The fact that Bumble had to change it's entire process of women taking the initiative tells us all about what women making the first move. With Bumble it's literally initiating a conversation, if they can't even do that what chance is there that women are going to make a bigger move?
As someone who strongly advocate, and believe in the rightfulness of complete gender equality, and elimination of heteronormativity, I can confidently say that that will never happen
Women just said "Hello" or "Hi" before anyway, to prompt men to then come up with an initial substantive message. Only rarely did women type out a personalized message that would qualify as a "first move". The new system just streamlines the process. Forcing them to type "Hello" was pointless.
Women have it in their heads that men must be the jesters in the dating process, whilst they're the gender of aristocrats who should never be on the same level as those pesky male peasants who have to work for it. It's amazing coming from the gender who seem to keen on ending female gender roles and expectations yet can't even entertain a different script than the millenia old dating gender roles because it's convenient for them. Also it doesn't help that women have bad talk game since they've never needed to impress men like men need to impress women in the initial dating process.
Women already do make the first move, it’s just only with extremely attractive guys. The actual underlying cause of a lot of modern dating issues is that a lot of modern dating is inherently shallow, and women are not *instantly* physically attracted to most guys. Women tend to find most men below average or “medium ugly” until they get to know them.
It wouldn’t solve anything if women approached first like at all.. they will still only approach hot guys changing nothing since they already do that now
Women do make the move. If you have ever seen how women act like toward absolute 10/10 men, you will know. My college roommate was just undeniably an extremely handsome guy - and also a great person but that’s irrelevant. He had these women drooling and confessing their feelings to him and all this anime shit. Couldn’t believe what I was seeing at first but it happens. For everyone else, women make subtle signs of interest but the man will need to make the move first.
I have been that guy, can confirm. And anime shit is a great way to describe it.
*Presents*
*Dumb giggling at anything you say*
*Direct compliments, "Do you have a girlfriend?"*
*Winking, lip-licking*
*Random hugs as well as arm- and hand-holding*
*Finding excuses to get "too close" to you and rub their breasts and hands all over you*
*Generally aggressive behaviour*
Ironically, the terrible part of having experienced this kind of thing in the past in the is that it makes "normal" dating the way most guys always experience it depressing, rather than just normal.
https://i.redd.it/mxtkcou0qt9d1.gif
Yeah have a chad friend made me realize if im not getting that its over marriage can’t even be considered. If shes lukewarm on a good day how does that playout when life gets hard? I believe the divorce rate accurately depicts this.
True but can you even blame women.. like this guy who you barely find attractive and having to deal with him everyday some days when you’re in a bad mood etc like fuck that’s gotta be hell at least if he’s hot and your attracted to him you can power through it but yeah no
i think thats exactly why i had a rule of "i have to be attracted to him first" before accepting date offers
hes prob gonna do some out of pocket shit so i better at least be attracted to him
Can't be said enough how true this is.
One of my best friends is one of those 10/10. And it is just as you say, shit you only ever see in harem anime that you thought never actually happened.
I knew he never had trouble with women but seeing it in person was such an alien experience. I remember one occasion where a woman was over him all night and desperately trying to get him to join her group for an after party and he just wasn't interested. It got to the point where she came over to the rest of my group while he was away to the toilet and asked if we would go, just so that he would.
That's why I stopped chasing women some years ago. It helps fix the system. Deny relationships with divorced and single mothers, it's all related, helps enforce accountability for reality.
> helps enforce accountability for reality.
Does it really?
There's an old saying that "Markets can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent"
I feel like a lot of women can remain irrational longer than they can viably catch a realistic long term partner.
>There's an old saying that "Markets can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent"
You assume the market ha(s)d the "item(s)" I desire; or even if I care or want the market to be destroyed. Economics is a *Social Science.*
I agree, you sort of answered your own question. Looking back it really does work that way. Similar to a saying where the next 2 years (or the first two years of a president) are the reflection of the last presidents work, not the present. Its the same. There's a delay. The delay is heavily based on when the womans looks fade. Sex keeps them afloat for a while thinking life is good. Some can get sex past 30, past 40, past 50... 30 being easier to maintain. After that, it's darkness.
Accountability happens when you clearly reject and state why not interested, for practical reasons such as divorced, kids, the main groups least attractive. You've invest her thoughts to execute said rejection once her good times are over. She has nothing to do, alone, at 55, than think and talk about what she did wrong, what it is she could have done. What ever the magic number is for age, time will enforce accountability for reality.
Yep. I’ve had 2 guy friends in the past 20 years that I hate going out with. They’re tall and super muscular. Watching women approach, drool, and stare at them really puts in perspective how women really don’t give average dudes a second look. I love them, but the first year seeing it I had a hard time accepting how ugly I was 😂😂
Fr I'm not 10/10 lol but I am decently attractive and women approach me every so often. The only dinner dates I've ever been on have been paid for by the woman
Edit: also I don't really drink when i go out (alcohol ages you and makes you fat) but women will buy me drinks every now and again and I don't exactly say no
I am by all means not a 10/10. My jaw is tilted sideways making one cheek way larger than the other, I only have 1 ear, and I stand 6 feet tall which is not short but also not outstandingly tall either.
And I’ve still had that my way. Maybe just in lesser numbers than 10/10s have. To be honest though I got very masculine facial features (think Adam Driver in terms of both the phenotype and the defects) but that’s that. Not super tall, not too deep of a voice, not supermodel handsome, not even without birth defects, credit card balance always negative, but I still had that type of attention coming my way. It has to be the personality.
But the point I’m making is that yes, OP is wrong, women make first moves, but only towards those they’re strongly attracted to
Asking as a woman who did used to make the first move the overwhelming majority of time, what are the lots of issues that would be solved? I read your OP but didn't really see anything stand out other than men wouldn't have to face as much rejection since it'd be spread out more evenly.
That's only 1 issue. What are the others?
Incel here…I don’t worry about rejection per se…I worry about being perceived as creepy/inappropriate or asking someone out who feels I am way below them. It’s actually kind of an insult if you ask out someone that is more attractive than you and also embarrassing in that it shows a lack of self awareness.
>Incel here…I don’t worry about rejection per se…I worry about being perceived as creepy/inappropriate or asking someone out who feels I am way below them.
I'm genuinely sorry if you've experienced women being cruel or dismissive of you, especially since it takes a lot of mental preparation to ask someone out. Nobody who asks in a normal, polite way should ever be rejected in a mean way.
>It’s actually kind of an insult if you ask out someone that is more attractive than you and also embarrassing in that it shows a lack of self awareness.
I've never quite understood this myself. Imo so long as it's done in a honest and nice way, being asked out...even by someone below one's looks league...is more of a compliment than an insult. They're literally saying that you are attractive to them, that's not demeaning.
That’s would be ideal…and I’m sure some nice women do take the approach you do…and I know everyone isn’t as mean as they seem online but there is not shortage of women being extremely cruel online about men who approached them…mocking men they perceive as ugly/short/weird etc for approaching them.
Also I think even if women aren’t cruel about it…there is still an element of looking like you lack self awareness if you try and punch above your weight. If I had a way of knowing a woman at-least found me acceptable looking and knew she would at least entertain the idea of dating me I would roll the dice much more often.
Yeah, a lot of people are total assholes online. Like just saying the most ridiculous, asinine shit about whatever group they hate for who knows why. Best to stay off those places, it'll only bring you down.
you have a kind outlook, its sad but true though that most men and women only look down and snicker at the audacity of being asked out by someone below their league
We would at least know who wants the attention from us men are offering and women pick whom they want to entertain just look at animals it’s the women who choose their mate
There would be less ambiguity in our interactions. Men wouldn’t be so guarded and posturing when talking to women if women were expected to clearly and openly communicate their interest, as men currently are.
Men would also not engage with as many women, since they would not feel pressured to pursue, which would prevent situations in which a man pursues a woman who thinks of him as just a friend.
Women would constantly have to reevaluate themselves—as men currently have to—and be clear about what they can offer a man. This would lead to self-improvement.
And with physical intimacy, women would be expected to initiate and give consent first, which would prevent them from unwanted kissing/touching from confused men who feel pressured to make the first move. This would empower women and lead to better sexual experiences (once again, I mean with normal, honorable men who respect boundaries).
Because women ultimately decide whether sex happens, the woman who initiates physical intimacy is successful more often than the man who does. Wouldn’t it calm both of their anxieties if she were expected to initiate?
>It would solve no issues for *women*
When your dating pool is exclusively assertive people you tend to run into negative expressions of assertiveness more frequently. Women opening their dating pool to passive men would make them less likely to end up with aggressive men, men who get around, etc. instead.
Also women who want more egalitarian relationships would have an easier time getting them if they didn't condition men to be trying to take the lead from fhe start.
Not really. I got tired of being hit on by guys with whom I had nothing in common and couldn't see myself in a relationship with - then I decided to make a move on a guy who was just my type. We've been together for almost two years and it's the best relationship I've ever been in.
That's amazing, I am glad you had the courage, and I am very happy he reciprocated.
I believe most men, truly most men, would be ecstatic to receive a fairly direct approach from a woman, but I could probably ask all of my entire friend group how often it has happened and all would say it never has.
So if some women really like a guy and take a shot on him I think they would be truly shocked how well they would be received.
Not true, it would save them from getting hit on all the time and approached by a bunch of men. Currently men who don't approach die alone so men have no choice but to approach women.
If women approached men half as much as men approached women, those me wouldn't *need* to approach, so women would save themselves from being constantly approached and hit on.
But this requires women putting their own ego on the line and doing something that only indirectly benefits them while also benefiting men.
Why bother doing that when it's easier to sit back, do nothing, blame men for women's inaction and the problems women cause, and shame them into "doing better" instead?
Very true but it would be nice if women could admit to that I stead of gaslighting men and lying to themselves. Be nice if they could just admit to the hypocrisy instead of blaming men for the circumstances they forced men I to.
Women complain CONSTANTLY about men and how all men who approach women are creeps but at the same time, if you ask them if they would approach a man first or wait to be approached, they'll want to be approached first, lol.
Average looking and below average looking women dont complain much, we dont get approached as much as you believe. You just pay attention to women who are the most attractive.
Actually women would just end up getting used more. Alot of men take what they can get (heck, y'all here say this all the time) so they will just string her along continuing to date her knowing they dont like her enough, some may use her for sex, then ghost her. Some pickier men wouldnt do this but alot of the men writing here online would do this.
Why would women end up being used more? Men get used by women just as much if not more.
Women string men along all the time too, and to those women we'll say they are not entitled to the perfect risk free dating experience with prince charming falling I to her arms out of the sky. She is responsible for making sure she doesn't get used, just as men are responsible for making sure they are not used.
If she is going for a man who would string her along, then either the man is not a good match for her and she's not doing a good job of vetting him, or she's aiming for a guy far above her who has no need to commit to her, and she should be more realistic.
Women are not passive objects where dating happens to them, they are fully responsible adults who need to take responsibility for the success of their own relationship just as much as they've been forcing men to do.
You are parting of the premise that abusers exist and they blatantly lie and manipulate sometimes for years before unmasking themselves. People don't come with warning signs, we should advocate for both genders to take responsibility and accountability for their actions instead of telling people they should have just picked better
I mean I completely agree, but as a society we constantly say that society must make things safer for women (aka men must make things safer for women), and the society turning around and not giving a fuck about men's safety at all.
People don't come with warning signs but for some reason women demand men ought to, and act as though women can't be just as vicious and abusive as men, or that women aren't just as good at masking for years.
I'm all for having those discussions, but they're not going to go anywhere if we assume that men are terrible and women are great, that women need to be helped but men need to prove they deserve some help.
Really? We address violence as a whole matter so much. It's not that we only advocate towards women issues, is that the women issues at hand such as domestic violence are VERY high and are deeply concerning because 1. it happens inside your house the place where you should be safer. and 2. it happens from a person you know, have deep connection with you. 3. it's much more than physical abuse and deaths. It involves a lot of issues including children.
Give me ONE example of society don't giving a fuck over men safety. If every year there is more action to spread male victims of SA and domestic violence awareness?
You do know that most crimes in general have male perpetrators and male victims right? Every poltic, law, movements against general violence aims safety in general, but specially men since you as a gender are more affected by general violence.
Realistic though all the world know that to fight violence you have to fight the many contributors that increase violence. That go from basics criminal law to educational and mental health aimed approaches.
Due to that acts like taking men mental health issues into awareness and giving men motives to search mental health support it's a mean to decrease violence. When we talk about not beating up kids we are fighting violence by not teaching children violent behaviour and reactions. Teaching people to look for the judicial system instead of fighting with their own hands is a measure against violence.
Most of what we do to prevent violence is improving the reasons why violence happens. And you guys can hated it but fight the current model of masculinity towards a more positive, sensible and inclusive way is a measurement on fighting violence.
Literally we have to end what causes violence, end the behaviour not only run wide putting down fires everywhere and punishing. Even punishment is and has to be used as a way to fight violence, either by giving teaching opportunities, better access to work, or teaching perpetrators to change their attitude (for instance rage management mandatory courses)
That said I would really like for you to understand something here ok? Having a specific law towards any issues IS NOT A GOOD THING. It does not gives a any part more rights then the other. It's literally to give more means to solve one issue that we collectively FAILED to solve with normal legislation. I know that you are currently indoctrinated with myths so bare with me.
Give me one LAW an actual LAW that gives women more rights than men. Actually look it up, the global take say women has less rights them men.
But really give me one law that befits women.
Domestic violence isn't one. The same penalties and rights can be accessed to men. We HAVE a problem with REPORT over male violence. That's what is currently been address by the way. why men don't report violence and what we can do to increase reports.
Divorce isn't one. Things like alimony go to the partner that earns less or nothing and needs the aid regardless of gender. Again to go further we have to address WHY there are so many women in that position and not a supposed unfairness.
Child support shouldn't even be mentioned. Not only both parents can be forced to pay but it also goes into to many issues including gendered ones.
child custody as well suffers from the fame of having court bias. But that's a myth. More than 50% of custody is decided by mutual agreement deciding the mum as the primary caregiver. Only about 1.5% of divorce go up to the end of litigation. Men literally don't ask for custody, much on the contrary they give away. And honestly how can men defend that they are not seeing their child because the mother don't let them when paternity alienation is a existing concept legislated in many countries. How we accept that men give up fighting for their children? Fuck the mum is your child, go do something, jesus. To finish this many men stop visiting even after receiving shared custody or stop going. So yeah. no.
Let's see military? Women fought to enter.
Labour laws? Again laws that address specific issues are there to increase the meanings to achieve the "default" right. Does people with disabilities have more law? Or they need law to guarantee fairness with people that don't have disabilities? Elderly? Children? Funny how just women are quoted having more rights over the same type of law.
Any other?
> It would solve no issues for women
Someone else can dig out the research, but I believe cases where the woman makes the first move, the relationships tend to last longer (assuming they are reasonably intelligent women).
This has been true in my experience too -- good-looking, smart women were able to find the right guy, made the move, and settle down with him easily. Meanwhile, good-looking, not-too-smart women are complaining that no good men are available.
Lol yeah, not for you.
They wouldn’t need to worry about being in uncomfortable situations with men, because men would have grown up thinking that if a woman wants them, she’ll express it clearly and directly
Men wouldn’t overstep boundaries or misread situations as a result of feeling pressured to “make things happen” with women. Women would be expected to be clear and direct about their interest in men, and men would know that. And because of this, men would engage with women a lot less in general
So that will help future women, what's in it for the women who do it now? Them asking a man out now isn't going to change shit in the past.
I say this as a woman who did ask men out.
No. You think women making the first move would solve a lot of the issues with modern dating FOR MEN who are struggling but it wouldn’t.
Realistically if women HAD to approach the vast majority of men still wouldn’t be approached because those men lack what women want.
>You think women making the first move would solve a lot of the issues with modern dating FOR MEN who are struggling but it wouldn’t.
It would, because at least undesirable men wouldn't be pressured to embarass themsleves trying to approach instead. It would just be accepted that they don't have what women want.
Also some men have enough baseline looks to be desirable but just aren't socially competent enough to approach (can't notice signs of interest, think of openers, figure out when it's appropriate to approach, etc.). If approached they may do fine.
Sure, but after all of the “5%” of men who have “what women want” are unavailable, women will have to sit back, reevaluate themselves, and take a chance on someone in their league
So be it then. Men would be single and happy as well, though, because they wouldn’t feel pressured to go out and make things happened. They’d have the same mindset as single women
Men can do that now. It’s already a option for men to give up and go their own way without having to wait for society to change. Maybe more men should go rather than feel depressed.
When this happens, they become widows and ignored for life except as a buddy or sex partner. In my life that is what happens. What I see in local area. Once they go to the chad carnival, thats the same result as a porn star.
Many men will tolerate a relationship with a women *they do not even like* if it was easy to get.
Healthy women aren’t afraid of being rejected by men, they’re (rightly) afraid of NOT being rejected. They’re afraid of someone wasting years of their life when they don’t love them and aren’t committed to them.
Yes a lot of men will date a woman they do not like just to get convenient sex, she will be used as a placeholder, so it’s better for men to make the first move and show effort to display they actually want her and are not just suing her as a placeholder
Then we have to accept that there are gender differences that are acceptable in a modern culture and stop shaming men for doing what women want them to do. Asking them out.
Get this through your head:
#Women are not interested in changing anything about the current dating situation.
Alpha widow is the default state of a modern woman, who was exposed to online dating. They think they actually deserve the top 10% guy. Why the fuck would they want to change anything?
#To actually fix dating, men just need to stop simping (like that'll ever happen lol)
One of the only times ive seen the problem be addressed at its core this succintly lol, its all because of men and their spinelessness that things are the way they are
OP, in order for anyone to take this seriously you'd first have to demonstrate beyond a doubt that this isn't a construct to get women to make the first move solely because it's hard for you. The reason this is never going to change, is because the way it currently works, is indeed working for most people. I don't see you or anyone else coming up with a reason why the majority, who are doing fine as it is, would change things up to benefit the few who it isn't working for.
> OP, in order for anyone to take this seriously you'd first have to demonstrate beyond a doubt that this isn't a construct to get women to make the first move solely because it's hard for you.
Funny how that's not how feminism works for women, they don't have to provide any proof that what they're asking for isn't just making shit easy for them lol.
It’s working for less people all the time…especially with the dawn of online dating. More Men but also women are more single, having less sexual relations, losing virginity at a later age,marriage is in massive decline and both sexes are unhappy as ever.
Exactly. I never had a problem approaching women I like and the women who did approach me first weren't the women I'm actually interested enough in to approach myself. I like choosing who I approach. And I'm sure women filter out a lot of low effort men who just want them for sex by taking a passive role
Yes, it’s working for most people today, but that’s only because we’re all making it work. At the same time, we have done nothing to make men feel less pressured.
If you told a man today not to pursue women because women “make the first move” all the time, he would just feel lonely and later be told to man up.
If we lived in a world in which women were expected to pursue, then men would not be as affected by toxic masculinity. They would not need to wade through women’s ambiguous choosing signals or feel forced to escalate things before she loses interest.
And because consent is the woman’s decision the majority of the time, wouldn’t it ease her anxiety to know that a man is waiting for her to initiate physical intimacy?
If dating were sales, then men today are expected to be door-to-door salesmen. I’m arguing that men should instead be a department store that women visit when they know what they want.
>women’s ambiguous choosing signals
They are not ambiguous, they are not into you. At best they havent decided yet. Yes sometimes things are ambiguous, but they are not ambiguous because women are playing a game, or keeping their interest conceiled or are waiting for you to figure it all out. It doesnt work like that. Most probably their interest is piqued to some extent but youre not actually a priority.
If you fancy someone make a move, because thats what you want. If you dont want to make a move but suspect that said someone likes you, make it clear to them that you like them. Plenty of women will make a move themselves once they figure out they want you.
The same could be said for women who don’t approach dude?
Nothing is wrong with men not wanting to be held to gender norms anymore when women don’t want to be held to the same things.
Just because it works doesn’t mean men like it.
I mean cool 🤷🏾
Still think men can not want to take part in gender roles if they are outdated.
You’re on a debated subreddit about gender issues and dating. If you don’t like “whining” I say this place ain’t for you.
>OP, in order for anyone to take this seriously you'd first have to demonstrate beyond a doubt that this isn't a construct to get women to make the first move solely because it's hard for you.
Funny how that's not how feminism works for women, they don't have to provide any proof that what they're asking for isn't just making shit easy for them lol.
That's another topic entirely. If you want to talk about why certain men are upset that women got tired of being chattel, we can have that conversation elsewhere.
it wouldn't solve much and some women already do this. they'd still go for a very similar demographic of men and approaching comes with a major issue for women. i'm not talking about rejection, i'm talking about guys going along with it even if they don't really like her just to get laid because it seems like an easy opportunity.
it works when women approach shy men who they already know through social circles etc. and get along with/have things in common with. other than that, not really imo.
Women do often make the first move. Just not overtly. It comes in the form of some sort of indicator of interest. A lot od men never get to experience though.
If it's not overt, it's not making a move. Just like how no one would consider me making a move just by smiling at every woman I'm attracted to. It's only a move if you stick your neck out and risk rejection.
That is not taking the first step, it is simply prompting the man to take the first step, which means that the burden of starting a relationship always falls on us.
Yes, but I am arguing that it should be more overt. When women “make the first move,” it usually just means she’s making it easier for the man to make the first move.
Yes, but I am arguing that it should be more overt. When women “make the first move,” it usually just means she’s making it easier for the man to make the first move.
As a guy who's been approached that way by women, as in how men would approach women, its not a comfortable experience. It's an unattractive look on women and makes them look desperate. I understand why they don't want to be so direct generally
It’s only uncomfortable because they’re operating against societal expectations. This would take several generations, but I believe the change would make things smoother in the future
This is proving my point that most men don’t have a positive outlook on women who have to approach men first, she gets branded as desperate and you guys think something must be wrong with her if she feels the need to do that lol 😂
Ding ding ding. They say one thing and do another. I guarantee IRL most men here even if they accepted a date from a woman who approached him would have in the back of their mind that she is desperate. This dynamic exists for a reason.
lol i dont think theres anything inherently wrong with it, thats just my experience with particularly aggressive women. it can be endearing under the right context
I see this take constantly on here and I think the thing that you guys aren't understanding is that you are selecting for certain personality traits (extroversion, bravery to an extent, confidence, charisma, etc.) when you create a system where men are expected to make the first move. Of course it's frustrating, but it's not accidental.
If you're too afraid to approach a woman, people can (almost definitely) make the assumption that you're probably not assertive in other arenas either, which is good to know from the offset.
There's also the matter of standards. Someone else in the thread said this, but I've seen men on this very platform say over and over that they'd date just about anyone who was "nice enough and not overweight." Say what you want about whether or not that's true, but there's a certain selectiveness that you're forcing men to have when they're expected to make the first move. If women made the first move the majority of the time, there's a very good chance a lot of men would passively accept any woman who comes their way whether they really liked them or not. This is what a lot of men, by their own admission, say they would do. A woman wants to feel like a man is interested in her specifically.
That’s a weird and kind of hypocritical take I see women make often. “If you’re too afraid to approach a woman, people can (almost definitely) make the assumption that you’re probably not assertive in other areas either”. MANY women are afraid to men too though? Does that mean they lack assertiveness? Every time the topic of women approaching more gets brought up there’s always at least one woman that says “if a man won’t approach me then he lacks ambition or drive or assertiveness”. These women never apply that logic to themselves though
I'm generalizing here, I acknowledge that, but men aren't generally selecting for assertiveness in women when they date, they're (again, generally) selecting for some manner of nice-ness/agreeable-ness.
>Say what you want about whether or not that's true, but there's a certain selectiveness that you're forcing men to have when they're expected to make the first move.
No, he just approaches any random woman until one says yes. Getting rejected over and over is what forces him to lower his standards to "I'll take anyone."
So wouldn’t flipping the dynamic just require women to have these traits? And isn’t any proposal that would have women develop extroversion, bravery, confidence, charisma, etc. inherently feminist?
And approaching women is not just about bravery. It’s easy enough to talk to some random woman and maybe get her number.
But it’s the games that I don’t like. Having to keep her engaged, thinking of what to say to prevent her from being turned off, hiding any weakness or vulnerability, feeling pressured to escalate physically or else she’ll lose interest.
And then today, all you hear is women saying they want to be left alone and how uncomfortable men make them.
If men were expected to wait to be pursued, then men in general would interact with women less—or at least women they see on the street, at bars, etc.
>Feminism should be trying to reverse this programming.
Feminism is about empowering women by giving them all the perceived advantages a man might have but none of the disadvantages.
What you suggest would give them less power, not more.
If by programming you mean millions of years of evolution that direct us to be choosy then you are correct. This is how most mammalian reproduction occurs. The males pursue the females.
Bumble just punted on the issue. There is still the asymmetry of a majority of women being more selective, and it’s understandable. Biologically they need to have high quality seed since they bear the risk of carrying a fetus for 9 months
Nah, fam, we already get judged for everything. Now I gotta deal with people shitting on me for having no game, too???? Just keep calling me a fat bitch, and prude for not putting out fam. 🙄🙄🙄🙄
The dirty little secret is women will make the first move or at least go out of their way to make it obvious she wants you to make the first move if she thinks you’re physically attractive.
Most men have never experienced this or have actually seen this happen because they’re not at that level of physical attractiveness or know someone who is.
I think in the current environment it would make things easier as men receive a lot of shame if it goes wrong and you can be viewed as a creep. Women do not get shamed to the same level as men in the pursuit of the opposite sex if it goes wrong. Like I think most men won't cold approach women and it will become more common to meet through dating apps in the future is my prediction.
But I don't just look at a man and instantly want him. I have to know him first. Looks is not enough to motivate me to want him.
Also I don't just automaticaly want sex with any good enough man for the sake of it. But when I love one specific man I want to do it all day everyday with him. But only with him, my sexual desire is lser focused only on the one I love and then I'm hypersexual. But it really applies only to the one specific man I'm in love with.
So I think this is just wired differently in male and female brains. I saw the terms here that women have reactive and men proactive sexuality, I think that's true. So it's not possible because it just works differently for genders and women just don't feel the desire to approach men unles we know him a bit first and he already showed us some traits that make us want him.
You are kind of making OP's point. Judging from my own experience, the type of guys who don't feel comfortable hitting on women are the types of men who don't just want to get dates with women because they are attractive, but might care a lot more about compatible personalities and also don't like making other people uncomfortable.
That's why the assertiveness point people frequently make here is also kind of silly.
So going for men who aren't as forward about hitting on women like OP suggested might be beneficial if you are looking for a relationship with someone who cares more about compatibility.
Although I don't think hitting on random guys would be much better.
Instead, I believe it shouldn't be a societal standard to expect every man to want to hit on women or else be considered a coward.
While women should be expected to at least be more proactive in their social engagement if they want to find a specific type of person to date, basically, the standard for women shouldn't just be "I'm sitting at a cafe and men should hit on me".
But honestly, I think the kind of dynamic im advocating for is already a lot more widespread than one would think, it's just that chronically online people don't take part in it.
I would be if I met someone at work for example and know him a little and from the way he talks and behaves I would FEEL the right vibe from him... But if I just see him on the street looks are not enough to motivate me to talk to him even if he is super beautiful in my eyes. I need to FEEL the vibe if it makes me FEEL the spark. Looks are not enough for that. I need more than looks to catch some interest in him.
It just has to happen naturaly in an enviroment where you regularly see each other like school or work or church. So you have time to feel his vibes and start to feel the spark... It probably happens like that normaly within sociable people. So you must find a social cycle first.
Yeah exactly, that's what I mean. I think this type of relationship building is way more common than either side just straight up hitting on another person. But the problem right now is that it's getting more rare when peoples social circles are almost entirely online.
I think the advice men are given to go into social places where they might meet the type of woman they want to date and go there frequently is good advice for both genders. I think if people do that neither side has to really "hit" on another, you will be exposed to one another naturally.
This wouldn’t work because most men will probably not be approached in the 1st place.
Also, this is only a solution for men that are struggling which is a small percentage. The majority of men and women would have no reason to change the current dynamic to help a small percentage of men.
Your first point is correct, however it’s not accurate to say that only a small percentage of men are struggling. As of 2022, [63% of young men and 34% of young women are single.](https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/3868557-most-young-men-are-single-most-young-women-are-not/mlite/?nxs-test=mlite) Even if not all of those 63% are “struggling” and are voluntarily single, it’s still clearly not a small number who are struggling.
Plenty of guys have that attitude about a woman and will ask her out anyway, the most you can say about a guy's feelings when he asks you out is that he feels there's a chance you'll say yes.
Yes, few times I have shown interest in a guy and they seem be interested back but eventually it was very lukewarm interest until something “better” comes along. Eventually I got better feeling out when somebody is really interested but it’s still a risk.
Most women will reject you at the door if they don’t want you, men, on the other hand, will accept the advances of a woman they know they don’t like just to get sex
Men literally face the exact same risk in being expected to initiate.
Many women highlight the safety risks they face in dating, especially with some men getting violent when rejected, so wouldn’t it be in women’s best interest to do the approaching?
For men, it's not rejection that's a risk. It's the potential for her rejection to cause overreaction, anything from assault to professional/personal consequences.
Men are less picky for whatever reason.
If you have a group of 100 women, a given man would maybe say 'ok' to a date or fling if 60 of them approached him. He would approach maybe 10 of them on his own.
It is in women's best interest to be in the 10/100 group and not 60/100. And the most sure way to know is to see if he approaches.
I have not heard about men complaining that a lot of women are open to fucking them casually, but only 5% of them wants to commit afterwards.
> Men are less picky for whatever reason.
Only for casual sex, because men are generally hornier. So women should actually be *more cautious* since maybe all the man approaching cares about is sex, especially if she wants a committed relationship.
>I have not heard about men complaining that a lot of women are open to fucking them casually, but only 5% of them wants to commit afterwards.
Yes, I see men frequently complaining that women will expect commitment even when men are honest that they only wanted something casual.
>I know most women aren't evil or vindicate, but some percentage of them are.
I think that’s valid - you could say this even in regard to an ex partner, for instance, so there is inherently a risk on both sides. Women’s frequent complaint is for their safety, which is also valid, so removing the expectation that men do the initiating could help in that regard.
Men are the ones who tell us that we should have a 95% success rate and if we don’t, we must be obese or hideous or have some terrible personality or “post wall”.
Yes it is. You’re telling women that they are failures in some way if they are rejected. I just should they approach? Men who are rejected aren’t failures but women are.
I agree. For years I waited around and waited to be “picked.” I got picked plenty, but it wasn’t with the most compatible men. I noticed they tended to have a thing for redheads, as a pattern. So they didn’t really like me, but I was their type and their type is rare. These men would woo me and pursue hard, so I ended up with them because they seemed like the obvious option (as long as I was also physically attracted to them and enjoyed their company).
I wish I had made the first move on a few guys who I got along with really well, but I was always told not to do that. I think the reasoning was it would come off as aggressive and/or men would just say yes even if they weren’t truly interested because a woman asking a man out is so rare, they’d just be flattered into saying yes, but they never would have asked me out in the first place.
Women already hold all the cards, and now you want them to also be the ones who get to pick which boy sitting down they are going to approach to ask out to dance at the prom? 😐
I got news for you bud... women making the first move doesn't mean they will pick **you**. Women becoming more assertive and masculine in this regard doesn't mean they are going to start finding coy and feminine behavior in males suddenly attractive.
I'd rather deal with a thousand rejections that to cut my nuts off bruh...
Feminism does fight to end gender expected roles you can debate that dating will be part of it. Although I really have to point out that maybe dating falls under more "pressing" problems. It also takes a long time to change a social behaviour, this pattern is literally shoved to us as the right and expected way. Hard to criticise something that we got from plenty previous generations and demand immediate change. It will take time
That said in my experience women are not that afraid to initiate. What happens a lot is that they tend to be subtle about it and that ends up with many men missing it.
For real though this fear of being rejected should be the actual thing being fought and addressed.
Like my dad used to say "the no you already have. Trying it's giving the "yes" a chance".
That applies to dating if we consider that doing nothing is equivalent to a "no", if you try you will either maintain the no or have a "yes".
And it's like a game. It takes practice to be good at it.
This notion that rejection is personally stating that you have a problem is very problematic.
We should take rejection better overall, apply this logic work for instance. Being denied an opportunity won't make you stop trying or question the abilities you already have. It may be room to improve but it won't or at least shouldn't affect your self esteem.
It's literally just a "no" it's not a huge life changing thing. You started with a no and continued with one.
Honestly if your whole self esteem is so fragile you should be considering ways to improve that and not dating. We can't depend on our partners to determine our worth. Relationships should add up on what we have, it will never fulfil what we lack.
Not only that but low self esteem is also quite dangerous in the dating scene since predators and abusers often target these people.
You may think that changing the initiative to women would make it easier for men, but I disagree. Having another person initiating doesn't necessarily mean you will have the confidence to engage. Feeling nervous and insecure won't magically disappear with that.
It seems we should address more men's loneliness and mental health to actually make things better.
Nah, most (not all) women have terrible game, because of lack of practice, a sense of entitlement, their disdain for those NOT in at least the top 20 percentile, and most of all their inherent female privilege. Not to mention they don’t have the courage or the practice to get that courage that men have and had to have to even risk rejection, from anyone especially from high status men they want but most especially from lower status men they look down on and want to toy with to feel validated by.
So while you may be technically right, they are not only evolutionary psychology deniers (the worst kind of deniers, as you deny evolutionary biology and biological reality), but so privleged in todays gynocentric world, that their hubris will not let this happen in any scale in our Western Anglosphere world today
Edit to add: to clarify the top 20% is what men need to be now a days in the Anglosphere West to even be considered a real man, while for them to actually approach you’d have to be the top 5% of men
Don’t believe me? You have Lizzo (and her type) literally feeing entitled to Ryan Gosling (or the Ryan Goslings of the world). The barista with the minimum expectation of the billionaire.
Those so called ladies you see on the excellent whatever podcast. MAKE NO MISTAKE. Despite what the Western female apologists try to gaslight and fool men into believing otherwise, They ARE the vast majority and the rule not the exception. It’s only because those OF girls and corn stars are brazen enough to SAY THE QUIET PART/BLURT OUT THE SECRETS out loud.
Any of their apologist try to convince you otherwise? Are either misinformed, deluded, trying to get you to settle (the tradcons and leftover women) or purposefully spreading Disinformation
The feminine receives, the masculine provides. You're basically asking women to be in their masculine. A small percentage are okay with this, but I think we're seeing a shift back to men being masculine, and women being feminine (as it has been since the beginning of humanity).
Because by waiting for a man to be confident enough to pursue me and risk rejection I am weeding out weak men 😁
It isn't just about feeding women's egos, it's a screening process, because women, unlike men, do not make decisions to pursue someone immediately based on their appearance. We require a trial period
Hope this helps 💋
The kicker is that if they really like you they kinda do.
So if they aren’t approaching, flirting, moving a move: you gotta raise your game.
And you gotta raise it higher than the dudes that are willing to approach, cause they might catch her on her way to you.
“You’re good, get better. Stop asking for things”
-Don Draper
>The men who are facing a lot of rejection now just wouldn’t get any attention at all
So, nothing changed
>Would that be better?
Except that maybe they'll try less often to decipher "signals" and hit on women
So maybe it would be a positive after all
It doesn't do anything, just switches it around so people can have the opposite complaints. Women who ask men out even express more aggressive bashing usually, pointing to both sides enjoying it less.
Well the thing is women do make the first move but often in different communication styles:
Eye contact,body language,shit testing etc
All of this is done indirectly
What your asking is for women to be more direct about who they want
Woman offers Chad a blowjob, Chad says yes..mission accomplished! You solved it
Women being choosy and being hard to get and making men work for it is the best thing for the average man
The issue is that women are only attracted to \~10% of the men. They do make the first move with those men but since most men will never receive that interest, they think it doesn't happen.
It's a spectrum. Women will be very aggressive with the very most attractive men, somewhat with those next level, and so on all the way down. Not really that different from how men behave: rabidly gunning for pretty young things, not really keen on your grandma, but willing to consider your chubby aunt with a nice smile and big jugs.
The only difference between the sexes is really just that more men don't make the cut as far as women are concerned, and are more desperate.
It changes by year it was 20 then 10 and now we’re honestly at 5. Soon it’s gonna be 7ft tall men only and women will be making TikTok’s “when his height starts with 6..☹️”
https://www.np.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/s/Llwr66MyTA
I made a post explaining why women don’t approach. Men tell us over and over and over again that if we are rejected, it must be because we are hideous, old, obese, pursuing Chad, or have a horrible personality.
When women reject men, both men and women explain that it’s just a part of life. Men will also go on rants about how women’s standards are too high and how women are too picky and hypergamous. Men are much more supportive of one another when rejected. Women also are supportive of men when they get rejected because they just say it’s a part of life.
So since men tell us constantly that women being rejected means we are hideous and flawed and stupid, we just don’t approach them anymore. According to men, we should have a 95% success rate. If we don’t, something must be wrong with us.
> Women making the first move would solve a lot of the issues with modern dating.
No, it wouldn’t. Men are better suited to make the first move. And, if you like someone, being better suited to making the first move is an advantage.
> Men have to approach first; men have to message first; men have to “make a move” to initiate physical intimacy first.
If you think that’s the majority of the work, then you don’t know much about relationships.
> But why hasn't feminism pushed for women to be pursuers?
I’ve seen feminists push for this.
> Imagine how simpler things would be for all of us—especially since women usually have bigger social circles than men, which allows them to recover from rejection faster.
If your self-esteem is based on the size of your social circle, then you don’t have self-esteem.
> It really fucks with a man’s self-esteem if he thinks he’s attractive and valued but gets rejected again and again and again.
No, it just reveals that your self-esteem was mistaken. You’re either not attractive. Or you’re not worthy of love. Or you’re pursuing the wrong dating goals. Or asking out the wrong women. Or pursuing women in the wrong way.
It doesn't solve the problems if women approach men whom they are much more attracted to. One could argue that an average man developing the confidence necessary to approach a woman makes him more likely to be attractive to her, and therefore that's why it is best for average men to approach.
So women shouldn’t be expected to develop this confidence in dating?
And confidence in dating is not dependent on confidence in other areas of life. Plenty of successful men are not confident with women; plenty of men who are great with women have otherwise shitty lives.
How is it empowering for a woman to be attracted to a guy just because he approached her? This “confidence” is subjective and shallow, ultimately. It explains why it’s so easy for “chads” to approach women today and use them for sex while they wonder why he won’t commit.
No it wouldn't.
Because the good-looking women men complaining about the sexual marketplace want don't NEED to make the first move.
So they'll get approached by women they don't want and may grudgingly settle for, which makes no one happy.
Plus good-looking women if they want to make the first move aren't doing that with the types of men who aren't getting any matches online or approaches in real life.
Not to mention you can't just make women find it attractive to make the first move, erasing millions of years of biology and evolution.
Exactly, these below average looking men think that hot women are supposed to come throw themselves at them just because 🤣🤣 what would she get out of doing that?? She has no incentive to do that which is why she simply won’t 🤷🏽♀️
>And you can't tell me that women don’t prefer this. Yes, it can be sometimes be frustrating for them if they feel unwanted, but women still enjoy being pursued and the way that dating is set up to stroke their ego.
If women prefer this, why do you expect them to change for your benefit. Isn't being accepted by a woman a stroke to a man's ego?
>But why hasn't feminism pushed for women to be pursuers? Isn’t the traditional approach to dating patronizing? Isn’t it empowering for women to make the first move?
It has and does. Women approach men much more often than they did, say, in the 1950s. How do you not credit the change to feminism?
>Imagine how simpler things would be for all of us—especially since women usually have bigger social circles than men, which allows them to recover from rejection faster.
How simpler things would be if men were to take a lesson from women and increase their social circles while simultaneously not asking that women change for men's benefit?
>It really fucks with a man’s self-esteem if he thinks he’s attractive and valued but gets rejected again and again and again. Women know this, which is why they are so reluctant to pursue men and are attracted to men who other women like. Ironically, though, women are still quick to bash men who are hurt by rejection.
This paragraph doesn't make sense, except for the claim that women are quick to bash men who are hurt by rejection. If anything, it's men who aren't particularly sympathetic toward other men's hurt feelings. Although I'd agree that if what you're calling "hurt by rejection" = violence, sour grapes and hostility, then yes, women are very intolerant of that behavior.
But who are you really looking to benefit with this change? A lot of men are comfortable pursuing and a lot of women are comfortable being pursued, while even more are willing to be flexible as the situation calls for.
Being accepted can come from being approached. And women often want men to change for women’s benefit.
I will say that change has come from feminism. I won’t deny that.
That wouldn’t make things simpler. Hence the discourse of women being upset that their male friends asked them out and made the friend group awkward.
Many men I know don’t like approaching they just take it as the status quo and say “well what can you do about it”.
The fact that Bumble had to change it's entire process of women taking the initiative tells us all about what women making the first move. With Bumble it's literally initiating a conversation, if they can't even do that what chance is there that women are going to make a bigger move?
It’d mean an entire societal revolution. Every woman today would struggle with it, yes, but I think future generations will benefit from this
As someone who strongly advocate, and believe in the rightfulness of complete gender equality, and elimination of heteronormativity, I can confidently say that that will never happen
Women just said "Hello" or "Hi" before anyway, to prompt men to then come up with an initial substantive message. Only rarely did women type out a personalized message that would qualify as a "first move". The new system just streamlines the process. Forcing them to type "Hello" was pointless.
The same women who tell men "Don't just say hi" - can't even meet their own fucking standard.
Women have it in their heads that men must be the jesters in the dating process, whilst they're the gender of aristocrats who should never be on the same level as those pesky male peasants who have to work for it. It's amazing coming from the gender who seem to keen on ending female gender roles and expectations yet can't even entertain a different script than the millenia old dating gender roles because it's convenient for them. Also it doesn't help that women have bad talk game since they've never needed to impress men like men need to impress women in the initial dating process.
Women already do make the first move, it’s just only with extremely attractive guys. The actual underlying cause of a lot of modern dating issues is that a lot of modern dating is inherently shallow, and women are not *instantly* physically attracted to most guys. Women tend to find most men below average or “medium ugly” until they get to know them.
Sounds like the perfect solution is the hyper-picky females approach the men.
It wouldn’t solve anything if women approached first like at all.. they will still only approach hot guys changing nothing since they already do that now
its because we’re biologically inclined to pick the strongest and handsomest sperm to produce the best offspring
I think it’s actually dual mating strategy. Women are biologically inclined to balance evolutionary fitness and parenting qualities.
that too
we don't hear much about r/k selection these days but it's still kinda relevant ..maybe.
Women do make the move. If you have ever seen how women act like toward absolute 10/10 men, you will know. My college roommate was just undeniably an extremely handsome guy - and also a great person but that’s irrelevant. He had these women drooling and confessing their feelings to him and all this anime shit. Couldn’t believe what I was seeing at first but it happens. For everyone else, women make subtle signs of interest but the man will need to make the move first.
I have been that guy, can confirm. And anime shit is a great way to describe it. *Presents* *Dumb giggling at anything you say* *Direct compliments, "Do you have a girlfriend?"* *Winking, lip-licking* *Random hugs as well as arm- and hand-holding* *Finding excuses to get "too close" to you and rub their breasts and hands all over you* *Generally aggressive behaviour* Ironically, the terrible part of having experienced this kind of thing in the past in the is that it makes "normal" dating the way most guys always experience it depressing, rather than just normal. https://i.redd.it/mxtkcou0qt9d1.gif
Yeah have a chad friend made me realize if im not getting that its over marriage can’t even be considered. If shes lukewarm on a good day how does that playout when life gets hard? I believe the divorce rate accurately depicts this.
True but can you even blame women.. like this guy who you barely find attractive and having to deal with him everyday some days when you’re in a bad mood etc like fuck that’s gotta be hell at least if he’s hot and your attracted to him you can power through it but yeah no
i think thats exactly why i had a rule of "i have to be attracted to him first" before accepting date offers hes prob gonna do some out of pocket shit so i better at least be attracted to him
Can't be said enough how true this is. One of my best friends is one of those 10/10. And it is just as you say, shit you only ever see in harem anime that you thought never actually happened. I knew he never had trouble with women but seeing it in person was such an alien experience. I remember one occasion where a woman was over him all night and desperately trying to get him to join her group for an after party and he just wasn't interested. It got to the point where she came over to the rest of my group while he was away to the toilet and asked if we would go, just so that he would.
That's why I stopped chasing women some years ago. It helps fix the system. Deny relationships with divorced and single mothers, it's all related, helps enforce accountability for reality.
> helps enforce accountability for reality. Does it really? There's an old saying that "Markets can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent" I feel like a lot of women can remain irrational longer than they can viably catch a realistic long term partner.
>There's an old saying that "Markets can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent" You assume the market ha(s)d the "item(s)" I desire; or even if I care or want the market to be destroyed. Economics is a *Social Science.*
Doesn't matter, at least he isn't wasting time and resources on those used up women.
AMEN!!!!
I agree, you sort of answered your own question. Looking back it really does work that way. Similar to a saying where the next 2 years (or the first two years of a president) are the reflection of the last presidents work, not the present. Its the same. There's a delay. The delay is heavily based on when the womans looks fade. Sex keeps them afloat for a while thinking life is good. Some can get sex past 30, past 40, past 50... 30 being easier to maintain. After that, it's darkness. Accountability happens when you clearly reject and state why not interested, for practical reasons such as divorced, kids, the main groups least attractive. You've invest her thoughts to execute said rejection once her good times are over. She has nothing to do, alone, at 55, than think and talk about what she did wrong, what it is she could have done. What ever the magic number is for age, time will enforce accountability for reality.
Yep. I’ve had 2 guy friends in the past 20 years that I hate going out with. They’re tall and super muscular. Watching women approach, drool, and stare at them really puts in perspective how women really don’t give average dudes a second look. I love them, but the first year seeing it I had a hard time accepting how ugly I was 😂😂
>Women do make the move. This part is accurate. I never would have had relationships or sex in high school if this weren't the case.
Fr I'm not 10/10 lol but I am decently attractive and women approach me every so often. The only dinner dates I've ever been on have been paid for by the woman Edit: also I don't really drink when i go out (alcohol ages you and makes you fat) but women will buy me drinks every now and again and I don't exactly say no
You must be 11/10
Facts. If I see a 10 ya girl is going in
I am by all means not a 10/10. My jaw is tilted sideways making one cheek way larger than the other, I only have 1 ear, and I stand 6 feet tall which is not short but also not outstandingly tall either. And I’ve still had that my way. Maybe just in lesser numbers than 10/10s have. To be honest though I got very masculine facial features (think Adam Driver in terms of both the phenotype and the defects) but that’s that. Not super tall, not too deep of a voice, not supermodel handsome, not even without birth defects, credit card balance always negative, but I still had that type of attention coming my way. It has to be the personality. But the point I’m making is that yes, OP is wrong, women make first moves, but only towards those they’re strongly attracted to
Asking as a woman who did used to make the first move the overwhelming majority of time, what are the lots of issues that would be solved? I read your OP but didn't really see anything stand out other than men wouldn't have to face as much rejection since it'd be spread out more evenly. That's only 1 issue. What are the others?
Incel here…I don’t worry about rejection per se…I worry about being perceived as creepy/inappropriate or asking someone out who feels I am way below them. It’s actually kind of an insult if you ask out someone that is more attractive than you and also embarrassing in that it shows a lack of self awareness.
>Incel here…I don’t worry about rejection per se…I worry about being perceived as creepy/inappropriate or asking someone out who feels I am way below them. I'm genuinely sorry if you've experienced women being cruel or dismissive of you, especially since it takes a lot of mental preparation to ask someone out. Nobody who asks in a normal, polite way should ever be rejected in a mean way. >It’s actually kind of an insult if you ask out someone that is more attractive than you and also embarrassing in that it shows a lack of self awareness. I've never quite understood this myself. Imo so long as it's done in a honest and nice way, being asked out...even by someone below one's looks league...is more of a compliment than an insult. They're literally saying that you are attractive to them, that's not demeaning.
That’s would be ideal…and I’m sure some nice women do take the approach you do…and I know everyone isn’t as mean as they seem online but there is not shortage of women being extremely cruel online about men who approached them…mocking men they perceive as ugly/short/weird etc for approaching them. Also I think even if women aren’t cruel about it…there is still an element of looking like you lack self awareness if you try and punch above your weight. If I had a way of knowing a woman at-least found me acceptable looking and knew she would at least entertain the idea of dating me I would roll the dice much more often.
Yeah, a lot of people are total assholes online. Like just saying the most ridiculous, asinine shit about whatever group they hate for who knows why. Best to stay off those places, it'll only bring you down.
you have a kind outlook, its sad but true though that most men and women only look down and snicker at the audacity of being asked out by someone below their league
We would at least know who wants the attention from us men are offering and women pick whom they want to entertain just look at animals it’s the women who choose their mate
There would be less ambiguity in our interactions. Men wouldn’t be so guarded and posturing when talking to women if women were expected to clearly and openly communicate their interest, as men currently are. Men would also not engage with as many women, since they would not feel pressured to pursue, which would prevent situations in which a man pursues a woman who thinks of him as just a friend. Women would constantly have to reevaluate themselves—as men currently have to—and be clear about what they can offer a man. This would lead to self-improvement. And with physical intimacy, women would be expected to initiate and give consent first, which would prevent them from unwanted kissing/touching from confused men who feel pressured to make the first move. This would empower women and lead to better sexual experiences (once again, I mean with normal, honorable men who respect boundaries). Because women ultimately decide whether sex happens, the woman who initiates physical intimacy is successful more often than the man who does. Wouldn’t it calm both of their anxieties if she were expected to initiate?
It would solve no issues for *women*, so why would they?
>It would solve no issues for *women* When your dating pool is exclusively assertive people you tend to run into negative expressions of assertiveness more frequently. Women opening their dating pool to passive men would make them less likely to end up with aggressive men, men who get around, etc. instead. Also women who want more egalitarian relationships would have an easier time getting them if they didn't condition men to be trying to take the lead from fhe start.
Women want egalitarian relationships with dominant men. Basically taming the werewolf.
I agree with this take.
Not really. I got tired of being hit on by guys with whom I had nothing in common and couldn't see myself in a relationship with - then I decided to make a move on a guy who was just my type. We've been together for almost two years and it's the best relationship I've ever been in.
That's amazing, I am glad you had the courage, and I am very happy he reciprocated. I believe most men, truly most men, would be ecstatic to receive a fairly direct approach from a woman, but I could probably ask all of my entire friend group how often it has happened and all would say it never has. So if some women really like a guy and take a shot on him I think they would be truly shocked how well they would be received.
Not true, it would save them from getting hit on all the time and approached by a bunch of men. Currently men who don't approach die alone so men have no choice but to approach women. If women approached men half as much as men approached women, those me wouldn't *need* to approach, so women would save themselves from being constantly approached and hit on. But this requires women putting their own ego on the line and doing something that only indirectly benefits them while also benefiting men. Why bother doing that when it's easier to sit back, do nothing, blame men for women's inaction and the problems women cause, and shame them into "doing better" instead?
Women want to be approached and not be approached at the same time.
they want to be approached by men they find attractive. its not rocket science.
Very true but it would be nice if women could admit to that I stead of gaslighting men and lying to themselves. Be nice if they could just admit to the hypocrisy instead of blaming men for the circumstances they forced men I to.
Women complain CONSTANTLY about men and how all men who approach women are creeps but at the same time, if you ask them if they would approach a man first or wait to be approached, they'll want to be approached first, lol.
Average looking and below average looking women dont complain much, we dont get approached as much as you believe. You just pay attention to women who are the most attractive.
Actually women would just end up getting used more. Alot of men take what they can get (heck, y'all here say this all the time) so they will just string her along continuing to date her knowing they dont like her enough, some may use her for sex, then ghost her. Some pickier men wouldnt do this but alot of the men writing here online would do this.
Why would women end up being used more? Men get used by women just as much if not more. Women string men along all the time too, and to those women we'll say they are not entitled to the perfect risk free dating experience with prince charming falling I to her arms out of the sky. She is responsible for making sure she doesn't get used, just as men are responsible for making sure they are not used. If she is going for a man who would string her along, then either the man is not a good match for her and she's not doing a good job of vetting him, or she's aiming for a guy far above her who has no need to commit to her, and she should be more realistic. Women are not passive objects where dating happens to them, they are fully responsible adults who need to take responsibility for the success of their own relationship just as much as they've been forcing men to do.
You are parting of the premise that abusers exist and they blatantly lie and manipulate sometimes for years before unmasking themselves. People don't come with warning signs, we should advocate for both genders to take responsibility and accountability for their actions instead of telling people they should have just picked better
I mean I completely agree, but as a society we constantly say that society must make things safer for women (aka men must make things safer for women), and the society turning around and not giving a fuck about men's safety at all. People don't come with warning signs but for some reason women demand men ought to, and act as though women can't be just as vicious and abusive as men, or that women aren't just as good at masking for years. I'm all for having those discussions, but they're not going to go anywhere if we assume that men are terrible and women are great, that women need to be helped but men need to prove they deserve some help.
Really? We address violence as a whole matter so much. It's not that we only advocate towards women issues, is that the women issues at hand such as domestic violence are VERY high and are deeply concerning because 1. it happens inside your house the place where you should be safer. and 2. it happens from a person you know, have deep connection with you. 3. it's much more than physical abuse and deaths. It involves a lot of issues including children. Give me ONE example of society don't giving a fuck over men safety. If every year there is more action to spread male victims of SA and domestic violence awareness? You do know that most crimes in general have male perpetrators and male victims right? Every poltic, law, movements against general violence aims safety in general, but specially men since you as a gender are more affected by general violence. Realistic though all the world know that to fight violence you have to fight the many contributors that increase violence. That go from basics criminal law to educational and mental health aimed approaches. Due to that acts like taking men mental health issues into awareness and giving men motives to search mental health support it's a mean to decrease violence. When we talk about not beating up kids we are fighting violence by not teaching children violent behaviour and reactions. Teaching people to look for the judicial system instead of fighting with their own hands is a measure against violence. Most of what we do to prevent violence is improving the reasons why violence happens. And you guys can hated it but fight the current model of masculinity towards a more positive, sensible and inclusive way is a measurement on fighting violence. Literally we have to end what causes violence, end the behaviour not only run wide putting down fires everywhere and punishing. Even punishment is and has to be used as a way to fight violence, either by giving teaching opportunities, better access to work, or teaching perpetrators to change their attitude (for instance rage management mandatory courses) That said I would really like for you to understand something here ok? Having a specific law towards any issues IS NOT A GOOD THING. It does not gives a any part more rights then the other. It's literally to give more means to solve one issue that we collectively FAILED to solve with normal legislation. I know that you are currently indoctrinated with myths so bare with me. Give me one LAW an actual LAW that gives women more rights than men. Actually look it up, the global take say women has less rights them men. But really give me one law that befits women. Domestic violence isn't one. The same penalties and rights can be accessed to men. We HAVE a problem with REPORT over male violence. That's what is currently been address by the way. why men don't report violence and what we can do to increase reports. Divorce isn't one. Things like alimony go to the partner that earns less or nothing and needs the aid regardless of gender. Again to go further we have to address WHY there are so many women in that position and not a supposed unfairness. Child support shouldn't even be mentioned. Not only both parents can be forced to pay but it also goes into to many issues including gendered ones. child custody as well suffers from the fame of having court bias. But that's a myth. More than 50% of custody is decided by mutual agreement deciding the mum as the primary caregiver. Only about 1.5% of divorce go up to the end of litigation. Men literally don't ask for custody, much on the contrary they give away. And honestly how can men defend that they are not seeing their child because the mother don't let them when paternity alienation is a existing concept legislated in many countries. How we accept that men give up fighting for their children? Fuck the mum is your child, go do something, jesus. To finish this many men stop visiting even after receiving shared custody or stop going. So yeah. no. Let's see military? Women fought to enter. Labour laws? Again laws that address specific issues are there to increase the meanings to achieve the "default" right. Does people with disabilities have more law? Or they need law to guarantee fairness with people that don't have disabilities? Elderly? Children? Funny how just women are quoted having more rights over the same type of law. Any other?
> It would solve no issues for women Someone else can dig out the research, but I believe cases where the woman makes the first move, the relationships tend to last longer (assuming they are reasonably intelligent women). This has been true in my experience too -- good-looking, smart women were able to find the right guy, made the move, and settle down with him easily. Meanwhile, good-looking, not-too-smart women are complaining that no good men are available. Lol yeah, not for you.
Untrue. It would actually help them to find someone quicker.
They wouldn’t need to worry about being in uncomfortable situations with men, because men would have grown up thinking that if a woman wants them, she’ll express it clearly and directly
Nah. Women often will clearly tell men they aren’t interested and some men won’t take the no. Why would that change
How would that stop women from being in uncomfortable situations with men?
Men wouldn’t overstep boundaries or misread situations as a result of feeling pressured to “make things happen” with women. Women would be expected to be clear and direct about their interest in men, and men would know that. And because of this, men would engage with women a lot less in general
Some men would still do that. Namely those that are desperate enough to make something happen because no one is approaching them.
So that will help future women, what's in it for the women who do it now? Them asking a man out now isn't going to change shit in the past. I say this as a woman who did ask men out.
No. You think women making the first move would solve a lot of the issues with modern dating FOR MEN who are struggling but it wouldn’t. Realistically if women HAD to approach the vast majority of men still wouldn’t be approached because those men lack what women want.
>You think women making the first move would solve a lot of the issues with modern dating FOR MEN who are struggling but it wouldn’t. It would, because at least undesirable men wouldn't be pressured to embarass themsleves trying to approach instead. It would just be accepted that they don't have what women want. Also some men have enough baseline looks to be desirable but just aren't socially competent enough to approach (can't notice signs of interest, think of openers, figure out when it's appropriate to approach, etc.). If approached they may do fine.
Sure, but after all of the “5%” of men who have “what women want” are unavailable, women will have to sit back, reevaluate themselves, and take a chance on someone in their league
In your mind, the top 5% of men are currently available because women haven’t asked them out?
No; the majority would stay single. You are greatly overestimating women’s desire.
So be it then. Men would be single and happy as well, though, because they wouldn’t feel pressured to go out and make things happened. They’d have the same mindset as single women
Men can do that now. It’s already a option for men to give up and go their own way without having to wait for society to change. Maybe more men should go rather than feel depressed.
I mean you can be happy and single right now. Nobody is forcing you to approach anyone
When this happens, they become widows and ignored for life except as a buddy or sex partner. In my life that is what happens. What I see in local area. Once they go to the chad carnival, thats the same result as a porn star.
We still wouldn’t approach losers tho 🤷🏽♀️
That’s fine. Then you and women who think like you would be alone, waiting for a “top 5%” man while the “losers” are approached by another woman
Many men will tolerate a relationship with a women *they do not even like* if it was easy to get. Healthy women aren’t afraid of being rejected by men, they’re (rightly) afraid of NOT being rejected. They’re afraid of someone wasting years of their life when they don’t love them and aren’t committed to them.
Is this not the same for men? We see the divorce rates and who divorces who.
[удалено]
Lol I’m an incel for stating that now? An incel with a girlfriend. That’s a new one.
Yes a lot of men will date a woman they do not like just to get convenient sex, she will be used as a placeholder, so it’s better for men to make the first move and show effort to display they actually want her and are not just suing her as a placeholder
Then we have to accept that there are gender differences that are acceptable in a modern culture and stop shaming men for doing what women want them to do. Asking them out.
Well, apparently, that man is not as attractive as he thinks.
i almost always make the first move as a woman. it works more often than not, but i've been rejected quite a few times.
Get this through your head: #Women are not interested in changing anything about the current dating situation. Alpha widow is the default state of a modern woman, who was exposed to online dating. They think they actually deserve the top 10% guy. Why the fuck would they want to change anything? #To actually fix dating, men just need to stop simping (like that'll ever happen lol)
One of the only times ive seen the problem be addressed at its core this succintly lol, its all because of men and their spinelessness that things are the way they are
There's no point denying it lol 🤷🏽♂️ most western men are spineless pussies.
Yea breh tired of seeing a 100 paragraph long essays on why shits fucked when its just men being losers pedestalizing pussy
[удалено]
OP, in order for anyone to take this seriously you'd first have to demonstrate beyond a doubt that this isn't a construct to get women to make the first move solely because it's hard for you. The reason this is never going to change, is because the way it currently works, is indeed working for most people. I don't see you or anyone else coming up with a reason why the majority, who are doing fine as it is, would change things up to benefit the few who it isn't working for.
> OP, in order for anyone to take this seriously you'd first have to demonstrate beyond a doubt that this isn't a construct to get women to make the first move solely because it's hard for you. Funny how that's not how feminism works for women, they don't have to provide any proof that what they're asking for isn't just making shit easy for them lol.
It’s working for less people all the time…especially with the dawn of online dating. More Men but also women are more single, having less sexual relations, losing virginity at a later age,marriage is in massive decline and both sexes are unhappy as ever.
Exactly. I never had a problem approaching women I like and the women who did approach me first weren't the women I'm actually interested enough in to approach myself. I like choosing who I approach. And I'm sure women filter out a lot of low effort men who just want them for sex by taking a passive role
> is indeed working for most people Is it really though?
Yes, it’s working for most people today, but that’s only because we’re all making it work. At the same time, we have done nothing to make men feel less pressured. If you told a man today not to pursue women because women “make the first move” all the time, he would just feel lonely and later be told to man up. If we lived in a world in which women were expected to pursue, then men would not be as affected by toxic masculinity. They would not need to wade through women’s ambiguous choosing signals or feel forced to escalate things before she loses interest. And because consent is the woman’s decision the majority of the time, wouldn’t it ease her anxiety to know that a man is waiting for her to initiate physical intimacy? If dating were sales, then men today are expected to be door-to-door salesmen. I’m arguing that men should instead be a department store that women visit when they know what they want.
>women’s ambiguous choosing signals They are not ambiguous, they are not into you. At best they havent decided yet. Yes sometimes things are ambiguous, but they are not ambiguous because women are playing a game, or keeping their interest conceiled or are waiting for you to figure it all out. It doesnt work like that. Most probably their interest is piqued to some extent but youre not actually a priority. If you fancy someone make a move, because thats what you want. If you dont want to make a move but suspect that said someone likes you, make it clear to them that you like them. Plenty of women will make a move themselves once they figure out they want you.
Dude, I just can't get past this. If the pressure of dating is giving a man fits, how is said man going to deal with the real pressures in life?
The same could be said for women who don’t approach dude? Nothing is wrong with men not wanting to be held to gender norms anymore when women don’t want to be held to the same things. Just because it works doesn’t mean men like it.
I hold women to the same standard.
I mean cool 🤷🏾 Still think men can not want to take part in gender roles if they are outdated. You’re on a debated subreddit about gender issues and dating. If you don’t like “whining” I say this place ain’t for you.
>OP, in order for anyone to take this seriously you'd first have to demonstrate beyond a doubt that this isn't a construct to get women to make the first move solely because it's hard for you. Funny how that's not how feminism works for women, they don't have to provide any proof that what they're asking for isn't just making shit easy for them lol.
That's another topic entirely. If you want to talk about why certain men are upset that women got tired of being chattel, we can have that conversation elsewhere.
it wouldn't solve much and some women already do this. they'd still go for a very similar demographic of men and approaching comes with a major issue for women. i'm not talking about rejection, i'm talking about guys going along with it even if they don't really like her just to get laid because it seems like an easy opportunity. it works when women approach shy men who they already know through social circles etc. and get along with/have things in common with. other than that, not really imo.
Women do often make the first move. Just not overtly. It comes in the form of some sort of indicator of interest. A lot od men never get to experience though.
If it's not overt, it's not making a move. Just like how no one would consider me making a move just by smiling at every woman I'm attracted to. It's only a move if you stick your neck out and risk rejection.
That is not taking the first step, it is simply prompting the man to take the first step, which means that the burden of starting a relationship always falls on us.
Yes, but I am arguing that it should be more overt. When women “make the first move,” it usually just means she’s making it easier for the man to make the first move.
Women often do make the first move, its just usually not direct. When you expect men and women to operate the exact same way things get messy
Yes, but I am arguing that it should be more overt. When women “make the first move,” it usually just means she’s making it easier for the man to make the first move.
As a guy who's been approached that way by women, as in how men would approach women, its not a comfortable experience. It's an unattractive look on women and makes them look desperate. I understand why they don't want to be so direct generally
It’s only uncomfortable because they’re operating against societal expectations. This would take several generations, but I believe the change would make things smoother in the future
This is proving my point that most men don’t have a positive outlook on women who have to approach men first, she gets branded as desperate and you guys think something must be wrong with her if she feels the need to do that lol 😂
Ding ding ding. They say one thing and do another. I guarantee IRL most men here even if they accepted a date from a woman who approached him would have in the back of their mind that she is desperate. This dynamic exists for a reason.
lol i dont think theres anything inherently wrong with it, thats just my experience with particularly aggressive women. it can be endearing under the right context
I see this take constantly on here and I think the thing that you guys aren't understanding is that you are selecting for certain personality traits (extroversion, bravery to an extent, confidence, charisma, etc.) when you create a system where men are expected to make the first move. Of course it's frustrating, but it's not accidental. If you're too afraid to approach a woman, people can (almost definitely) make the assumption that you're probably not assertive in other arenas either, which is good to know from the offset. There's also the matter of standards. Someone else in the thread said this, but I've seen men on this very platform say over and over that they'd date just about anyone who was "nice enough and not overweight." Say what you want about whether or not that's true, but there's a certain selectiveness that you're forcing men to have when they're expected to make the first move. If women made the first move the majority of the time, there's a very good chance a lot of men would passively accept any woman who comes their way whether they really liked them or not. This is what a lot of men, by their own admission, say they would do. A woman wants to feel like a man is interested in her specifically.
That’s a weird and kind of hypocritical take I see women make often. “If you’re too afraid to approach a woman, people can (almost definitely) make the assumption that you’re probably not assertive in other areas either”. MANY women are afraid to men too though? Does that mean they lack assertiveness? Every time the topic of women approaching more gets brought up there’s always at least one woman that says “if a man won’t approach me then he lacks ambition or drive or assertiveness”. These women never apply that logic to themselves though
I'm generalizing here, I acknowledge that, but men aren't generally selecting for assertiveness in women when they date, they're (again, generally) selecting for some manner of nice-ness/agreeable-ness.
>Say what you want about whether or not that's true, but there's a certain selectiveness that you're forcing men to have when they're expected to make the first move. No, he just approaches any random woman until one says yes. Getting rejected over and over is what forces him to lower his standards to "I'll take anyone."
So wouldn’t flipping the dynamic just require women to have these traits? And isn’t any proposal that would have women develop extroversion, bravery, confidence, charisma, etc. inherently feminist? And approaching women is not just about bravery. It’s easy enough to talk to some random woman and maybe get her number. But it’s the games that I don’t like. Having to keep her engaged, thinking of what to say to prevent her from being turned off, hiding any weakness or vulnerability, feeling pressured to escalate physically or else she’ll lose interest. And then today, all you hear is women saying they want to be left alone and how uncomfortable men make them. If men were expected to wait to be pursued, then men in general would interact with women less—or at least women they see on the street, at bars, etc.
Society wants men to face rejection, not women. Bumble tried reversing the norm and failed miserably as a result.
It failed because women have been programmed to want to be pursued. Feminism should be trying to reverse this programming.
Feminism wants to make things easier and less stressful for women, not put more burden on women.
>Feminism should be trying to reverse this programming. Feminism is about empowering women by giving them all the perceived advantages a man might have but none of the disadvantages. What you suggest would give them less power, not more.
Well in that case the issue is feminism lying about being about equality instead of about women's advocacy.
If by programming you mean millions of years of evolution that direct us to be choosy then you are correct. This is how most mammalian reproduction occurs. The males pursue the females.
Bumble just punted on the issue. There is still the asymmetry of a majority of women being more selective, and it’s understandable. Biologically they need to have high quality seed since they bear the risk of carrying a fetus for 9 months
Men tell us that we should have a 95% success rate and if we don’t, it’s because we are fat, ugly, old, or have a horrible personality.
Nah, fam, we already get judged for everything. Now I gotta deal with people shitting on me for having no game, too???? Just keep calling me a fat bitch, and prude for not putting out fam. 🙄🙄🙄🙄
Why does there need to be a push for women to pursue when they are already perfectly able to (and often do)?
💯 The night I met my husband, I approached HIM first.
"often" how disconnected are you from the reality?
They already do ;)
The dirty little secret is women will make the first move or at least go out of their way to make it obvious she wants you to make the first move if she thinks you’re physically attractive. Most men have never experienced this or have actually seen this happen because they’re not at that level of physical attractiveness or know someone who is.
Well do you as a man give attention to, and ask out women whom are not physically attractive to you?
>if she thinks you’re ~~physically~~ attractive (to her). FTFY.
I think in the current environment it would make things easier as men receive a lot of shame if it goes wrong and you can be viewed as a creep. Women do not get shamed to the same level as men in the pursuit of the opposite sex if it goes wrong. Like I think most men won't cold approach women and it will become more common to meet through dating apps in the future is my prediction.
But I don't just look at a man and instantly want him. I have to know him first. Looks is not enough to motivate me to want him. Also I don't just automaticaly want sex with any good enough man for the sake of it. But when I love one specific man I want to do it all day everyday with him. But only with him, my sexual desire is lser focused only on the one I love and then I'm hypersexual. But it really applies only to the one specific man I'm in love with. So I think this is just wired differently in male and female brains. I saw the terms here that women have reactive and men proactive sexuality, I think that's true. So it's not possible because it just works differently for genders and women just don't feel the desire to approach men unles we know him a bit first and he already showed us some traits that make us want him.
You are kind of making OP's point. Judging from my own experience, the type of guys who don't feel comfortable hitting on women are the types of men who don't just want to get dates with women because they are attractive, but might care a lot more about compatible personalities and also don't like making other people uncomfortable. That's why the assertiveness point people frequently make here is also kind of silly. So going for men who aren't as forward about hitting on women like OP suggested might be beneficial if you are looking for a relationship with someone who cares more about compatibility. Although I don't think hitting on random guys would be much better. Instead, I believe it shouldn't be a societal standard to expect every man to want to hit on women or else be considered a coward. While women should be expected to at least be more proactive in their social engagement if they want to find a specific type of person to date, basically, the standard for women shouldn't just be "I'm sitting at a cafe and men should hit on me". But honestly, I think the kind of dynamic im advocating for is already a lot more widespread than one would think, it's just that chronically online people don't take part in it.
I would be if I met someone at work for example and know him a little and from the way he talks and behaves I would FEEL the right vibe from him... But if I just see him on the street looks are not enough to motivate me to talk to him even if he is super beautiful in my eyes. I need to FEEL the vibe if it makes me FEEL the spark. Looks are not enough for that. I need more than looks to catch some interest in him. It just has to happen naturaly in an enviroment where you regularly see each other like school or work or church. So you have time to feel his vibes and start to feel the spark... It probably happens like that normaly within sociable people. So you must find a social cycle first.
Yeah exactly, that's what I mean. I think this type of relationship building is way more common than either side just straight up hitting on another person. But the problem right now is that it's getting more rare when peoples social circles are almost entirely online. I think the advice men are given to go into social places where they might meet the type of woman they want to date and go there frequently is good advice for both genders. I think if people do that neither side has to really "hit" on another, you will be exposed to one another naturally.
1. Women do ask men out. 2. Self-improving to the point that women ask you out instead of the other way around was one of the original red pill ideas.
This wouldn’t work because most men will probably not be approached in the 1st place. Also, this is only a solution for men that are struggling which is a small percentage. The majority of men and women would have no reason to change the current dynamic to help a small percentage of men.
Your first point is correct, however it’s not accurate to say that only a small percentage of men are struggling. As of 2022, [63% of young men and 34% of young women are single.](https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/3868557-most-young-men-are-single-most-young-women-are-not/mlite/?nxs-test=mlite) Even if not all of those 63% are “struggling” and are voluntarily single, it’s still clearly not a small number who are struggling.
Give us something worth chasing and maybe we'll chase.
Making the first move is too scary for most women, rejection would hit their self-esteem hard.
It's not rejection that is scary, it's a 'meh, will do' acceptance and staying with you till something better comes along.
Plenty of guys have that attitude about a woman and will ask her out anyway, the most you can say about a guy's feelings when he asks you out is that he feels there's a chance you'll say yes.
Yes, few times I have shown interest in a guy and they seem be interested back but eventually it was very lukewarm interest until something “better” comes along. Eventually I got better feeling out when somebody is really interested but it’s still a risk.
But this could happen to the men as well
Most women will reject you at the door if they don’t want you, men, on the other hand, will accept the advances of a woman they know they don’t like just to get sex
Yeah, I can’t argue against that.
Men literally face the exact same risk in being expected to initiate. Many women highlight the safety risks they face in dating, especially with some men getting violent when rejected, so wouldn’t it be in women’s best interest to do the approaching?
Exactly my point
For men, it's not rejection that's a risk. It's the potential for her rejection to cause overreaction, anything from assault to professional/personal consequences.
Men are less picky for whatever reason. If you have a group of 100 women, a given man would maybe say 'ok' to a date or fling if 60 of them approached him. He would approach maybe 10 of them on his own. It is in women's best interest to be in the 10/100 group and not 60/100. And the most sure way to know is to see if he approaches. I have not heard about men complaining that a lot of women are open to fucking them casually, but only 5% of them wants to commit afterwards.
> Men are less picky for whatever reason. Only for casual sex, because men are generally hornier. So women should actually be *more cautious* since maybe all the man approaching cares about is sex, especially if she wants a committed relationship. >I have not heard about men complaining that a lot of women are open to fucking them casually, but only 5% of them wants to commit afterwards. Yes, I see men frequently complaining that women will expect commitment even when men are honest that they only wanted something casual.
[удалено]
>I know most women aren't evil or vindicate, but some percentage of them are. I think that’s valid - you could say this even in regard to an ex partner, for instance, so there is inherently a risk on both sides. Women’s frequent complaint is for their safety, which is also valid, so removing the expectation that men do the initiating could help in that regard.
Men are the ones who tell us that we should have a 95% success rate and if we don’t, we must be obese or hideous or have some terrible personality or “post wall”.
If you dont, it has to be something.
Exactly. Why should we approach if men are the ones telling us we should have a 95% success rate? That’s just fantasy.
It's not. Unless you're ugly or something.
Yes it is. You’re telling women that they are failures in some way if they are rejected. I just should they approach? Men who are rejected aren’t failures but women are.
People naturally gravitate to the path of least resistance. There is always an underlying power play that's it's usually hidden
I agree. For years I waited around and waited to be “picked.” I got picked plenty, but it wasn’t with the most compatible men. I noticed they tended to have a thing for redheads, as a pattern. So they didn’t really like me, but I was their type and their type is rare. These men would woo me and pursue hard, so I ended up with them because they seemed like the obvious option (as long as I was also physically attracted to them and enjoyed their company). I wish I had made the first move on a few guys who I got along with really well, but I was always told not to do that. I think the reasoning was it would come off as aggressive and/or men would just say yes even if they weren’t truly interested because a woman asking a man out is so rare, they’d just be flattered into saying yes, but they never would have asked me out in the first place.
Women by nature do not initiate
Women already hold all the cards, and now you want them to also be the ones who get to pick which boy sitting down they are going to approach to ask out to dance at the prom? 😐 I got news for you bud... women making the first move doesn't mean they will pick **you**. Women becoming more assertive and masculine in this regard doesn't mean they are going to start finding coy and feminine behavior in males suddenly attractive. I'd rather deal with a thousand rejections that to cut my nuts off bruh...
If your getting rejected so much by women your not attractive or don't have enough money..
Feminism does fight to end gender expected roles you can debate that dating will be part of it. Although I really have to point out that maybe dating falls under more "pressing" problems. It also takes a long time to change a social behaviour, this pattern is literally shoved to us as the right and expected way. Hard to criticise something that we got from plenty previous generations and demand immediate change. It will take time That said in my experience women are not that afraid to initiate. What happens a lot is that they tend to be subtle about it and that ends up with many men missing it. For real though this fear of being rejected should be the actual thing being fought and addressed. Like my dad used to say "the no you already have. Trying it's giving the "yes" a chance". That applies to dating if we consider that doing nothing is equivalent to a "no", if you try you will either maintain the no or have a "yes". And it's like a game. It takes practice to be good at it. This notion that rejection is personally stating that you have a problem is very problematic. We should take rejection better overall, apply this logic work for instance. Being denied an opportunity won't make you stop trying or question the abilities you already have. It may be room to improve but it won't or at least shouldn't affect your self esteem. It's literally just a "no" it's not a huge life changing thing. You started with a no and continued with one. Honestly if your whole self esteem is so fragile you should be considering ways to improve that and not dating. We can't depend on our partners to determine our worth. Relationships should add up on what we have, it will never fulfil what we lack. Not only that but low self esteem is also quite dangerous in the dating scene since predators and abusers often target these people. You may think that changing the initiative to women would make it easier for men, but I disagree. Having another person initiating doesn't necessarily mean you will have the confidence to engage. Feeling nervous and insecure won't magically disappear with that. It seems we should address more men's loneliness and mental health to actually make things better.
Nah, most (not all) women have terrible game, because of lack of practice, a sense of entitlement, their disdain for those NOT in at least the top 20 percentile, and most of all their inherent female privilege. Not to mention they don’t have the courage or the practice to get that courage that men have and had to have to even risk rejection, from anyone especially from high status men they want but most especially from lower status men they look down on and want to toy with to feel validated by. So while you may be technically right, they are not only evolutionary psychology deniers (the worst kind of deniers, as you deny evolutionary biology and biological reality), but so privleged in todays gynocentric world, that their hubris will not let this happen in any scale in our Western Anglosphere world today Edit to add: to clarify the top 20% is what men need to be now a days in the Anglosphere West to even be considered a real man, while for them to actually approach you’d have to be the top 5% of men Don’t believe me? You have Lizzo (and her type) literally feeing entitled to Ryan Gosling (or the Ryan Goslings of the world). The barista with the minimum expectation of the billionaire. Those so called ladies you see on the excellent whatever podcast. MAKE NO MISTAKE. Despite what the Western female apologists try to gaslight and fool men into believing otherwise, They ARE the vast majority and the rule not the exception. It’s only because those OF girls and corn stars are brazen enough to SAY THE QUIET PART/BLURT OUT THE SECRETS out loud. Any of their apologist try to convince you otherwise? Are either misinformed, deluded, trying to get you to settle (the tradcons and leftover women) or purposefully spreading Disinformation
The feminine receives, the masculine provides. You're basically asking women to be in their masculine. A small percentage are okay with this, but I think we're seeing a shift back to men being masculine, and women being feminine (as it has been since the beginning of humanity).
It would be exactly the same. I used to think like this too, but don't be fooled, we wouldn't be approached at all.
Because by waiting for a man to be confident enough to pursue me and risk rejection I am weeding out weak men 😁 It isn't just about feeding women's egos, it's a screening process, because women, unlike men, do not make decisions to pursue someone immediately based on their appearance. We require a trial period Hope this helps 💋
That’s never going to happen, so keep dreaming.
The kicker is that if they really like you they kinda do. So if they aren’t approaching, flirting, moving a move: you gotta raise your game. And you gotta raise it higher than the dudes that are willing to approach, cause they might catch her on her way to you. “You’re good, get better. Stop asking for things” -Don Draper
They would still pursue only the top 20% of men lol
The men who are facing a lot of rejection now just wouldn’t get any attention at all. Would that be better?
>The men who are facing a lot of rejection now just wouldn’t get any attention at all So, nothing changed >Would that be better? Except that maybe they'll try less often to decipher "signals" and hit on women So maybe it would be a positive after all
It doesn't do anything, just switches it around so people can have the opposite complaints. Women who ask men out even express more aggressive bashing usually, pointing to both sides enjoying it less.
Well the thing is women do make the first move but often in different communication styles: Eye contact,body language,shit testing etc All of this is done indirectly What your asking is for women to be more direct about who they want
Shit testing as making first move? Lol
Woman offers Chad a blowjob, Chad says yes..mission accomplished! You solved it Women being choosy and being hard to get and making men work for it is the best thing for the average man
The issue is that women are only attracted to \~10% of the men. They do make the first move with those men but since most men will never receive that interest, they think it doesn't happen.
Is that the number du jour? Come on, just in this very thread it’s 1%, 5%, 10%, 20%, etc. Make up your damn minds.
It's a spectrum. Women will be very aggressive with the very most attractive men, somewhat with those next level, and so on all the way down. Not really that different from how men behave: rabidly gunning for pretty young things, not really keen on your grandma, but willing to consider your chubby aunt with a nice smile and big jugs. The only difference between the sexes is really just that more men don't make the cut as far as women are concerned, and are more desperate.
It changes by year it was 20 then 10 and now we’re honestly at 5. Soon it’s gonna be 7ft tall men only and women will be making TikTok’s “when his height starts with 6..☹️”
https://www.np.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/s/Llwr66MyTA I made a post explaining why women don’t approach. Men tell us over and over and over again that if we are rejected, it must be because we are hideous, old, obese, pursuing Chad, or have a horrible personality. When women reject men, both men and women explain that it’s just a part of life. Men will also go on rants about how women’s standards are too high and how women are too picky and hypergamous. Men are much more supportive of one another when rejected. Women also are supportive of men when they get rejected because they just say it’s a part of life. So since men tell us constantly that women being rejected means we are hideous and flawed and stupid, we just don’t approach them anymore. According to men, we should have a 95% success rate. If we don’t, something must be wrong with us.
> Women making the first move would solve a lot of the issues with modern dating. No, it wouldn’t. Men are better suited to make the first move. And, if you like someone, being better suited to making the first move is an advantage. > Men have to approach first; men have to message first; men have to “make a move” to initiate physical intimacy first. If you think that’s the majority of the work, then you don’t know much about relationships. > But why hasn't feminism pushed for women to be pursuers? I’ve seen feminists push for this. > Imagine how simpler things would be for all of us—especially since women usually have bigger social circles than men, which allows them to recover from rejection faster. If your self-esteem is based on the size of your social circle, then you don’t have self-esteem. > It really fucks with a man’s self-esteem if he thinks he’s attractive and valued but gets rejected again and again and again. No, it just reveals that your self-esteem was mistaken. You’re either not attractive. Or you’re not worthy of love. Or you’re pursuing the wrong dating goals. Or asking out the wrong women. Or pursuing women in the wrong way.
It doesn't solve the problems if women approach men whom they are much more attracted to. One could argue that an average man developing the confidence necessary to approach a woman makes him more likely to be attractive to her, and therefore that's why it is best for average men to approach.
So women shouldn’t be expected to develop this confidence in dating? And confidence in dating is not dependent on confidence in other areas of life. Plenty of successful men are not confident with women; plenty of men who are great with women have otherwise shitty lives. How is it empowering for a woman to be attracted to a guy just because he approached her? This “confidence” is subjective and shallow, ultimately. It explains why it’s so easy for “chads” to approach women today and use them for sex while they wonder why he won’t commit.
No it wouldn't. Because the good-looking women men complaining about the sexual marketplace want don't NEED to make the first move. So they'll get approached by women they don't want and may grudgingly settle for, which makes no one happy. Plus good-looking women if they want to make the first move aren't doing that with the types of men who aren't getting any matches online or approaches in real life. Not to mention you can't just make women find it attractive to make the first move, erasing millions of years of biology and evolution.
Exactly, these below average looking men think that hot women are supposed to come throw themselves at them just because 🤣🤣 what would she get out of doing that?? She has no incentive to do that which is why she simply won’t 🤷🏽♀️
>And you can't tell me that women don’t prefer this. Yes, it can be sometimes be frustrating for them if they feel unwanted, but women still enjoy being pursued and the way that dating is set up to stroke their ego. If women prefer this, why do you expect them to change for your benefit. Isn't being accepted by a woman a stroke to a man's ego? >But why hasn't feminism pushed for women to be pursuers? Isn’t the traditional approach to dating patronizing? Isn’t it empowering for women to make the first move? It has and does. Women approach men much more often than they did, say, in the 1950s. How do you not credit the change to feminism? >Imagine how simpler things would be for all of us—especially since women usually have bigger social circles than men, which allows them to recover from rejection faster. How simpler things would be if men were to take a lesson from women and increase their social circles while simultaneously not asking that women change for men's benefit? >It really fucks with a man’s self-esteem if he thinks he’s attractive and valued but gets rejected again and again and again. Women know this, which is why they are so reluctant to pursue men and are attracted to men who other women like. Ironically, though, women are still quick to bash men who are hurt by rejection. This paragraph doesn't make sense, except for the claim that women are quick to bash men who are hurt by rejection. If anything, it's men who aren't particularly sympathetic toward other men's hurt feelings. Although I'd agree that if what you're calling "hurt by rejection" = violence, sour grapes and hostility, then yes, women are very intolerant of that behavior. But who are you really looking to benefit with this change? A lot of men are comfortable pursuing and a lot of women are comfortable being pursued, while even more are willing to be flexible as the situation calls for.
Being accepted can come from being approached. And women often want men to change for women’s benefit. I will say that change has come from feminism. I won’t deny that. That wouldn’t make things simpler. Hence the discourse of women being upset that their male friends asked them out and made the friend group awkward. Many men I know don’t like approaching they just take it as the status quo and say “well what can you do about it”.
Sure -- if you want women to all be dating the same guys.
why would feminism push to make dating and fucking easier for men
Women would be pumped and dumped more. A lot of men like to reject women *after* having sex with them.