What do you guys think of this?

oneiorosgrip · 2013-10-23T03:46:51+00:00

This is a religious article. It's going to be based on traditional gender stereotypes, and it's going to be written from the perspective that men are responsible, and women are innocent angels, or at least that men only take an interest in innocent angels. It's somewhat functional advice (most of it, anyway) presented in a manner that is dysfunctional because, again, it places all of the responsibility for a two-way interaction on just the man.

The article places all of the burden for initiating contact, pursuing a relationship, and filling the breadwinner role on the man. That's consistent with traditional Christian lifestyles, but it's not functional or merited in a society in which men don't have authority over women. It especially doesn't work in a society in which divorce exempts the female partner from the responsibilities dictated by her role in the partnership, but leaves the man subject to those dictated by his role.

Take the gender out of it, and the first point has some merit. A person who initiates interaction should be clear about it. It's just that the responsibility to do so shouldn't automatically belong to the man. If a woman is attracted to a guy, she ought to let him know, and she ought to cover the date's expenses exactly the same as the author of this expects a man to do.

The second point has some merit, too, if you take the religious perspective out, and again, it shouldn't be gendered. Both sexes should be the person they are going to present to a potential partner, or at least honestly present to potential partners the person they are going to be. It's good to strive to be a person you can respect and take pride in being, and it's good to have consideration for your partner's experiences, but defining your worth by your partner's attitudes and expectations is dysfunctional. Being dishonest about yourself in a relationship is a big reason why divorce is so common. Basing one's relationship on a false understanding of each other is a sure way to doom it.

That said, the article is written from a religious perspective. It's up to you to decide what you think a "cleaned up" act is. Churches will define that their way, and if you choose to follow one, it's your choice to submit yourself to those rules. If those rules don't seem sensible to you, maybe the church isn't a good fit for your spiritual nature.

The third point is the same - it shouldn't be gendered, and it's not bad advice, even though it's from a religious perspective that deems premarital sex "sinful." The reality is that if you don't want something to happen on a date, it's wise to avoid putting yourself in a position where the inclination for it to happen will likely arise, and you're likely to fail to prevent it from happening. That's not limited to sex. That could include things like choosing a less expensive venue if your plan is to not overspend, or planning ahead when to introduce your partner to your extended family.

Point 4 is mostly bullshit, in that it takes into account the fragility of a woman's heart, and completely ignores the fragility of a man's heart. Take the gender out of it and apply it to both, and it becomes an admonition to not rush recklessly into a relationship. That's a wise piece of advice.

And I've seen both sexes do the "using the faith as a tool for manipulation" bit. It's an asshole move when either sex does it, regardless of their intent.

Point 5 - the way it's written goes right back to making the man responsible for everything, as if women have no agency in how they touch or are touched. That's just stupid.

It's sensible to be mindful of how your interaction contradicts your intent, especially if you're an individual who plans on remaining celibate until marriage, or if you're not ready to trust your partner with your heart and your freedom enough to be sexually intimate with her... but in a committed relationship, you should both have the same intentions, so if your intent involves waiting for whatever reason, that should be part of your relationship, and your partner is equally responsible for being mindful of that plan. If she's not, then she's not a woman of good character.

And of course, if the two of you have no such restriction, then the admonition about touching is unnecessary. Regardless, you should never think of your partner the way you think of a child. Don't put yourself in that position - it creates an incentive for her to take advantage by placing all of the responsibility burden on you instead of sharing it with you as a partner, and even if she starts out intending to act as a mature adult, that kind of coddling will result in her relaxing into a state of childish irresponsibility.

In the end, this is an article to take with a grain of salt. The advice in it is too heavily couched in religious ideology for it to apply functionally to the population at large.

jolly_mcfats · 2013-10-23T02:44:48+00:00

It rubs me the wrong way because it insists on a traditionalist relationship in which the man is responsible for everything. There's no mutuality. It may bother other people for other reasons. Many in the MRM complain about how the provider/protector role is outdated; this article is an advertisement for it.

Eulabeia · 2013-10-23T04:29:38+00:00

the unintentional guy’s responses are selfish because they put his interests before the woman’s

I don't feel like I even have to keep reading anymore, this is probably what the whole thing is going to be about. "Her feelings and desires are more important than yours so just do what they want." Stupid.

There's no reason for any man to take any of this seriously because it's not even trying to come off as being advice for men on how to be successful with women, it's just a list of demands.

2013-10-23T04:47:59+00:00

“Can you cover half the bill? I’m pretty broke right now.” (My wife believes this communicates, “You are worth about $20, but not quite $40.”

What does it communicate when a woman pays nothing then? Men are worthless?

2013-10-23T02:37:35+00:00

https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2011/10/10/smp-searching-costs-and-the-unmourned-death-of-courtship/

Women traditionally were able to bask in the courtship process because they were the center of attention and men bore the financial, emotional, and social costs of the selection process. What men typically find grueling women find delightful. However, in cultures with traditional courtship men perceive the rewards to be high (lifetime commitment). In addition, in such cultures the risks are moderated by rules of decorum and formal and informal pressure on the woman to minimize the number of men she allows to court her. While the average woman might wish to be courted by 50 men, the average man is in no position to bear the expense of courting 50 women in order to find a wife.

Ever since the beginning of the sexual revolution women have perceived the incentive to prolong courtship in one way or another. The old rules no longer restricted them from extending the courtship period or required them to keep their lifetime commitment, and many men initially continued to play by the old set of rules. This is at the very heart of choice addiction.

https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2012/05/05/women-should-reduce-their-expectations-of-courtship/

What we need to explain to young women is not only that their own behavior will determine how willing men are to foot the searching costs, but that the behavior of women in general has already changed the rules. The whole point of courtship is finding out if there is a match there. Footing this investment has become a losing proposition for men in many ways. She can’t expect the man to know that “she is different”, because this is what the process is about. In the past women enjoyed a free ride here, but it came at the cost of pressure to not dither and make marriage a priority. The pressure is gone now, and so is much of the free ride. So all a young woman can expect now is the new baseline limited courtship which men have adjusted to. The older she gets the less of this she should expect. If she handles this badly she will gain a reputation for such and will receive even less than the age adjusted baseline. But either way she can’t expect what women received in the past, and even that is less than what Disney has likely sold to her.

rightsbot · 2013-10-23T02:24:16+00:00

Post text automatically copied here. (Why?) (Report a problem.)

brendanvista · 2013-10-23T05:00:50+00:00

I actually brought it up with my girlfriend, and we talked about it a bit. I really appreciate you guys helping me analyze this stuff. All you guys brought up really good points. Thank you so much!

sammacyntyre · 2013-10-23T08:07:49+00:00

Men and women these days who want men to pay for the whole date don't seem to realize they are saying that women are chattel and that it's a down-payment that entitles men to sex

KamikaziWarrior · 2013-10-23T14:47:47+00:00

I'm going to try to completely ignore the religious context of the article and I assume that this is for the initial stage of relationships: first couple of dates to the first few months. I have a big problem with section 1 and will leave it for last.

Section 2: Getting your shit together is good advice and helps with dating. I believe that people gain confidence which spreads to the other area's of their life when they have their shit together.

Section 3: Yes! Plan your dates out. Knowing where your going, and what you're going to do has helped me a lot. As a side note, winging it is often times a good plan.

Section 4: "Don't hurt her" Sure, whatever. I'm not sure how else I can remove the religious aspect from it.

Section 5: To make it not religious I'll phrase it as "know your boundaries" Also good advice, wherever your boundaries lie. Know what you're going to do when your boundaries are being crossed and also be respectful of hers.

Back to section 1. It is wrong advice. Wrong. Glossing over their specific examples of intentional/unintentional, all of the intentional examples are incorrect moves/statement and will hinder your dating. The unintentional statements have the right idea but are worded so poorly that it makes the person sound like they have no confidence. This is because their main conclusion of:

The big idea is this, men: Don’t keep her guessing. Let her know exactly where you are at all of the time. Is the opposite of what needs to be done. You want to keep her guessing by doing date like things: taking her out, holding hands, being playful, etc. without ever putting it into words. That way she knows that you two are dating but still has that doubt in her mind. This should cause her to think about you more and discuss your dates in detail with her friends. I fully believe that this makes dating much more exciting for her and for you.

This article suffers from what most dating advice suffers from (in my experience especially women's advice to men) It suffers from being what the author wishes works for dating. As will all advice, take it with a grain of salt and compare it to your personal experience. I believe this is why the article sounds off but you can't quite articulate well. The overall message from subject 1 most likely has been told to you over and over by many people because they wished it worked that way, but from personal experience you probably know that the article is full of shit.

Source: I am an extremely introverted guy (You know how your stomach gets in a knot when your really nervous about something? I got that every time walking up to talk to my friends in high school, people I talked to everyday.) who spent a number of years figuring out how to date women resulting in great success. I then coached a close friend through the same process and he is now experiencing great success.

Edit: FYI to give a little perspective I'm currently 24.

Title	What do you guys think of this?
Author	brendanvista
Upvotes	3
Comments	11
Date	October 23, 2013 2:22 AM UTC (12 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/1p0tw3/what_do_you_guys_think_of_this/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/what-do-you-guys-think-of-this.1160643 https://theredarchive.com/post/1160643

Comments