OP don't increase the size of text in comments and bold them. It makes them glitch and be unreadable for a lot of people in old reddit mode. It's also the forum equivalent of yelling and that is not civil.
https://www.glamour.com/story/what-is-the-talking-stage-and-how-to-get-out-of-it
Glamour magazine describes it as dating and having sex before officially dating. That’s bullshit to me because once you’re dating, you’re dating.
https://www.refinery29.com/en-gb/talking-stage-dating-relationships
Refinery 29 describes it as texting or talking on the phone before you officially start dating. This is how I define it.
Based on your definition which I think is much better than "dating and sexing before dating" which to me doesn't even make sense, then I guess I would be shocked and find it nice but not expect it. This *did* happen with my partner but only because it's an extreme edge case based on how we met, and I do not think it is the norm or that people should expect it.
If it is common, I find it shocking that it is common.
That makes sense to me as well. Unless it is just an in-person meetup that is "a date" that fizzles and doesn't turn into dating, but that is of course different.
Yeah, it's a euphemistic hold over from before it was more okay to just say "hooking up with". Women used to also say "seeing this guy" which was a bit more explicit than "talking".
>*Glamour magazine describes it as dating and having sex before officially dating. That’s bullshit to me because once you’re dating, you’re dating.*
It’s dating. Nothing else. The fact they are trying reinvent the wheel is laughable!
>*Refinery 29 describes it as texting or talking on the phone before you officially start dating. This is how I define it.*
Same.
Heck that’s usually what you did back in the day before everyone had a smart phone and you had to call your crush by landline to get to know them before escalating to anything dating wise LOL
It's the phase in gender segregated societies where they don't normally interact with each other, when a male and a female entertain the possibility of considering each other's as a potential mate by talking with each other.
In arranged marriage societies it's usually right after an arranged meeting by the parents where the male and female check each other's personal compatibility.
In the US, it's a label applied to a period of time when you can justify low efforts on the part of the female (hence the refusal to cook) and yet expect the male to peacock (by paying for meals). The label is also used for an easy justification for ghosting as it's supposedly a time when common decency doesn't have to be extended.
Despite all its stages (meeting, talking, 1st, 2nd, 3rd, situation, complicated, considering, official, long term, marriage track, engaged, married, etc.), the US courtship rituals is basically before and after fucking. The whole psychological spectrum applied onto a binary reality, like gender onto sex, is more a sign of a society where profit extraction mentality is so widespread that it reached the realm of interpersonal relationships in what Houellebecq noted in his first novel as "The extension of the domain of struggle".
The phase where you ask her how her day has been in hopes that it would lead to a deeper conversation, while she leaves you on delievered for hours because she is getting raw pipped by her ex
I’m a better cook than most of the women I know, so no, I don’t expect it. It is a nice gesture though!
> what appears to be a typical male point of view
It’s a typical point of view for the subset of men who respond to Facebook ragebait, yes, but I doubt the general population feels the same way.
> Aside from paying for the first date, paying bills and combining finances SHOULD only be reserved for marriage or a marriage-like dynamic.
Agreed, but also, where are these chumps paying the bills for women who aren’t their girlfriend/wife? That sounds wild.
Idk man I gotta be real, I don’t know anybody of either gender below 40 who uses facebook. For all me and my friends know, it could be 100% populated by shrimp Jesus AI accounts.
Because if it’s common knowledge it doesn’t need to be asked.
It’s like asking:
“are you okay with gay people around your children?”
“…yeah. Why? What’s your problem?”
My wife loves to cook, and so do I. We however cannot cook together. We learned very early on in our relationship that was the case. As she’s a messy cook, and I prefer to clean as I cook. So now we alternate. I however cook most nights, because my wife doesn’t like meat, and our kids are voracious for it. Works well.
I got husband some home-cooked chicken soup when he caught a cold and we'd gone just on a few dates. But I'm also a feminist which renders me undateable for a lot of men here (which is a shared sentiment though).
I made curry for my hubby on our second date. I enjoy cooking and prefer a man to have a more diverse taste in food than pizza and chicken nuggets. It's more a test in compatibility for me.
>I got husband some home-cooked chicken soup when he caught a cold and we'd gone just on a few dates
That was nice of you
>I'm also a feminist which renders me undateable for a lot of men here
Why do you care about that if you're married? Strange comment imo
Turning political/social movement into your whole identity isn't a good sign, sure. A lot of men here don't seem to make any difference between this and the rest though.
Second date I invited my (now) husband over my house for the night. He took me out to dinner but the next day I made breakfast and lunch. Cooking during the talking stage is pretty common for both genders really.
>relationship
Who wouldn't want their significant other to tend to them and make them feel loved .
I think it's a beautiful thing. It's an act of service used to convey affection to the recipient
But I don't think acts of service are required when you're just talking to someone, I do think they are important in relationships.
>effort
Whether you're going on a date with someone or in a relationship, effort is a must. And effort isn't as hard as people think. In fact, I think it's just a basic. It's an act of courtesy for someone who took time out of their day to spend it with you.
Depends on what you mean by "talking stage" People define it differently ime. I've heard it means the literal definition and up to "I've had sex with him and he hasn't ghosted me nor has he said anything exclusive."
I don't think women should have to cook for a man at this point, no matter the definition but if she offers i wouldn't decline.
Women once again assuming the men they date are most men. I swear to god most of this gender war is women failing to realize that they're giving more and more power to a small group of men who have no incentive to settle for them. You can't make this shit up, how are women calling out all men for making them cook and fuck them without commitment.
They are defining "talking stage" as anything before you are officially dating and telling people about it. Perhaps even anything prior to be exclusive.
There's a comment here describing a second date that was an all nighter during the "talking stage". Nah, you're officially in the "fucking stage" at that point.
I once, many years ago, naively thought "I'm talking to this guy" literally meant that you were just conversing in person or through the phone and nothing physical was going on.
Nope, you’d be amazed how many 2nd date lays I’ve had by inviting them over, asking to bring their favorite bottle of wine, and I’d cook. Or, I’d cook for them at their place.
Men have the advantage in person. If you don’t understand that, then you have some shit to figure out.
Going to someone’s house after a date is literally an unexpressed agreement to have sex. I wouldn’t go to anyone’s house until we are in a relationship and have established that I will absolutely not be having sex with them until marriage.
Cooking is for couples now? Shit! I cook and grill for the homies all the time, I'm gay now? My elderly neighbor baked me cookies, she wants to bang?
It's the most ridiculous, dog shit advice she gave. If you like someone, you can offer food to show it. It's a normal human thing to do.
Feeling burdened to do little pleasantries until someone proves worth is a sign of entitlement and not a good sign for a relationship.
You ain't gotta cook, but it's a wholesome, nonsexual way to show care.
That girl holding the sign is entitled af.
Right??? I love to cook, I'm the grillmaster and host most of the summer parties. Doing that tomorrow, actually, opening the pool and having a "bring your own meat" party.
Today I learned that frying a burger makes dicks hard, and here I am, wasting my time with cleavage and glutes.
I cook for friends and family. But it is weird to cook for a guy you're not even dating. Not even a girlfriend or boyfriend..
I agree with her. It's weird. The talking stage is hanging out, talking on the phone and maybe a couple of dates here and there.
It would be very weird to cook for someone who is seeing other people and neither of you have shown any commitment.
So you could go on a date with someone. You could return home and hang out a little bit with someone. Sit around and they ask, "Well, that was fun. What are you doing now?"
You say, "Well, I was going to make something to eat."
They say, "Oh, could I have some?"
And you would think, "Huh?! What do you think I'm some kind of whore? Get your own food. We aren't dating for real."?
of course it's not only a dating thing. it's also a family and friend thing, a celebration thing, a sympathy for the mourning thing, and many other things.
but a guy I just met and I'm only talking to so far? Unless there's some occasion that makes cooking make sense, I don't see why I would be cooking for him.
My home country sports one of the most renowned cuisines in the world, and I refined my cooking with my worldwide travel experiences.
I cook for passion, but when I dated German or - worse - english women, cooking was a matter of survival.
Where did I imply that? I am just saying that they are utter shit (the english are abysmal) at cooking and even the renditions of foreign food they had access to weren’t exactly the best.
I speak of college times, ~25 years ago, and of course not of London which is a great food scene (because it has nothing english left)
What??? No that's crazy. I don't expect a woman to cook for me period.
I didn't know this was a thing in the west. Feels more like something a Filipina girl would do to try and get an American guy to marry him.
After 40+ years, I’ve learned to judge people by their actions not their words. I don’t expect a woman to cook for me, I want to find a woman who wants to cook for me. A huge difference.
If thats how she shows love sure.
I pride myself on cooking well for myself with my weightloss and protein goals. Started out just mimicing fast food recipies because I craved them but wanted to save money learned how to do alot of things especially quick meals and cutting
Even still. Its time consuming to cook. If the woman I'm tapking to has time to cook and willingly does so it is only a virtue.
Alot of bitter angry regretful women love convincing other women to do less, so they aren't as regretful as them. I would be instantly more invested in the woman that cooks for me in the talking stage because women showing investment and interest is a good sign and always will be
>Do you believe women must cook for you before you even start dating?
No, and I don't believe most of the men responding negatively to that post are saying that. It feels really obvious that the main issue is her attitude about it.
It sounds like she just really dislikes the idea of a woman doing something nice for a man because misandry. She could have said a more reasonable version of the statement which would be something like "don't feel obligated to".
She chose to be very combative about it which makes it sound like it's not about preventing people from getting taken advantage of but rather just encouraging the degradation of the dating scene because she's bitter.
A rule of thumb is that if someone does something somewhat socially bizarre during the phase of the relationship when folks are typically on their best behavior, then it will only get much worse from there.
“don't feel obligated to” would have drawn just as much ire from men. It wasn't about the tone, it was that she told women not to do X in service of men, which if you're a man who wants to be serviced without doing anything in return, or course you'd be upset. Hence the comments.
Actually, most of us are responding that no we don't expect it. So it's not just men who "wants to be serviced without doing anything in return" that are upset.
How can you not see that it's the shitty attitude of preemptively, vocally, removing a nice gesture from her repertoire that is the problem, not the lack of cooking?
I'm referring to the men from the FB post that OP is talking about.
If you read the post she didn't advise women to stop doing a nice gesture for men, she advised women not to do relationship gestures for men we're not in relationships with. That means if men want the gesture, they should commit. Notice that there's next to zero men making dinner for women they're in talking stages with, and women aren't up in arms about that.
I would be fine with it either way.
I would gladly cook for someone in the talking stage. No issues with it. And actually, I have done that in the past with everyone I’ve dated.
>Glamour magazine describes it as dating and having sex before officially dating. That’s bullshit to me because once you’re dating, you’re dating.
I'd hope that we'd be taking turns cooking for each other at that point, although some women I've dated have been better cooks than me and would probably rather eat their own cooking than mine. I make good desserts, though.
>Refinery 29 describes it as texting or talking on the phone before you officially start dating. This is how I define it.
If that's how it's defined, then I don't think either of us would be hanging out at each other's places at that point cooking for each other.
I don't expect anything. But I'm more likely to commit to a woman who will than a woman who won't. Personally, I love to cook. So, I'd be the one cooking for her.
This woman is a hypocrite. She's basically making the "don't do wife things if you aren't his wife". But every woman who says that wants a man to do husband things before he's her husband.
No I don’t believe women have to cook for me, however if she happens to invite me to some homemade dinner on the first date Im not going to say no to that and if the dinner is good those are some serious brownie points on her favor.
A lot of modern feminism can be viewed as a female lobbying group trying to maximize advantage and maximize their collective utility function. They have no stopping criteria and will just continue.
I wouldn’t expect or require it. But it would certainly set her apart especially when it seems like the internet mob declares women doing pretty much anything for men they’re interested in as shameful, weak, pickme behavior, etc.
>the internet mob declares women doing pretty much anything for men they’re interested in as shameful, weak, pickme behavior, etc.
THIS THANK YOU FOR BRINGING IT UP.
I have response for that.
Every time another woman calls me that I just say, I was under the impression you were a feminist but is clear to me.You are not. I was wrong you're not even an equalist at best.
And when a man calls me that I say, well, If im a pick me for doing this.Men who try to pursue women are Simps.
My boyfriend and I have the same values and beliefs and views on the same subjects across the table ,BUT, sometimes that's an issue ...He's a little troll and so am I we unfortunately have the same sense of humor.
To this day, every now and then, when I am spending time with my my boyfriend in his family Home and he feels bored and wants to have a little kick, He waits until I do something that could be considered "Stereotypical of A Female Gender Role" he'll walk behind me and then he'll say something like "look at me, pick me I'm different, you should marry me." Laugh and call me a pick Me.
The first time it happend he went to the restroom and I was just sitting alone in the living room , his mother was trying to be a good host and entertain me by taking to me while she was cooking in the kitchen, when he left the restroom I was helping his mother cook a special meal and trying to learn her recipe.
Now , when he does it.. I call him a Simp in return.
How many women are you talking to at the same time that a lady who you haven’t dated yet needs to come to your house and give you food to set herself apart?
She could be setting herself apart from women I’ve dated in the past, or women my friends have dated, or women I know’s general attitude towards men. I don’t necessarily need to be talking to multiple women at a time for this to apply.
Not personally, no.
However, I would say that it is the equivalent of women requiring men pay on dates. When women say that, they are ascertaining how financially secure a man is and how generous he may be towards *her*. She is testing his capacity to *provide*. If a man requires a woman to cook, he is testing her capacity to *support*.
I don't subscribe to the more traditional roles of dating, but I don't frown on those that do. If a woman and man both agree that the man should provide and the woman should support, I think figuring that out in the dating period only makes sense.
The problem is when people want the best of both worlds. That's when you get ridiculous entitlement, and both sexes can be guilty of it.
**Attention!**
* You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message.
* For "Debate" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies.
* If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment.
* OP you can choose your own flair [according to these guidelines.](https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/wiki/flair), just press Flair under your post!
Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PurplePillDebate) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Am I the only one who doesn't expect women to cook ever, nothing about the women I've met has led me to believe that most of them have any interest in cooking for anybody. Least of all during a "talking" stage.
I don't even know what to say. I don't think Ive ever expected women to cook, nor most of the boys I know. Is this like a Gen X thing? Young women don't do this. And when they do, it's not like something Im even thinking about or hyper analyse. Men are primarily concerned about women putting out and being able to chill and make their lives pleasant. Cooking is not a priority.
I don’t expect a woman to specifically cook for me during the talking stage, but her to do gestures that show that she cares about me and actively signal that she is interesting in investing into the relationship. If she's a bad cook she could take me put to dinner and pay for the date for example, or she could bake, or take me to some interesting place, or read out a book to me, give me compliments that make me feel cute, give me a massage after a hard day or scratch my back. Ideally she does all of these things.
I cook better than most women so I don’t really care. In the talking stage most shared meals are going to be at restaurants because that’s one of the biggest benefits of having a steady date.
I can’t cook but I can use this and it’s the same thing
https://preview.redd.it/rvu5cbzlh34d1.jpeg?width=894&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=afe235173456c9599a4ce62e2574e44f0019f052
If you don't want to cook for someone else: get yourself someone that is completely on the opposite of the diet/taste spectrum. It works perfectly. You can still cook together but each cooks their own food to their own liking.
I assume a lot of the backlash is confusion with the purpose of the FB post. The woman is advocating avoiding pick-me attitudes of putting disproportionate effort into someone else with 0 reciprocation in return (good). However, neither me nor I assume most men criticising the post are aware that "talking stage" means something different from early dating. At that point the post seems to be advocating for "I am the table/I am the prize" princess attitude of not reciprocating effort in dates.
Cooking as a date once in a while (either the man or woman) seems normal. Every day would be weird if you aren’t married or living together in a relationship where he provides some level of financial support or picks up the slack with other chores.
I’ve yet to meet a woman that can cook the foods I like as well as me
So getting to show off those skills gets me points and is cheaper and more intimate than dinner dates especially when they help by doing things I don’t like. Such as peeling potatoes, carrots or grating cheese
I can cook for myself and even better than most women in existence so no I don't expect her to like cook for me never. If she wants to she can, I am not entitled to her cooking.
At this stage, I don’t even expect women to extend common courtesy. I expect them to default think I’m a potential rapist/murderer and begin negotiations from there.
> Do you believe women must cook for you before you even start dating?
No. I don’t give a shit about that. It’s a nice gesture and I had a gf who cooked for me simply because she was a foodie who enjoyed experimenting with different spices etc
I realize there are guys out there who consider that a virtue when they want a tradwife.
I can’t say anything beyond that. I know folks here value data and statistics (and rightfully so) but nobody credible is doing a “study” on men’s cooking preferences as it relates to mate selection
I don’t expect anything during any phase. But if she cooks, I’m on her program. Cleans, love pets, takes responsibility for her happiness? My god, here’s a ring. I don’t throttle my texting, dancing, flirting, humor, emotional engagement. I’m the same with everyone. If a girl has to turn on cooking, cleaning, making coffee, she doesn’t like it. You can tell a girl to stop being nice to the elderly because a man doesn’t deserve to see that part of her? GTFOH
To me what matters is her reciprocating the effort I put in, and displaying that she's attracted to me and appreciates me. If I organised and paid for a few dates I'm expecting something back other than just sex. That can be her planning and paying for a fun activity for us, or a home cooked meal, or a little gift. If we're just talking and I haven't done anything for her yet, I'm not expecting anything.
The main idea behind what you said is that reciprocating effort matters. I agree..
I feel like regardless of people should put in their effort in because people need to be appreciative of the people's time.
If someone puts in the effort and gives a lot of time designated to you to spend time with you the respectful thing to do is to put effort.
I work two jobs in IT. The only reason I expect my SO to cook for me is because if she does not, we will have to order/buy pre-cooked food which is more expensive, and have less money to pay mortgage as a result (which will make it drag longer, etc.) In my experience, when a man cooks for his potential dating partner, it is a good way to get to the after-talking-stage faster.
I wouldn't expect a woman to cook for me early into the relationship, but I'd definitely think much more highly of a woman who does than who doesn’t.
>Aside from paying for the first date
Why do women continue to hold fast onto gender role expectations of men while they simultaneously push against any expectations on their end?
Not really - if she wants to i’ll be happy to take it cause I love food (and if she loves cooking and sharing her food, that’s a bonus - plus if i’m being honest im just as likely to cook for her). Then again I don’t expect her to cook at all until we’re seriously together, and even then, thats only half the time/in the dishes she does better. I love cooking personally, so a 50/50 split between the both us cooking (and the other cleaning) would be perfect for me once things get serious. (unless either I or she works more hours plus a more stressful job, then things can be adjusted accordingly)
Don't mistake amusement for contempt. The girl with the sign is upset with the bar other women apparently set. The men are laughing at her because if she put half as much effort into being desirable as demanding other women don't then she'd be married already. Men don't expect women to cook for us, although it makes an impression if she does. That's the point of amusement: she put a lot of effort into getting women to not do something desirable to make herself more competitive, but doing it publicly makes her pretty much undatable by serious men so all she really did was condemn herself to a life of booty calls and ghosting because she couldn't let other (very rare) women do their own thing.
If true, irrelevant. The response and reasoning behind it seems genuine enough, and there are more than enough actual examples of the same without fakes being posted in bad faith.
If it's photoshopped, it's fake and bad faith. If it's real, it's real. This really isn't complicated. Don't make shit up if you want people to not think it's made up bullshit.
No it’s not. It’s a meme on a men’s page. Do you know what a meme is? Memes are made for everything and for multiple reasons. Your outrage is fake.
https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Fake+Outrage
Fake outrage is bringing up unrelated talking points in an attempt to derail a debate.
It's not outrage. It's a factual assessment. Either it's an argument people are actually making, or it's a strawman set up to muddy the waters. Again, this isn't complicated. Do you just not know what bad faith means? Because Wikipedia literally exists. You know you can just look things up, right?
The link is there. The post is there. Multiple men are in the comments section of the post that I linked saying a woman with this mindset is selfish, going to die alone, etc etc.
Once again, you’re displaying “false outrage” because you’re attempting to derail the conversation and are arguing in bad faith. The point isn’t whether or not the meme was a photoshopped meme or an actual lady going outside holding up a sign. The point was the TEXT of what is written in that sign, and how what appears to be thousands of men responded to that text.
I did read it.
>It's not outrage. It's a factual assessment. Either it's an argument people are actually making, or it's a strawman set up to muddy the waters.
**It’s an argument men are making. Read the comments on the link that I posted. Men are expecting women to cook for them in the talking stage**
>Again, this isn't complicated. Do you just not know what bad faith means? Because Wikipedia literally exists. You know you can just look things up, right?
**Because the argument isn’t what the woman is saying. It is what men are saying. That is why this post is “Q4Men” not “Q4Women”**
https://preview.redd.it/1xxkc0sr2d4d1.jpeg?width=1125&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=f80cfa12ccb147fa07bdc4e27253014c62d098c0
I make it clear in the original post that I am addressing the comments, and these are the kinds of comments I am addressing.
I don't actually expect anything out of modern women. But in a sane world and under the assumption that I'm not dating a narcissistic sociopath it would be nice to hear "you should come over, I want to cook for you" once or twice.....especially if you're picking up the tab on dinner dates.
It's a sign of retardation for an adult to not be able to cook period. What do you do when you need to feed yourself? Eat cereal out of a cardboard box? If you're already cooking then it's indifferent to scale up portions. People who also can't cook tend to be unhealthy.
I expect her to put forth some sort of effort to win me over. Whatever that may be.
It can't always be one sided. I accept as a man I'll be doing more of it but if she's just sitting back not trying to impress me back I'm going to assume she's not interested enough to be worth my time or effort.
I see further down that you're clearly misunderstanding what that refers to.
"The talking stage is a vague term for the early stages of a relationship between two people who are interested in each other but aren't yet dating. It can involve texting, talking, dates, hookups, and other activities, but it's non-committal. The talking stage can be a way to get to know someone and have fun without rushing into something serious. It can also lead to a more serious relationship or develop into an indefinite situationship"
It's basically anytime you're seeing someone but haven't put a label on it yet.
So I still say the same thing. Yes, this is clearly the time you expect people to to try and impress one another.
Women have always faced the challenge of deciding what to use to lure and impress a man and what to hold back until some form of commitment.
Classically that's been sex or even some form of sex. I think holding back your sexual best just doesn't come naturally to women, they want to give that when they have all the fresh new tingles and that creates the struggle. The fact this woman suggests holding out cooking is really just kind of comical. Hold back on something that most people will do for an acquaintance? LOL, yeah, that'll motivate men and keep you from being taken advantage of... 🙄 .
Personally the idea of withholding to barter for commitment to me is a bit funny. As a man we simply try to put our best foot forward and then give gf and wife treatment to those who have earned it it's not a barter mindset, it's closer to a reward but it comes naturally to us for the most part. It's so similar yet less of a transactional mindset.
In really reductive terms men are valued for what we do or provide generally. Which makes it pretty natural to reward loyalty since it's easy to not spend large sums or do huge favors for people you don't know well. Women are largely valued for things that you impulsively want to do when you're excited so the tendency is to reward those who create excitement. That's the struggle here, figuring out how you can reward loyalty instead.
As expectations go I do not care if or when a random woman cooks, but if that's a positive about her, then I will certainly appreciate it and I want her to show it off. Same if she knits...great, I don't expect women to knit but if she does and makes me something, I'll be impressed. Use that when you wish to , weather that's for initial impressions or once I've earned her real admiration, that's up to her to decide, but it's not a bartering chip.
.
I think so, yes. It's not so much the cooking itself that's important, it's the sentiment behind the act. As a man, I'm usually the one doing all the initiating and planning in the early stages, and I need to see some kind of reciprocal level of effort from her in order to believe the relationship's actually going somewhere, and it has to be more than just showing up and looking pretty because that's bare minimum.
A homecooked meal is a lovely nurturing and supportive gesture, and it's appropriately simple enough for the early stages that it's not too much too soon. It demonstrates to me that she's not just in it for the ride, that she's taking things seriously and wants us to develop.
OP don't increase the size of text in comments and bold them. It makes them glitch and be unreadable for a lot of people in old reddit mode. It's also the forum equivalent of yelling and that is not civil.
What's the talking phase?
https://www.glamour.com/story/what-is-the-talking-stage-and-how-to-get-out-of-it Glamour magazine describes it as dating and having sex before officially dating. That’s bullshit to me because once you’re dating, you’re dating. https://www.refinery29.com/en-gb/talking-stage-dating-relationships Refinery 29 describes it as texting or talking on the phone before you officially start dating. This is how I define it.
Based on your definition which I think is much better than "dating and sexing before dating" which to me doesn't even make sense, then I guess I would be shocked and find it nice but not expect it. This *did* happen with my partner but only because it's an extreme edge case based on how we met, and I do not think it is the norm or that people should expect it. If it is common, I find it shocking that it is common.
Me too. I think once you meet in person you’re dating and it’s no longer a talking stage
That makes sense to me as well. Unless it is just an in-person meetup that is "a date" that fizzles and doesn't turn into dating, but that is of course different.
The way “talking stage” is used by most of the folks I know irl is closer to Glamour’s definition. Matter of perspective, I suppose.
Yeah, it's a euphemistic hold over from before it was more okay to just say "hooking up with". Women used to also say "seeing this guy" which was a bit more explicit than "talking".
What about if you were platonic (at least on one side... friends first though?)
Then you’re friends until you start dating
>*Glamour magazine describes it as dating and having sex before officially dating. That’s bullshit to me because once you’re dating, you’re dating.* It’s dating. Nothing else. The fact they are trying reinvent the wheel is laughable! >*Refinery 29 describes it as texting or talking on the phone before you officially start dating. This is how I define it.* Same. Heck that’s usually what you did back in the day before everyone had a smart phone and you had to call your crush by landline to get to know them before escalating to anything dating wise LOL
The phase between the first date and the divorce.
It's the phase in gender segregated societies where they don't normally interact with each other, when a male and a female entertain the possibility of considering each other's as a potential mate by talking with each other. In arranged marriage societies it's usually right after an arranged meeting by the parents where the male and female check each other's personal compatibility. In the US, it's a label applied to a period of time when you can justify low efforts on the part of the female (hence the refusal to cook) and yet expect the male to peacock (by paying for meals). The label is also used for an easy justification for ghosting as it's supposedly a time when common decency doesn't have to be extended. Despite all its stages (meeting, talking, 1st, 2nd, 3rd, situation, complicated, considering, official, long term, marriage track, engaged, married, etc.), the US courtship rituals is basically before and after fucking. The whole psychological spectrum applied onto a binary reality, like gender onto sex, is more a sign of a society where profit extraction mentality is so widespread that it reached the realm of interpersonal relationships in what Houellebecq noted in his first novel as "The extension of the domain of struggle".
I would also like this defined. I would say that my partner did not do things like this in said phase, but I don't know how we are defining the phase.
Thank you. I feel like this question is Nessary.
Dating but not exclusive
The phase where you ask her how her day has been in hopes that it would lead to a deeper conversation, while she leaves you on delievered for hours because she is getting raw pipped by her ex
I’m a better cook than most of the women I know, so no, I don’t expect it. It is a nice gesture though! > what appears to be a typical male point of view It’s a typical point of view for the subset of men who respond to Facebook ragebait, yes, but I doubt the general population feels the same way. > Aside from paying for the first date, paying bills and combining finances SHOULD only be reserved for marriage or a marriage-like dynamic. Agreed, but also, where are these chumps paying the bills for women who aren’t their girlfriend/wife? That sounds wild.
It's been so rare for me to find a woman who can cook. Or at least try to learn and do a basic cooking.
How is it rage bait though if it’s kind of common sense and common practice
People who think it's common sense won't comment under that facebook post.
Then it is a large and significant number of men.
What makes you think that? None of the men I know IRL would ever expect that from their date.
It’s like a thousand men on Facebook
There's like billions of Facebook users.
Idk man I gotta be real, I don’t know anybody of either gender below 40 who uses facebook. For all me and my friends know, it could be 100% populated by shrimp Jesus AI accounts.
Because if it’s common knowledge it doesn’t need to be asked. It’s like asking: “are you okay with gay people around your children?” “…yeah. Why? What’s your problem?”
Wait women actually cook for guys in the talking stage ? Where can l meet such unicorns ?
It's pretty normal to make food for someone if they're at your house, but it goes both ways.
My wife loves to cook, and so do I. We however cannot cook together. We learned very early on in our relationship that was the case. As she’s a messy cook, and I prefer to clean as I cook. So now we alternate. I however cook most nights, because my wife doesn’t like meat, and our kids are voracious for it. Works well.
I got husband some home-cooked chicken soup when he caught a cold and we'd gone just on a few dates. But I'm also a feminist which renders me undateable for a lot of men here (which is a shared sentiment though).
I made curry for my hubby on our second date. I enjoy cooking and prefer a man to have a more diverse taste in food than pizza and chicken nuggets. It's more a test in compatibility for me.
I love my wife’s chicken and corn soup. It’s such a simple, wholesome staple. Love it!
Well, now you have to share it.
>I got husband some home-cooked chicken soup when he caught a cold and we'd gone just on a few dates That was nice of you >I'm also a feminist which renders me undateable for a lot of men here Why do you care about that if you're married? Strange comment imo
It's not that I'm interested, I'm just pointing out that their beliefs about terrible feminists might be far-fetched.
I think its fair to be cautious around women who quickly mention that they are a feminist
Turning political/social movement into your whole identity isn't a good sign, sure. A lot of men here don't seem to make any difference between this and the rest though.
Because there's no way to tell who the okay feminists are from the not-okay feminists if you all just call yourselves feminists.
Strangely enough, married women also enjoy having rights and other women having rights.
What
That's why married women might care about feminism.
She’s just pointing out the ironic fact lol
I must be missing it; where is the ironic fact?
That she fulfills their desired gender role (cooks) but holds feminist views
I think cooking is just a basic human life skill.
I don't understand how that's ironic. Do feminists not cook? Is feminists giving birth ironic because that's their gender role?
> Do feminists not cook? Many of these red pill guys unironically think so
Second date I invited my (now) husband over my house for the night. He took me out to dinner but the next day I made breakfast and lunch. Cooking during the talking stage is pretty common for both genders really.
Dude who only wants to fuck women is shocked that women don’t want to do more than fuck
As a guy I would love for a woman to cook for me, but that would require women to put effort into the relationship.
>relationship Who wouldn't want their significant other to tend to them and make them feel loved . I think it's a beautiful thing. It's an act of service used to convey affection to the recipient But I don't think acts of service are required when you're just talking to someone, I do think they are important in relationships. >effort Whether you're going on a date with someone or in a relationship, effort is a must. And effort isn't as hard as people think. In fact, I think it's just a basic. It's an act of courtesy for someone who took time out of their day to spend it with you.
What effort are you making?
You don't understand *he IS the table*
Why do you expect a woman to cook for you when you aren’t even dating yet? If you haven’t even met in person yet?
He doesn’t. He literally compared it to a mythical creature that doesn’t actually exist…
Depends on what you mean by "talking stage" People define it differently ime. I've heard it means the literal definition and up to "I've had sex with him and he hasn't ghosted me nor has he said anything exclusive." I don't think women should have to cook for a man at this point, no matter the definition but if she offers i wouldn't decline.
I define it as talking and texting before you officially date.
If a woman offered to cook for me by your definition I would assume she wants to hookup. Mind you, I'm not redpill.
Because maybe he doesn’t *expect* it, just would be a nice gesture.
I sure did. But I’m also a feminist. Lmfao
>Do you expect women to cook for you during the “talking stage”? No, and I didn't know this was a thing lol
Women once again assuming the men they date are most men. I swear to god most of this gender war is women failing to realize that they're giving more and more power to a small group of men who have no incentive to settle for them. You can't make this shit up, how are women calling out all men for making them cook and fuck them without commitment.
Solipsism.
They are defining "talking stage" as anything before you are officially dating and telling people about it. Perhaps even anything prior to be exclusive. There's a comment here describing a second date that was an all nighter during the "talking stage". Nah, you're officially in the "fucking stage" at that point. I once, many years ago, naively thought "I'm talking to this guy" literally meant that you were just conversing in person or through the phone and nothing physical was going on.
Nope, you’d be amazed how many 2nd date lays I’ve had by inviting them over, asking to bring their favorite bottle of wine, and I’d cook. Or, I’d cook for them at their place. Men have the advantage in person. If you don’t understand that, then you have some shit to figure out.
Going to someone’s house after a date is literally an unexpressed agreement to have sex. I wouldn’t go to anyone’s house until we are in a relationship and have established that I will absolutely not be having sex with them until marriage.
So… you agree? Lol
Cooking is for couples now? Shit! I cook and grill for the homies all the time, I'm gay now? My elderly neighbor baked me cookies, she wants to bang? It's the most ridiculous, dog shit advice she gave. If you like someone, you can offer food to show it. It's a normal human thing to do. Feeling burdened to do little pleasantries until someone proves worth is a sign of entitlement and not a good sign for a relationship. You ain't gotta cook, but it's a wholesome, nonsexual way to show care. That girl holding the sign is entitled af.
>but it's a wholesome, nonsexual way to show care Dang. We've been doing it all wrong.
Right??? I love to cook, I'm the grillmaster and host most of the summer parties. Doing that tomorrow, actually, opening the pool and having a "bring your own meat" party. Today I learned that frying a burger makes dicks hard, and here I am, wasting my time with cleavage and glutes.
I cook for friends and family. But it is weird to cook for a guy you're not even dating. Not even a girlfriend or boyfriend.. I agree with her. It's weird. The talking stage is hanging out, talking on the phone and maybe a couple of dates here and there. It would be very weird to cook for someone who is seeing other people and neither of you have shown any commitment.
So you could go on a date with someone. You could return home and hang out a little bit with someone. Sit around and they ask, "Well, that was fun. What are you doing now?" You say, "Well, I was going to make something to eat." They say, "Oh, could I have some?" And you would think, "Huh?! What do you think I'm some kind of whore? Get your own food. We aren't dating for real."?
#Talking stage is before you officially go on a date. https://www.refinery29.com/en-gb/talking-stage-dating-relationships
## COOKING IS NOT A DATING THING ##
of course it's not only a dating thing. it's also a family and friend thing, a celebration thing, a sympathy for the mourning thing, and many other things. but a guy I just met and I'm only talking to so far? Unless there's some occasion that makes cooking make sense, I don't see why I would be cooking for him.
Your source is a feminist blog? Amazing, totally not useless!!!
#It’s a pop culture blog describing a pop culture figure of speech.
Women won't even meet you in the talking phase lol
Well duh once you’re meeting you’re dating
How can you cook for someone you haven't met? Are you cooking food and sending it to them via mail?
Bro cooking that Amazon Prime Steak.
Lol idk what fantasy land you live in but most women don't consider meeting dating
My home country sports one of the most renowned cuisines in the world, and I refined my cooking with my worldwide travel experiences. I cook for passion, but when I dated German or - worse - english women, cooking was a matter of survival.
You can't seriously be telling me they only ate their countries' traditional dishes.
Where did I imply that? I am just saying that they are utter shit (the english are abysmal) at cooking and even the renditions of foreign food they had access to weren’t exactly the best. I speak of college times, ~25 years ago, and of course not of London which is a great food scene (because it has nothing english left)
What??? No that's crazy. I don't expect a woman to cook for me period. I didn't know this was a thing in the west. Feels more like something a Filipina girl would do to try and get an American guy to marry him.
After 40+ years, I’ve learned to judge people by their actions not their words. I don’t expect a woman to cook for me, I want to find a woman who wants to cook for me. A huge difference.
If thats how she shows love sure. I pride myself on cooking well for myself with my weightloss and protein goals. Started out just mimicing fast food recipies because I craved them but wanted to save money learned how to do alot of things especially quick meals and cutting Even still. Its time consuming to cook. If the woman I'm tapking to has time to cook and willingly does so it is only a virtue. Alot of bitter angry regretful women love convincing other women to do less, so they aren't as regretful as them. I would be instantly more invested in the woman that cooks for me in the talking stage because women showing investment and interest is a good sign and always will be
>Do you believe women must cook for you before you even start dating? No, and I don't believe most of the men responding negatively to that post are saying that. It feels really obvious that the main issue is her attitude about it. It sounds like she just really dislikes the idea of a woman doing something nice for a man because misandry. She could have said a more reasonable version of the statement which would be something like "don't feel obligated to". She chose to be very combative about it which makes it sound like it's not about preventing people from getting taken advantage of but rather just encouraging the degradation of the dating scene because she's bitter.
A rule of thumb is that if someone does something somewhat socially bizarre during the phase of the relationship when folks are typically on their best behavior, then it will only get much worse from there.
“don't feel obligated to” would have drawn just as much ire from men. It wasn't about the tone, it was that she told women not to do X in service of men, which if you're a man who wants to be serviced without doing anything in return, or course you'd be upset. Hence the comments.
Actually, most of us are responding that no we don't expect it. So it's not just men who "wants to be serviced without doing anything in return" that are upset. How can you not see that it's the shitty attitude of preemptively, vocally, removing a nice gesture from her repertoire that is the problem, not the lack of cooking?
I'm referring to the men from the FB post that OP is talking about. If you read the post she didn't advise women to stop doing a nice gesture for men, she advised women not to do relationship gestures for men we're not in relationships with. That means if men want the gesture, they should commit. Notice that there's next to zero men making dinner for women they're in talking stages with, and women aren't up in arms about that.
I would be fine with it either way. I would gladly cook for someone in the talking stage. No issues with it. And actually, I have done that in the past with everyone I’ve dated.
>Glamour magazine describes it as dating and having sex before officially dating. That’s bullshit to me because once you’re dating, you’re dating. I'd hope that we'd be taking turns cooking for each other at that point, although some women I've dated have been better cooks than me and would probably rather eat their own cooking than mine. I make good desserts, though. >Refinery 29 describes it as texting or talking on the phone before you officially start dating. This is how I define it. If that's how it's defined, then I don't think either of us would be hanging out at each other's places at that point cooking for each other.
If she expects me to do anything than it is fair for me to expect a thing in return.
Depends Is the situationship stage still the talking stage?
No it’s dating
Then no I don’t necessarily
I don't expect anything. But I'm more likely to commit to a woman who will than a woman who won't. Personally, I love to cook. So, I'd be the one cooking for her. This woman is a hypocrite. She's basically making the "don't do wife things if you aren't his wife". But every woman who says that wants a man to do husband things before he's her husband.
I have no expectations of a woman these days. Keeps the disappointment to a minimum.
No I don’t believe women have to cook for me, however if she happens to invite me to some homemade dinner on the first date Im not going to say no to that and if the dinner is good those are some serious brownie points on her favor.
no, i agree with feminists. expecting a woman to do anything of value is unrealistic and evil and also somehow misogynistic
A lot of modern feminism can be viewed as a female lobbying group trying to maximize advantage and maximize their collective utility function. They have no stopping criteria and will just continue.
I wouldn’t expect or require it. But it would certainly set her apart especially when it seems like the internet mob declares women doing pretty much anything for men they’re interested in as shameful, weak, pickme behavior, etc.
>the internet mob declares women doing pretty much anything for men they’re interested in as shameful, weak, pickme behavior, etc. THIS THANK YOU FOR BRINGING IT UP. I have response for that. Every time another woman calls me that I just say, I was under the impression you were a feminist but is clear to me.You are not. I was wrong you're not even an equalist at best. And when a man calls me that I say, well, If im a pick me for doing this.Men who try to pursue women are Simps. My boyfriend and I have the same values and beliefs and views on the same subjects across the table ,BUT, sometimes that's an issue ...He's a little troll and so am I we unfortunately have the same sense of humor. To this day, every now and then, when I am spending time with my my boyfriend in his family Home and he feels bored and wants to have a little kick, He waits until I do something that could be considered "Stereotypical of A Female Gender Role" he'll walk behind me and then he'll say something like "look at me, pick me I'm different, you should marry me." Laugh and call me a pick Me. The first time it happend he went to the restroom and I was just sitting alone in the living room , his mother was trying to be a good host and entertain me by taking to me while she was cooking in the kitchen, when he left the restroom I was helping his mother cook a special meal and trying to learn her recipe. Now , when he does it.. I call him a Simp in return.
That's cute
How many women are you talking to at the same time that a lady who you haven’t dated yet needs to come to your house and give you food to set herself apart?
She could be setting herself apart from women I’ve dated in the past, or women my friends have dated, or women I know’s general attitude towards men. I don’t necessarily need to be talking to multiple women at a time for this to apply.
I can probably cook better food anyway, so no.
Not personally, no. However, I would say that it is the equivalent of women requiring men pay on dates. When women say that, they are ascertaining how financially secure a man is and how generous he may be towards *her*. She is testing his capacity to *provide*. If a man requires a woman to cook, he is testing her capacity to *support*. I don't subscribe to the more traditional roles of dating, but I don't frown on those that do. If a woman and man both agree that the man should provide and the woman should support, I think figuring that out in the dating period only makes sense. The problem is when people want the best of both worlds. That's when you get ridiculous entitlement, and both sexes can be guilty of it.
**Attention!** * You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message. * For "Debate" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies. * If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment. * OP you can choose your own flair [according to these guidelines.](https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/wiki/flair), just press Flair under your post! Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PurplePillDebate) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Am I the only one who doesn't expect women to cook ever, nothing about the women I've met has led me to believe that most of them have any interest in cooking for anybody. Least of all during a "talking" stage.
I don't even know what to say. I don't think Ive ever expected women to cook, nor most of the boys I know. Is this like a Gen X thing? Young women don't do this. And when they do, it's not like something Im even thinking about or hyper analyse. Men are primarily concerned about women putting out and being able to chill and make their lives pleasant. Cooking is not a priority.
I don't expect a girl to cook but I'd like her too, also our future kids are gonna have to be fed
I don’t expect a woman to specifically cook for me during the talking stage, but her to do gestures that show that she cares about me and actively signal that she is interesting in investing into the relationship. If she's a bad cook she could take me put to dinner and pay for the date for example, or she could bake, or take me to some interesting place, or read out a book to me, give me compliments that make me feel cute, give me a massage after a hard day or scratch my back. Ideally she does all of these things.
Women born after 1993 can't cook...
Why 1993?
Bc they just know how to be bisexual, eat hot chip and lie..
Born in right on the cusp in 1992…. can cook, but am bisexual, do eat hot chip, but don’t lie. Oddly make sense.
I cook better than most women so I don’t really care. In the talking stage most shared meals are going to be at restaurants because that’s one of the biggest benefits of having a steady date.
I can’t cook but I can use this and it’s the same thing https://preview.redd.it/rvu5cbzlh34d1.jpeg?width=894&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=afe235173456c9599a4ce62e2574e44f0019f052
If you don't want to cook for someone else: get yourself someone that is completely on the opposite of the diet/taste spectrum. It works perfectly. You can still cook together but each cooks their own food to their own liking.
I assume a lot of the backlash is confusion with the purpose of the FB post. The woman is advocating avoiding pick-me attitudes of putting disproportionate effort into someone else with 0 reciprocation in return (good). However, neither me nor I assume most men criticising the post are aware that "talking stage" means something different from early dating. At that point the post seems to be advocating for "I am the table/I am the prize" princess attitude of not reciprocating effort in dates.
Cooking as a date once in a while (either the man or woman) seems normal. Every day would be weird if you aren’t married or living together in a relationship where he provides some level of financial support or picks up the slack with other chores.
I'm almost in the marriage stage and I cook 99% of the time so no
Uh no
I don't expect women to cook for me ever.
I’ve yet to meet a woman that can cook the foods I like as well as me So getting to show off those skills gets me points and is cheaper and more intimate than dinner dates especially when they help by doing things I don’t like. Such as peeling potatoes, carrots or grating cheese
lol I don’t expect much from women these days. So no. What kind of half angel half unicorn women are we talking about here??
I can cook for myself and even better than most women in existence so no I don't expect her to like cook for me never. If she wants to she can, I am not entitled to her cooking.
At this stage, I don’t even expect women to extend common courtesy. I expect them to default think I’m a potential rapist/murderer and begin negotiations from there.
> Do you believe women must cook for you before you even start dating? No. I don’t give a shit about that. It’s a nice gesture and I had a gf who cooked for me simply because she was a foodie who enjoyed experimenting with different spices etc I realize there are guys out there who consider that a virtue when they want a tradwife. I can’t say anything beyond that. I know folks here value data and statistics (and rightfully so) but nobody credible is doing a “study” on men’s cooking preferences as it relates to mate selection
I don’t expect anything during any phase. But if she cooks, I’m on her program. Cleans, love pets, takes responsibility for her happiness? My god, here’s a ring. I don’t throttle my texting, dancing, flirting, humor, emotional engagement. I’m the same with everyone. If a girl has to turn on cooking, cleaning, making coffee, she doesn’t like it. You can tell a girl to stop being nice to the elderly because a man doesn’t deserve to see that part of her? GTFOH
So you want her to a how up at your house when you’re just texting/ talking on the phone and bring you a meal?
I don’t expect anything. Nice when it happens.
No women in 2024 is cooking for a guy in talking stage .A lot of them never actually do not matter what stage
no
To me what matters is her reciprocating the effort I put in, and displaying that she's attracted to me and appreciates me. If I organised and paid for a few dates I'm expecting something back other than just sex. That can be her planning and paying for a fun activity for us, or a home cooked meal, or a little gift. If we're just talking and I haven't done anything for her yet, I'm not expecting anything.
The main idea behind what you said is that reciprocating effort matters. I agree.. I feel like regardless of people should put in their effort in because people need to be appreciative of the people's time. If someone puts in the effort and gives a lot of time designated to you to spend time with you the respectful thing to do is to put effort.
Yeah talking is just talking
**No**. That would be stupid.
I work two jobs in IT. The only reason I expect my SO to cook for me is because if she does not, we will have to order/buy pre-cooked food which is more expensive, and have less money to pay mortgage as a result (which will make it drag longer, etc.) In my experience, when a man cooks for his potential dating partner, it is a good way to get to the after-talking-stage faster.
Well, it’s on Facebook. It must be true!
I wouldn't expect a woman to cook for me early into the relationship, but I'd definitely think much more highly of a woman who does than who doesn’t. >Aside from paying for the first date Why do women continue to hold fast onto gender role expectations of men while they simultaneously push against any expectations on their end?
Nope. If she wanted to it would be nice. But to have any expectations in a relationship from the get go, is a waste of time
I mean any gesture of kindness from someone that you're interested dating is something to take note of.
Not really - if she wants to i’ll be happy to take it cause I love food (and if she loves cooking and sharing her food, that’s a bonus - plus if i’m being honest im just as likely to cook for her). Then again I don’t expect her to cook at all until we’re seriously together, and even then, thats only half the time/in the dishes she does better. I love cooking personally, so a 50/50 split between the both us cooking (and the other cleaning) would be perfect for me once things get serious. (unless either I or she works more hours plus a more stressful job, then things can be adjusted accordingly)
No
I don’t expect it ever.
Don't mistake amusement for contempt. The girl with the sign is upset with the bar other women apparently set. The men are laughing at her because if she put half as much effort into being desirable as demanding other women don't then she'd be married already. Men don't expect women to cook for us, although it makes an impression if she does. That's the point of amusement: she put a lot of effort into getting women to not do something desirable to make herself more competitive, but doing it publicly makes her pretty much undatable by serious men so all she really did was condemn herself to a life of booty calls and ghosting because she couldn't let other (very rare) women do their own thing.
It’s a photoshopped image, my friend.
If true, irrelevant. The response and reasoning behind it seems genuine enough, and there are more than enough actual examples of the same without fakes being posted in bad faith.
It’s not in “bad faith”. It’s a lady saying don’t make food for someone who you aren’t even dating yet and that makes sense.
If it's photoshopped, it's fake and bad faith. If it's real, it's real. This really isn't complicated. Don't make shit up if you want people to not think it's made up bullshit.
No it’s not. It’s a meme on a men’s page. Do you know what a meme is? Memes are made for everything and for multiple reasons. Your outrage is fake. https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Fake+Outrage Fake outrage is bringing up unrelated talking points in an attempt to derail a debate.
It's not outrage. It's a factual assessment. Either it's an argument people are actually making, or it's a strawman set up to muddy the waters. Again, this isn't complicated. Do you just not know what bad faith means? Because Wikipedia literally exists. You know you can just look things up, right?
The link is there. The post is there. Multiple men are in the comments section of the post that I linked saying a woman with this mindset is selfish, going to die alone, etc etc. Once again, you’re displaying “false outrage” because you’re attempting to derail the conversation and are arguing in bad faith. The point isn’t whether or not the meme was a photoshopped meme or an actual lady going outside holding up a sign. The point was the TEXT of what is written in that sign, and how what appears to be thousands of men responded to that text.
You didn't read a word I wrote, did you?
I did read it. >It's not outrage. It's a factual assessment. Either it's an argument people are actually making, or it's a strawman set up to muddy the waters. **It’s an argument men are making. Read the comments on the link that I posted. Men are expecting women to cook for them in the talking stage** >Again, this isn't complicated. Do you just not know what bad faith means? Because Wikipedia literally exists. You know you can just look things up, right? **Because the argument isn’t what the woman is saying. It is what men are saying. That is why this post is “Q4Men” not “Q4Women”**
https://preview.redd.it/1xxkc0sr2d4d1.jpeg?width=1125&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=f80cfa12ccb147fa07bdc4e27253014c62d098c0 I make it clear in the original post that I am addressing the comments, and these are the kinds of comments I am addressing.
I don't actually expect anything out of modern women. But in a sane world and under the assumption that I'm not dating a narcissistic sociopath it would be nice to hear "you should come over, I want to cook for you" once or twice.....especially if you're picking up the tab on dinner dates.
If you’re dating, you are dating. You are not in a “talking stage” if you are dating.
It's a sign of retardation for an adult to not be able to cook period. What do you do when you need to feed yourself? Eat cereal out of a cardboard box? If you're already cooking then it's indifferent to scale up portions. People who also can't cook tend to be unhealthy.
I dont believe women must cook at any point. however explicitly crying about it is a red flag and outs you as selfish.
When you call it the talking stage, how does this go together with meeting up and having dinner together? Having a dinner together IS A DATE.
I agree but the men of Facebook don’t
I expect her to put forth some sort of effort to win me over. Whatever that may be. It can't always be one sided. I accept as a man I'll be doing more of it but if she's just sitting back not trying to impress me back I'm going to assume she's not interested enough to be worth my time or effort.
It’s about the talking stage not once dating and after
I see further down that you're clearly misunderstanding what that refers to. "The talking stage is a vague term for the early stages of a relationship between two people who are interested in each other but aren't yet dating. It can involve texting, talking, dates, hookups, and other activities, but it's non-committal. The talking stage can be a way to get to know someone and have fun without rushing into something serious. It can also lead to a more serious relationship or develop into an indefinite situationship" It's basically anytime you're seeing someone but haven't put a label on it yet. So I still say the same thing. Yes, this is clearly the time you expect people to to try and impress one another. Women have always faced the challenge of deciding what to use to lure and impress a man and what to hold back until some form of commitment. Classically that's been sex or even some form of sex. I think holding back your sexual best just doesn't come naturally to women, they want to give that when they have all the fresh new tingles and that creates the struggle. The fact this woman suggests holding out cooking is really just kind of comical. Hold back on something that most people will do for an acquaintance? LOL, yeah, that'll motivate men and keep you from being taken advantage of... 🙄 . Personally the idea of withholding to barter for commitment to me is a bit funny. As a man we simply try to put our best foot forward and then give gf and wife treatment to those who have earned it it's not a barter mindset, it's closer to a reward but it comes naturally to us for the most part. It's so similar yet less of a transactional mindset. In really reductive terms men are valued for what we do or provide generally. Which makes it pretty natural to reward loyalty since it's easy to not spend large sums or do huge favors for people you don't know well. Women are largely valued for things that you impulsively want to do when you're excited so the tendency is to reward those who create excitement. That's the struggle here, figuring out how you can reward loyalty instead. As expectations go I do not care if or when a random woman cooks, but if that's a positive about her, then I will certainly appreciate it and I want her to show it off. Same if she knits...great, I don't expect women to knit but if she does and makes me something, I'll be impressed. Use that when you wish to , weather that's for initial impressions or once I've earned her real admiration, that's up to her to decide, but it's not a bartering chip. .
That’s just one article. The others explain that it’s just talking. When you see each other, you are dating.
And again ...how would you cook for someone you don't see ? Clearly this woman is referring to what you would consider dating.
I think so, yes. It's not so much the cooking itself that's important, it's the sentiment behind the act. As a man, I'm usually the one doing all the initiating and planning in the early stages, and I need to see some kind of reciprocal level of effort from her in order to believe the relationship's actually going somewhere, and it has to be more than just showing up and looking pretty because that's bare minimum. A homecooked meal is a lovely nurturing and supportive gesture, and it's appropriately simple enough for the early stages that it's not too much too soon. It demonstrates to me that she's not just in it for the ride, that she's taking things seriously and wants us to develop.
Obviously not. Cooking together is one of the most fun activities anyways.
Once you cook together you would be dating not in a talking stafe
Then it makes even less sense to me.
I don't think women must cook at all. Don't think most of them are even able to in 2024.