough to get in exchange the woman’s company, but it quite plainly isn’t. The only thing this means is that in a typical date, the market value of the woman’s company is far greater than that of the man’s, so the man has to make up for it by paying out of his own pocket for something to make it interesting enough for the woman—otherwise, she has better things to do with her time; perhaps dating a more desirable suitor.

It’s no use trying to change how the world works. Everyone will always get as much as they can from others in exchange for as little as possible of their own.

Yes, but at least some of them may find it awkward, because you live with your family.

My only issue with dating a man who lives with his family is that people who have never lived on their own often don't realize what is involved in keeping up a dwelling because their parents or a housekeeper typically did the cleaning at home. I had to explain to my roommate when he moved in that it doesn't matter if he didn't make messes because things get dirty on their own.

Money=freedom, simple as that. Money is nothing more, nothing less, and how you choose to wield your freedom factors a lot into attractiveness.

Money is not the ONLY source of freedom. It’s just the big, obvious one.

Stay-at-home-woman types don’t mind dependency. We all depend on each other for something, so that’s not the real issue. Women don’t want to be slaves to a man or the household. The Netflix and chill girl can’t do that if she doesn’t know she has security, so the man who can offer that is who she’ll gravitate to. A lot of women, too, are attracted to the idea of being a homemaker with a good side-hustle (my wife used to sell Younique, but she started getting hate from her upline so she gave it up. She’s a Plexus girl now. PM me if you’re interested, haha!). So if you want that girl, you have to be responsible for her independence as well as yours. So both the homemaker and the working Netflix and chill girl end up being higher maintenance than you might think.

We have so many special occasions and social obligations that “dating” as a married couple is a thing of the past. Over time, you should expect a degree of upward social mobility, so we’re never short on being entertained. There is a renovated plantation home within walking distance of us that schedules events open to the public, and we see a lot of our friends there. We don’t do it as a date-date thing, but it serves the same function. When you are young or in early dating stages, dating is getting to know someone and having fun. As you move along in your relationship, you’ll probably find that you sort of transcend the “just-us” thing and start bringing more and more people into your circle.

It’s still romantic and fun, don’t get me wrong. It’s just you never think about going there in life and then...there you are. My point is that Netflix and chill is more often the destination and not the journey.

Not anymore then her living off her parents ornwith roomates would be awkward.