Got Fucked Over

Rylan said:

He has found many enablers here, that is for sure! LMAO

I would like to make a poll but it would be two-fold so I don't know who to word it.

Basically - All those in this thread who have been saying to DR.L that he is right, how successful are they in dating and how do they feel women in general are regarding dating.

All those who are saying the Dr.L is wrong in the thread, how successful are they in dating and how do they feel women in general are regarding dating.


I have a feeling that those who say he is wrong, are great at dating, getting lots of free puss if they want, and love women in general while those who say Dr.L is right, don't date, use SP's as their social outlet, hate women most of the time and get no free pussy!

What do you think?

Click to expand...

Rylan I don't agree with you . Just to repeat myself. The men and women who can afford to be so casual about dating are the ones who are in demand in the dating marketplace.

I personally happen to love women but I am not very good at dating. With that being said I'm sure I could have had sex with that woman who asked me out in a supermarket eventually. However I didn't find her the least bit attractive and she had other issues as well!

Why deceive someone just to get free pussy? In my case it certainly wouldn't have been free as I probably would have had to pay a lot of money to support her bad habits!

IMHO, DL is 100% right in how he is handling the situation so far.

squash500 said:

Captain here's my take on the situation . The woman who DL is pursuing must be hot looking or maybe in her 20's or early 30's----who knows? For whatever reason this game playing chick is not desperate for a guy? Maybe she has 10 other guys after her as well?

Believe me if DL was her dream guy she would be all over him like white on rice. That's the way women in demand operate? On the other hand IMHO guys who have good jobs ( Doctors, lawyers, Accountants etc etc) can afford to play the same games with women as this woman is playing with DL.

It's all about the laws of supply and demand. Basic Economics 101! These guys with good jobs will also have women lining up at their door as well!

Click to expand...

That's why you and many others are in the situation that you're in. You don't really respect, like or trust women and it shows. That includes drlove.

Most women don't care about what job a guy has, just so long as he has a job or that he has passion and a dream/plan. I've been at both ends of the spectrum (jobless and reasonably well off) and I've never had a problem getting dates or being in relationships.

It's all about one's attitude, outlook and how they comport themselves in life and in relationships/dating. Women want a guy who is fun, yet serious when the time calls for it. Romantic and nice without being cheesy or a pushover. Smart and sensitive, but not arrogant or emotionally vacant. And you'd be really surprised at how unlike many men, women are not hung up on looks.

Really, it's not all that different than what a guy wants in a relationship. It's just that so many guys on TERB are mistrustful and borderline misogynists that the "norm" is skewed towards "men" who believe that women are out to get them. Just as there are women who believe the same... again, we're not all that different. The smart, successful and happy daters accept that and learn to read the signs (verbal and non-verbal) that tell you where things are and how the other person feels. They also tell you when a relationship isn't working out. Those that don't end up like drlove - bitter, blaming and bitching.

squash500 said:

IMHO, DL is 100% right in how he is handling the situation so far.

Click to expand...

If that's not a reason why he should re-think his strategy, I don't know what is.

Not trying to be mean, squash, but you've shown time and again that you don't understand women and that your viewpoint is totally one of "women are out to get me - unless I pay them."

squash500 said:

Rylan I don't agree with you. Just to repeat myself. The men and women who can afford to be so casual about dating are the ones who are in demand in the dating marketplace.

Click to expand...

Or maybe they are in demand because they "get it"? Dating isn't rocket science. It's about having fun (and that doesn't need to cost much at all) and having some semblance of emotional IQ.

squash500 said:

I personally happen to love women but I am not very good at dating. With that being said I'm sure I could have had sex with that woman who asked me out in a supermarket eventually. However I didn't find her the least bit attractive and she had other issues as well!

Click to expand...

And you don't have issues? You are a stunner, a catch, a man-in-demand? So really, where do you get off saying she's the one with the issues? If you don't like her alcoholism, that's one thing - I can understand it completely. But I don't think you should somehow deceive yourself into thinking that your issues aren't just as big to others that you deem worthy of you affections.

squash500 said:

Why deceive someone just to get free pussy? In my case it certainly wouldn't have been free as I probably would have had to pay a lot of money to support her bad habits!

Click to expand...

Who said anything about deceiving? Where are you getting this shit from? Your are making enormous leaps in logic.

Again, alcoholism isn't cool. But who said you had to pay for her? YOU chose to. Dates can be nothing more than a coffee, a walk or ONE drink. I do that all the time for the first couple of dates and I rarely have problems. If a girl has issue with me not lavishing big dinners and gifts on her from the get-go, I want nothing to do with her. Easy cut-off point for me. That's MY choice.

Guys who go the "romantic" route of expensive dinner and wine, gifts, etc., are setting themselves up for failure most of the time. Many girls see this as bragging, overcompensation or worse, an attempt to buy them if the guy doesn't have the substance to back it up. That's the point I'm trying to make - just like clothes DON'T make the man, neither does his dating "bling."

...It's all about one's attitude, outlook and how they comport themselves in life and in relationships/dating. Women want a guy who is fun, yet serious when the time calls for it. Romantic and nice without being cheesy or a pushover. Smart and sensitive, but not arrogant or emotionally vacant. And you'd be really surprised at how unlike many men, women are not hung up on looks.

Click to expand...

Ahem, women may want all that but books and articles are full of examples of women who don't go for that. Sorry, I 100% disagree. Women are more hung up on looks than men. They just go about it differently. They assume all guys want a pam anderson lookalike (but we don't) and while they don't all go for a gq brad pitt lookalike, they do have a particular look they go for and won't deviate from that.

Look at the long running commentary on short guys: that is 100% based on a guy's "look". It is 100% accurate to state that most women want tall guys. Some want heavy guys, some want skinny athletic types but the fact remains they are based on a guy's "look" not who he really is.

To say women aren't hung up on looks is ludicrous......

tboy said:

Ahem, women may want all that but books and articles are full of examples of women who don't go for that. Sorry, I 100% disagree. Women are more hung up on looks than men. They just go about it differently. They assume all guys want a pam anderson lookalike (but we don't) and while they don't all go for a gq brad pitt lookalike, they do have a particular look they go for and won't deviate from that.

Look at the long running commentary on short guys: that is 100% based on a guy's "look". It is 100% accurate to state that most women want tall guys. Some want heavy guys, some want skinny athletic types but the fact remains they are based on a guy's "look" not who he really is.

To say women aren't hung up on looks is ludicrous......

Click to expand...

And that's why you're perceived as a bitter misogynist. You (and those like you) believe the things that make it easier for you not to look at yourselves. That includes either trying to date out of your league by having expectations that you cannot live up to yourself. And then blaming the women after the fact.

I've seen too many short, ugly trollish men with very average jobs get lots of attractive women - because they have a good personality and an even better attitude. The fact that you bring cute-bald into this just proves that point. He has a terrible attitude and personality. If even 1/4 of his online persona is carried over into the real world, I can plainly see why no women want to have any part of him.

Simply put, the average woman is not nearly as hung up on looks as the average man is. That's just a fact - to argue it just shows you want to argue, not discuss the issues.

Thank god Cosco had popcorn on sale yesterday. I was suppose to clean out my garage but it is raining, so I am poppin' some corn and settling in.

CF, let me know if you want some help, or need a break.

Yeah, it's getting hot in here.....

I'm not sure about the whole women not being hung up on looks as men. Most of the girls I know these days are looking for the Ambecrombie and Fitch stereotype. I'm not saying that that's a bad choice, but it's very specific, i.e. white, 20's at least 6 feet, 175-200lbs muscular, blue eyes etc. If you deviate from that, i.e are not 6 feet tall, white etc etc etc. you are pretty much SOL. And I'm not just speaking about white Canadian girls, but also Chinese girls, Indian girls etc., all seem to carry this ideal in their head.

I see douchebags all the time who are very adept at acheiving that Ambecrombie and Fitch look and are the most successful with the ladies. You know, the one where it looks like they don't care about their looks and are all nonchalant about it, but in reality spend alot of time thinking about how to layer their long sleeve shirt underneath their short sleeve shirt etc.

And if you're Asian, or Indian or Black and try to get that look, you won't be as successful. Any trip down to Queen's University where the A & F douchebag habitates and you will see this immediately.

Having said this, I don't think the issue isn't that girls are less hung up on looks, but are more interested in a man's earning potential than anything else. This might explain why you consistently see hot girls with ugly guys. I'm sure there are other confounding variables to female mate preference, which may give the appearance that they don't care about looks as much as men, but that may not necessarily be so.

Captain F: if you actually read and understood my post you'd argee. Women are just as hung up on looks as men are, they just go about it differently.

I never said women ONLY want what is typically considered an attractive man, what is attractive to them may BE short fat bald and smelly. The fact of the matter is they will only GO for short fat bald and smelly if that is what they find attractive.

Same as men, we are stereotyped as only wanting skinny big boobs bleach blonde hair (mainly by women) but I HATE that look and so do millions of others. Many (I'd say most of us) just want someone WE find attractive.

For eg: I got into a debate on the forums at POF once with a bunch of people. (surprised? lol) We were discussing what we found attractive. A woman said she like a guy to look like x, I said the perfect woman physically for me is someone about 34 24 34. maybe 5 1 to 5 6 about 120 - 130 lbs. She said "I want a skinny twig". I said BULLSHIT. That is about as average as you can get. It turned out she thought she was "average" at size 16 185 lbs. All the women in the thread were saying they aren't hung up on looks yet were continually stating things like: they won't date a bald guy, won't date a short guy, won't date an overweight guy. That is the same fricken thing. The second you put any type of criteria on a person's looks and why you won't date them because they don't meet your criteria is no different than a guy saying I won't date an overweight or larger women. NO DIFFERENCE.

And to answer Rylan: the reason it applies to women and not to men (and Captain F has swollowed this party line hook line and sinker) is because women will NOT admit that they are hung up on looks because that is somehow shallow. Yet a person's appearance, whatever that may be, is just one aspect of who they are. It is as important as emotional stability, personality, intelligence, whatever.

Now maybe Captain would realize that women are just (if not more) hung up on looks as men if he'd walked a mile in my shoes.

Let me ask you Captain: how many times have you approached a woman, said hi hello whatever and had her look you up and down and sneer? or meet a blind date after talking for months and having her face show utter disappointment? (and that one was through a glass door)

Believe me dude, you can argue all you want but if you don't think looks aren't as important to women as men, then you are living in a dream world.

tboy said:

And to answer Rylan: the reason it applies to women and not to men (and Captain F has swollowed this party line hook line and sinker) is because women will NOT admit that they are hung up on looks because that is somehow shallow. Yet a person's appearance, whatever that may be, is just one aspect of who they are. It is as important as emotional stability, personality, intelligence, whatever.

Click to expand...

But it is the men here who are saying that is it bad for woman to want these things and it is a matter of choice for them as men. It is not woman saying that they don't agree or them not admitting that they like looks.

Also and more importantly, if you noticed in my question, I didn't list looks in the woman question, but I did list it in the man side of the question. So you are not actually answering my question but instead trying to use it out of context to further your agreument against CF, who will not fall of it, like I haven't.

What I have to ask is why should women not be allowed to judge a man on his looks? Men have done it for centuries.

The days of the fat, slovenly, ill-kempt man with a bad personality being able to get a good woman are drawing to a close. Deal with it. Women have had to dress up and look good for years, now they want to see some of the same effort made by men. And some people can't take it. Tough shit, I say. Make the same effort you demand from women, guys.

Bald is nothing - if the man can allow himself to go bald gracefully - no comb-overs or skullets. Height is only slightly higher on the pecking order and that goes to genetics - for "real" relationships, women want a man who has good genes. Can you blame them? I don't want my progeny to be short and ugly! I have physical choices that I make when considering who I'm going to take it to the next level with. Along with a long list of intellectual, emotional and common-sensical traits that must be met. But I'll date just about anyone if they are interesting. Most guys and some women won't. Take drlove's case - a Demi Moore lookalike was willing to go on a couple of dates with him, but he still complained because she wasn't falling over herself for him. Instead of looking at his actions and attitude, he immediately blamed her, without knowing what her story really was. The fact that she has stayed in touch with him is a miracle, given what he's claimed to have said/written to her.

All I'm saying is that more women are more willing to look past the physical than most men, particulary guys who have been promised the Playboy-bunny, supermodel-esque girl of their dreams. Those types and guys who exclusively "hobby" have artificial notions of what the female form is. I find women to be much more pragmatic about these things than men. But I'm not bitter and jaded, so I guess that makes my point invalid...

I'm sorry that you're not an attractive man, tboy. I really am. But I think you might want to take a look inside at what you can control, namely your attitude and outlook. You can be controversial without always having to be right or confrontational. You can be independent but still have the capacity for empathy. And you can learn to try and improve yourself as an overall human being every day in every way and not just think you're perfect the way you are, because "God made you this way." Just sayin'.

Captain Fantastic said:

I would LOVE to see the response from the guys on TERB if the roles of drlove and this woman were reversed.

A woman calling a guy repeatedly, even if he doesn't respond. Sending emails laying out "feelings" very early on. The same woman, after TWO DATES asking the man to "define" the relationship. The woman complaining about the guy not taking the initiative through calls and emails.

99% of the guys here would say that she's clingy and bound to be trouble over the long haul and to ditch her - after having sex with her.

Click to expand...

My response would be the same either way. What is good for the goode is good for the gander.

a 1 player said:

My response would be the same either way. What is good for the goode is good for the gander.

Click to expand...

But you're one of the few that "get it." There are a dearth of self-actualized men on this board.

Certainly, women have the right just like anyone else to go out with a well groomed, good looking individual. Nothing wrong with that. However, I don't really know how true it is to say that they are not as hung up on looks as men are. The only real objective way to try and answer a question of this sort is to run an experiment, and crunch some numbers comparing male and female responses.

However, also (and I'm not saying that this is the case here), but by stating women are more willing to look past the physical than men, implies to me, that they are less superficial than men when it comes to dating, all noble, innocent, and choosing to look at the inner beauty of a man, which I don't think is the case at all, and I would suggest that they are even more shallow, and more superficial and discriminatory than men, especially when it comes to perceived wealth. I think this is a valid point to mention.

winstar said:

However, also (and I'm not saying that this is the case here), by stating women are more willing to look past the physical than men, implies to me, that they are less superficial than men when it comes to dating, all noble, innocent, and choosing to look at the inner beauty of a man, which I don't think is the case at all, and I would suggest that they are even more shallow, and more superficial and discriminatory than men, especially when it comes to perceived wealth. I think this is a valid point to mention.

Click to expand...

This is the type of post that pisses me off. (no offense winstar).

What we have here is a complete stereotype of women, based on one persons dating experiences. It is the kind of post that women read, and 'some' will think that this is the way in which 'most' men view women. This is the type of mentality I have been trying to fight against. Indeed, this is the way 'some' women view men, and 'some' men view women, but I think that this type of person is in the minority.

Here is what 'I think' most women want. (Women, please feel free to correct me here if I am way off base).

-Someone who treats them as an equal
-Someone who respects them
-Someone who is intelligent
-Someone who has manners
-Someone who has ambition
-Someone who has 'a bit' of style
-Someone who is self sufficient
-Someone who has self respect
-Someone who has a sense of humor
-Someone who is fun
-Someone who is not codependent
-Someone who listens to them
-Someone who is not afraid to show emotions
-Someone with morals
-Someone who is not too hard on the eyes
-Who does not lie
-Who can admit when they are wrong
-Who has their own hobbies and interests
-Who does not get jealous easily
-Who will defend them and their honor
-Who is not cheap
-Who does not embarrass them
-Who they are not ashamed of after a few beers
-Who they can take home to their family and friends

Like I said in an earlier post, men and women are not that different from each other. Most of what is on that list is what men are seeking as well. If a man (or a woman) can show these traits, they will do well in the world of dating. This is not shallow, but it is discriminating, and as it should be.

winstar said:

However, also (and I'm not saying that this is the case here), by stating women are more willing to look past the physical than men, implies to me, that they are less superficial than men when it comes to dating, all noble, innocent, and choosing to look at the inner beauty of a man, which I don't think is the case at all, and I would suggest that they are even more shallow, and more superficial and discriminatory than men, especially when it comes to perceived wealth. I think this is a valid point to mention.

Click to expand...

Nope, that's a huge leap in logic. Where did it say that in any of my posts? Although I will unequivocally state here and now that I think the "wealth" thing is vastly overstated by the TERB misogynists. Particularly these days when women have their own sources of independent income.

Women have preferences and choices, just as men do. I think that's still within their rights, isn't it? But in the pecking order of things, looks are further down the list for most women when compared with most men. In general, women value personality traits, compassion, humour, etc., more than men do.

There is nothing more superficial than sizing someone up based solely on looks and I posit that men do that far more frequently than women. Being discriminating in taste, on the other hand, is entirely different. Why should a woman date a jock meathead? Or an insecure, nebbish nerd? Or an empty suit? I don't date airheads, women without souls or weak women lacking self-confidence and I'd hope that women would make the same tough choices. Why prolong a relationship or even try to make it work if there's nothing in common?

And I think that goes back to the OP - he wants a woman that responds immediately to his vague, general calls and emails; he wants the woman to take charge, but not be in charge; and he wants her to "define the relationship" after TWO DATES. The fact that she hasn't told him to fuck off yet is a miracle. She is obviously not going to play his game and is much more laid back and casual right now. He's a pedantic, high-strung mess. Different personalities - go thy separate ways. Dude's trying to fit his square peg into her round hole.

Nice list a 1 player. Pretty f'n comprehensive and impressive.

The only couple more I would add are:

- Someone who is positive in outlook.
- Someone who is laid back, but not lackadaisical.
- Someone who is kind to strangers and makes those around him/her feel comfortable.

What about adding occupation and ....

MONEY!!!!!!!!!!!!!

No offense taken.

Rylan said:

But it is the men here who are saying that is it bad for woman to want these things and it is a matter of choice for them as men. It is not woman saying that they don't agree or them not admitting that they like looks.

Also and more importantly, if you noticed in my question, I didn't list looks in the woman question, but I did list it in the man side of the question. So you are not actually answering my question but instead trying to use it out of context to further your agreument against CF, who will not fall of it, like I haven't.

Click to expand...

As much as you tried to bate me there with your last statement, I took your "questions" out of context and misunderstood what you were asking.

No, it is not "wrong" for a woman to want all that.

No it is not wrong for a man to want all that.

The reason many feel it is wrong for a man to want all that is because he is asking for perfection (in their opinion, not mine).

In all the discussions I've had online and in real life with women, the ONE underlying factor from their perspective is that men want too much in a woman, and women only want the best of the deeper traits. Deeper in THEIR estimation anyways. I have to admit there are (and I have met a few of them) who openly admit that they will only date what is considered a physically attractive man. The problem is these women want that attractive man who is popular with the ladies, a smooth talker, witty, charming, etc but they also want the sensitivity, intelligence, empathy, etc. and it is my experience that those qualities don't go with physical attractiveness (especially in men). It has been my experience that the more attractive a guy is, the weaker he is inside. The less coping skills, the co-dependance, the absolute necessity to have as many attractive females around him at all times.

So to sum up, imo, no, it is not wrong for a guy to want the perfect woman and a woman to want the perfect man. The problem lies when women say that "a guy who wants the perfect woman is delusional" yet at the same time, when a woman won't settle (there's that word again) for anything less than her idea of perfection, she is applauded for it.

But I'll date just about anyone if they are interesting. Most guys and some women won't.

Click to expand...

I disagree. Most guys WILL date just about anyone. (by date I mean go out at least once with) and most women won't if he doesn't meet their "idea" of attractive. How else do you explain the immediate brush off at hello that the vast majority of guys get?

Again I will repeat, since some don't get it, that for a guy to have "it" doesn't mean he looks like brad pitt. He doesn't even have to have the personality either. He just has that certain something that women want and they decide in 1.2 ms whether we have "it" or not. I have seen guys that look a little better than a supporating boil get the hottest women (and be just as beautiful on the inside) yet they continue to fall for them. I have seen some of the most attractive men (and be ugly on the inside) get any woman they want and have the women complain that they're assholes even after they've been warned.

I just want to point out that this (and most of my comments) apply to Toronto women only. Women in other cities IME have a different outlook on men and are way more open to getting to know someone before making any snap decisions.

As for the "barb" of Captain F about me not being attractive. Nice try. The ONLY person's opinion of how attractive I am is the one who faces me in the mirror on a daily basis. I used to worry about what others thought of me but I grew up. For that matter, it has been only the women in Toronto (and Manhatton) who have given me those looks of contempt. In every other city, especially Montreal, I do quite well thank you very much.

It wasn't a barb, tboy. I've never heard of nor seen a woman turn someone away or make an obvious sour face to that person's face based solely on looks. Maybe behind his back, to her friends/enablers. But even that's rare.

Because of your statement about it happening a few times to you, I just assumed that you looked like that monster-guy from the Goonies! My bad.


BTW, it's Manhattan. You've made that mistake a few times now. I know you value spelling and the like, so I thought I'd help out.