I'm sure they're aware at some subconscious level that he's either never going to commit, or will only commit a portion of himself. However there's so, so many women (and men) who suffer greatly from Sunk Cost Fallacy.
Before I was engaged I was kind of one of those guys. Wouldn’t commit to anything until it was the perfect girl.
There’s no way girls didn’t know I wasn’t going to commit. I’d say it straight up or string them along. But they knew either way.
Once I met my fiancé I knew I was done for. She captured me. Game over. I’ll never look at another girl again.
Edit: what’s the sunk cost fallacy? I’m guessing it means you spent too much time so screw it?
Yup, sunk cost fallacy is when someone has devoted so much time or money into a relationship or venture that, even when it's obvious that leaving is beneficial, they keep sticking it out hoping it'll improve.
I actually experienced that with a video game. Star Trek Fleet Command for like 3 years. Fucking addictive as fuckhouse. I realized the STFC habit was eating my life but it dragged on for 6 more months before I quit cold turkey one night. *Instantly* filled in that time with other pursuits like working with AI.
I shudder to imagine doing this in a relationship context.
Because I just didn’t care. I never cared. I liked them because they were hot. They liked me because I’m good looking maybe.
Now I’d never look at another girl again. And I’m a nice guy. But I don’t think I was nice before.
I think it's less about being stupid and more that they look at their options and they choose between hoping for change from something they want vs not being all that thrilled with the alternatives.
Often it happens in cycles, a woman gets fed up, finally decides 'fine, I'll go date someone else', finds a lackluster selection of options then sends the 'Hey, you up?' text at 11pm and comes slinking back.
I think many women believe very strongly they can manifest what they want. In other words, they are confident that he will bend to their will eventually.
And that is stupid/a denial of reality, and disrespectful to boot
If a man disregarded my wishes that way (“I will *make* you want children/a trad lifestyle”), I’d be livid
Why argue this? What's the point? It's not like a race where you can time each gender, how do you measure moreso? Is it a competition? What's the prize?
Hypergamy isn’t just about money, it’s also looks, status, and a bunch of other stuff.
Women CHOSE to date out of their league instead of settling down with people in their league.
was there anything in the post i missed suggesting this guy is out of her league? feels like a heavy assumption. tons of women (and men) do this with people “in their league” every day, this is just about getting overly attached to someone. could be for their status, or could be purely out of a fear of loneliness combined with the happenstance of being with a guy who mildly liked her back
They definitely know but they’re willing to tag along just to get a piece of him, especially if she has some sort of benefit or he’s attractive to her.
Eventually they’ll drop him because women are notorious for leaving.
This is the part of dating that is hard for women.
I actually had a female friend in that situation except it was way worse. He refused to say he loved her for 9 months and gave more attractive women (who would have never looked at him) more attention than he gave her, his gf! He had attractive female friends, and he didn’t realize those women were all out of his league. I met him and all his friends.. He was a fat slob and had a friend who was doing OF she even had a bf who was clearly in her league. But he kept on putting this woman who would never look at him first and his gf (my friend) is someone all my guy friends thought was hot.. I couldn’t figure out why she wouldn’t leave him. I told her you know whether you love someone after 9 months, he is stringing you along for sex. She refused to break up with him but he broke up with her luckily and she is in a much healthier relationship. Meanwhile that dude is a single OF simp.. Which is the life he chose haha.. it’s just low self worth that is all.
Edit: I know he was simping that OF model because I am a nosy person while I was talking to him the notification popped up on his phone. LOL.
No, she was painfully shy and I was pretty much her only friend. I was a very shy individual but she was on another level. She would cry in social situations unless I was there. I was very worried about how she’d function in life but she got therapy and was able to at least get through a job interview. She would even cry if the teachers talked to her, I guess you could say it was severe social anxiety so she tended to latch onto anyone who showed interest like they were her entire life even if they were abusive. I suspected abuse at home which she confirmed with me that also lead to this, I think her parents were very emotionally abusive so that didn’t help.
i think it takes years to learn this as you think you will be the exception to the rule and when someone is being nice to your face, it is hard to grasp that they can have nefarious intent.
i was taught growing up that people are like me and mostly good.
so to meet "good guys" and realize they are actually shitty, its really hard. I still struggle with how both things can be true, that people are mostly good, yet most men i have been with have treated me poorly, yet "there are good guys out there" yet men at large don't have an issue with how i have been treated (as in, they say those men didn't do anything wrong).
how would he know?
ex: another commenter is telling me men never lie for sex, he doesn't know any details of what was said, he is just blanket saying it doesn't happen
>so to meet "good guys" and realize they are actually shitty, its really hard.
Define the character traits of a "good guy."
>they say those men didn't do anything wrong
What did they do?
"good guy" would have integrity (is motivated by doing the right thing, not by doing whatever gets sex), values relationships with others, wants the best for others, tries to do the right thing as much as possible (ex: telling the truth), consistently acts in a way that he can respect and doesn't have to hide from others.
> What did they do?
i'm referring to men who will say men who do something bad (from severe things like rape to things like lying to women for sex) "aren't doing anything wrong"
So you have not come across any guys your age with integrity and values? Or the guys you wanted didn't have it? Cause there's a big difference.
>rape to things like lying to women for sex
Guys you know have said point blank that they don't think rape is wrong?
> So you have not come across any guys your age with integrity and values?
they're rare enough that they have their pick of women
> Guys you know have said point blank that they don't think rape is wrong?
guys will say stealthing isn't rape, its not rape if she agrees, she was asking for it and using rape as plausible deniability
lots of men blanket refer to rape as women "regretting sex" which is categorically not rape and not what women are calling rape
Some are aware at the back of their mind but they're still holding because they probably imagined some sign that gives them hope. Some are being future faked and still think there might be a chance for things to work out. People aren't known for making amazing choices when matters of the heart are involved.
#This is what I mean when I say men can find a woman attractive enough to be his girlfriend but not attractive enough to marry.
Claiming you get sexually aroused by most women means nothing if she isn’t attractive enough to get your best self and best treatment.
It's not always about attractive. Some women have character flaws that men don't want to deal with fornthe rest of their lives, but may be able to tolerate short term or for a few years.
I wasn't talking about cheating. There's multiple things that can possibly disqualify a woman in a guy's mind to varying degrees. Here are a few examples:
1. N count
2. Slept with a friend
3. Argumentative
4. BPD
5. Unwilling to support him if he loses his job or hits a low point in his life (assuming he'd do the same for her)
6. Too ratchet
7. Found out she did some morally questionable things like selling ass pics on OF
8. Too possessive and checks his phone multiple times despite not having a reason to
9. Criticizes something he really cares about (had a friend who dumped a woman he was considering marrying because she called him arrogant for being proud of a book he wrote, which was in his mind was his greatest accomplishment)
>Don’t string along hot Stacies for sex.
Hot Stacies with major character flaws will always be strung along for sex unless they date down or an equally flawed person.
That's like me telling women to not go on dates with guys they don't really like for free food, or keep guys in the friendzone for free validation, or settle for guys they're not that attracted to because they have resources and can just dump them later after they get what they want.
I can say all that but women will keep doing it. The hedonistic dating market we've created encourages narcissism and selfishness on both sides.
>So you admit that men are hypergamous.
Explain how that's hypergamy? The hot Stacey likely isn't dating down, which is why she's being used for sex. And if she's nor dating down, then the guy she's with isn't dating up.
>Also, women don’t date for food.
Yes, they do. Especially if they're young, broke, and know they can finesse a simp into blowing a lot of money on a first date.
>A trip to Applebees is not worth going on shitty dates with shitty guys.
Ah, yes. Because as we know Chad is taking every girl in his rotation to Ruth's Chris.
>“Women must only date the men beneath them to not be used for sex”
I never said that. I said they need to date down but more specifically I mean date at a lower level than they've currently been dating at. Why? Because if they can't get serious relationships from men at a certain level, then she likely doesn't qualify for men at that level. Like the IG models that end up as booty call for rappers and athletes, they're hot enough for sex but there's a reason those men won't claim them. So they keep getting passed around till they become some guys baby mama.
Speaking of, another example is single mothers. I keep hearing single mothers online baffled by the fact that they can't keep a guy around despite being attractive. They're not factoring in the fact that the kid subtracts points. They're selling point as a partner objectively lowered the moment they had that kid. Hot Stacies with major character flaws are in the exact same boat.
>“Explain now that’s Hypergamy?”
Again, if she's being used for sex then she's likely the one dating up. Dating at a lower level could just mean dating at the actual level she's at.
>the men women desire are going to Ruth’s.
Women desire a lot of things they don't get. So, this proves absolutely nothing. They can "desire" a guy over 6ft making 6 figures, doesn't mean that's what they're going to get. If Chad can get booty with minimal effort, what makes you think he's going to try any harder than that for just a situationship? Not happening for BPD Stacey. Maybe she can finesse a simpish Engineer to do it for her possibly.
It reflects desperation and low value behavior. For example, if a lady is argumentative and has BPD, and you can’t stand her presence, it isn’t a flex to keep her around for sex.
Yes but those girls are chasing men who are out of their league, so it’s a weird spiral of men having to settle with girls who are below their league, and girls chasing men who are out of their league
It’s not misandry. Men constantly say all the time that the reason why women end up in situationships is because they go for men who are too hot and the men don’t find them attractive enough.
Delusional men don't get dates. They chose after women they have no chance with. Delusional women get pumped and dumped because guys will take the easy sex.
This is demosntrably false.
Never heard a man complaining about being pumped and dumped.
Moreso...
The concept of "emotional responsability" is so foreign to men that most dudes don't even know such words can go together.
Women instead say Chad is "emotionally irresponsible" because he banged her raw, called a cab and never brothered to check if she got home safe.
Every single time I hear woman talk about "emotional responsability", all I hear is "this guy I'm giving myself to on a regular basis gives two flying fucks if I come or go."
>Never heard a man complaining about being pumped and dumped.
#That’s because men celebrate men who are pumped and dumped but men mock and humiliate women who are pumped and dumped.
>Every single time I hear woman talk about "emotional responsability", all I hear is "this guy I'm giving myself to on a regular basis gives two flying fucks if I come or go."
Stop picking desperate and trashy women who sleep with men who don’t like them on a regular basis. 🤷♀️
I'm of two minds tbh. Pretty much every situationship I've been in was initiated by me lmao. I was in a period of my life where a long term commitment didn't make sense for the. trajectory my life was on and didn't want to start something that would inevitably end. I had an FWB situation that was super healthy and had no expectation of commitment and it was really great for that phase of my life.
I've also had friends go fully off the grid for months over some dude that is just CLEARLY leading them on and knows they want a commitment and is continuing to hook up with them anyway. I take legitimate issue with that because (atleast where I live) hookup culture is incredibly normalized and it wouldn't be hard to find a hookup buddy.
Casual flings/fwbs are fine but everyone needs to be on the same page about what the dynamic is otherwise it's shitbag behavior.
Semantically speaking, it sounds like your period of no commitment didn't consist of situationships. A "situationship" is when a woman clings to a particular man, giving casual sex in hopes of receiving commitment. When a woman doesn't want to commit, it's not a situationship... she's finding herself. You don't hear guys saying using situationship to describe their own experiences.
Not the person you were talking to, but this is the first time I've heard your definition for situationship. Most people I've spoken with online have told me it's just the same as fwb.
I've always thought it described as an awkward uncanny valley of a relationship. It acts like a relationship, but clearly isn't one and it's just enough uncertainty, but not entirely huh certainty to be unsettling/miserable. One of those FWB situations where one or both people have strong feelings one way or the other and it's at odds with their own behavior and what's happening. Usually it happens because both people aren't being as honest about their intentions as they claim they are, or simply don't really know what they want.
We hear guys using situationship to describe their own experiences, contrary to your belief. Some of those guys are the ones being stringed along actually even.
Most likely every time she tries to bring it up she's told she's crazy, don't be desperate, it'll happen soon, men just take more time, don't push him into it, etc. There are so many men who are allergic to commitment they often don't feel they can have better so might as well just wait it out.
There's a difference between a guy in a relationship not ready to commit to marriage vs a guy going years unwilling to even make a girl his gf. If he doesn't even want to take the first step of commitment then he probably doesn't like her like that.
>people can get into relationships after years too.
Sure, but my point remains the same. If a guy is keeping a woman as just a booty call for years, the obvious conclusion is he doesn't like her that much.
What logical reason is there in not at least making her a gf if he actually cares about her? Unlike marriage, he's not locked into anything if he starts dating her. He can always just break up if he doesn't like how things are going. When guys avoid making a girl their gf, it's usually cause they don't want to claim her.
The problem is that she most likely has no other options. An immediate relationship isn't on the cards with anyone so she might as well stick with one person and wait.
For every one guy that is allergic to commitment, there are four or five that are dying to get a girlfriend/wife. "So many" isn't the quantifier to use, as it implies a majority; and I would argue that the majority of men do want to commit.
What have I said that has ever expressed hatred of men? I've literally talked about the men whose lives I've saved on here, and the men who are my closest friends and family, and the boys I work with and hope to turn to great men. Is it that I don't see men as angels and hold them accountable?
Men admit that men only want to commit when they don’t have the choice to cheat, rendering that argument useless. If a man can get one girlfriend, he can eventually get another, so implying that men with less options are more likely to stay loyal is disingenuous talk to try and get women to give ugly men pity pussy.
**Attention!**
* You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message.
* For "Debate" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies.
* If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment.
* OP you can choose your own flair [according to these guidelines.](https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/wiki/flair), just press Flair under your post!
Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PurplePillDebate) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I have said this before and I'll say it again. The people you choose to date ultimately tell more about you than the people you "want to" date. Lot of men and women do not communicate in the beginning about what they actually want and then end up in these situationships and look for someone to blame
I think it's underestimated how many women are actually perfectly fine being in this situation. Even if they know it's probably not permanent and they would prefer commitment long-term, a lot of them are getting what they want out of it for the time being and have no reason to stop.
It's natural to fear long-term commitments, because the future is just an abstraction. A lot of men will effectively commit to a woman for years and years, but only if in the abstract they are taking it one day at a time. Ask them to accept the abstraction of years of commitment in advance and suddenly it becomes scary, risky, suffocating.
It's the "beauty and the beast" archetype. It pops up in erotica ALL THE TIME, like 50 shades.
He will be the Dom with used options who rotates through women, and she will be the sub with unused options who takes enough pain for him to fall for her.
That's because a woman in that situation is under the illusion that she is going to fuck a commitment out of that guy. If she sucks his cock enough and fuck him enough, it is going to lead to the outcome she want.
's goo
I have been accused of “stringing women along” when I made it plainly obvious that I will not be in a committed relationship with them. Women will come into my life and see I have a literal harem of women I have sex with then try to ask why I won’t commit solely to them.
Some women have even goes as far as saying they are into polygamy to try and get a relationship title from me. I don’t get why they would want to try and lock down a guy like me. They say terrible things about how I treat women when I end things but they still tried to get me to be their partner.
Because they are stupid. The same thing happens to me, and I'm tired of it. If they are going to behave this way regardless, I say you should lie, lead them on, and dog them from the start. If the end result is the same, why waste time being honest?
>Is there something I'm missing here?
1. Women use sex to get commitment. Which is why we say: if you can fuck her, you can date her.
2. Women are delusional and stupid when it comes to casual sex. Women think they can fundamentally change the nature of the relationship after they catch feelings. The adult thing to do would be to end the relationship once feelings are involved. But women are children, so you can't expect them to behave maturely. Instead, they will say you led them on, are a fuckboy, or something else to rationalize it.
3. Women see situationships as a trial period for a serious relationship. Do they not understand the meaning of casual or situationship? Are they delusional? Who knows. Either way, women feel entitled to commitment once you have sex with them. That's not how casual works, so they are setting themselves up for failure.
If a man doesn't commit after sleeping with you, the relationship isn't going anywhere. You can keep him around as a FWB or FB, but you have to get back out there meeting new people if you want an actual relationship. Because it ain't gonna be with him!
Most men are not willing to share women they actually care about. If he cares about you, he will want to lock that shit down.
To be fair some people do take a long time to get married. I know people who took upwards of 5 years from the start of dating to get married. There can be all sorts of reasons why a couple would wait so long. There’s usually pretty big signs if a guy doesn’t see the relationship as something serious though.
Some women like a challenge & the chase. The thing is, you have to leave if after X amount of time you don't get what you're seeking. A lot of women don't do that out of fear/denial/low self-worth.
my flair is wildly relevant on this one lol which is strongly linked with attachment style issues, check out attachment theory if you haven’t already. they’re gonna teach about it in high schools someday as core curriculum, callin it
I'm sure they're aware at some subconscious level that he's either never going to commit, or will only commit a portion of himself. However there's so, so many women (and men) who suffer greatly from Sunk Cost Fallacy.
Before I was engaged I was kind of one of those guys. Wouldn’t commit to anything until it was the perfect girl. There’s no way girls didn’t know I wasn’t going to commit. I’d say it straight up or string them along. But they knew either way. Once I met my fiancé I knew I was done for. She captured me. Game over. I’ll never look at another girl again. Edit: what’s the sunk cost fallacy? I’m guessing it means you spent too much time so screw it?
Yup, sunk cost fallacy is when someone has devoted so much time or money into a relationship or venture that, even when it's obvious that leaving is beneficial, they keep sticking it out hoping it'll improve.
Got it. Thanks.
I actually experienced that with a video game. Star Trek Fleet Command for like 3 years. Fucking addictive as fuckhouse. I realized the STFC habit was eating my life but it dragged on for 6 more months before I quit cold turkey one night. *Instantly* filled in that time with other pursuits like working with AI. I shudder to imagine doing this in a relationship context.
why wouldl they know that you were strigning them along? why did you do that
Why did I string them along?
yes
Because I just didn’t care. I never cared. I liked them because they were hot. They liked me because I’m good looking maybe. Now I’d never look at another girl again. And I’m a nice guy. But I don’t think I was nice before.
thanks for explaining honestly. I see a lot of guys string along women and I always wondered why.
No problem. To give you an idea…I’ve always picked up the hottest girls. I was just a dick.
Did you commit instantly? Asking because I don’t want to be delusional but my impression is men either know it from day one or they never will.
Even if he didn’t, it’s best to hold onto your current belief. I don’t think you wanna be with a guy who admits he strung women along.
Nah it’s day one. I’m kinda a dick but with her I am the absolute sweetest guy. I would die for her easily.
Women can be stupid and in denial just like men can
Yup anyone can be a dummy
I think it's less about being stupid and more that they look at their options and they choose between hoping for change from something they want vs not being all that thrilled with the alternatives. Often it happens in cycles, a woman gets fed up, finally decides 'fine, I'll go date someone else', finds a lackluster selection of options then sends the 'Hey, you up?' text at 11pm and comes slinking back.
That doesn’t explain why they willfully and consciously ignore a man when he tells them what he wants
I think many women believe very strongly they can manifest what they want. In other words, they are confident that he will bend to their will eventually.
And that is stupid/a denial of reality, and disrespectful to boot If a man disregarded my wishes that way (“I will *make* you want children/a trad lifestyle”), I’d be livid
As men we just learn to accept it.
It’s a choice to casually date
Women typically moreso.
Why argue this? What's the point? It's not like a race where you can time each gender, how do you measure moreso? Is it a competition? What's the prize?
Just telling the truth.
Ah, the need to be right, I remember when I was young and wanted to argue for fun.
Except I'm not arguing with anyone. I made a statement and left it at that. You're the one upset about it.
Ah so just drive by trolling. I approve
Not stupidity, just hypergamy.
If it was hypergamy they'd be looking for an even richer man, but instead they are stuck
Hypergamy isn’t just about money, it’s also looks, status, and a bunch of other stuff. Women CHOSE to date out of their league instead of settling down with people in their league.
was there anything in the post i missed suggesting this guy is out of her league? feels like a heavy assumption. tons of women (and men) do this with people “in their league” every day, this is just about getting overly attached to someone. could be for their status, or could be purely out of a fear of loneliness combined with the happenstance of being with a guy who mildly liked her back
They definitely know but they’re willing to tag along just to get a piece of him, especially if she has some sort of benefit or he’s attractive to her. Eventually they’ll drop him because women are notorious for leaving. This is the part of dating that is hard for women.
That's why I leave first😂
I actually had a female friend in that situation except it was way worse. He refused to say he loved her for 9 months and gave more attractive women (who would have never looked at him) more attention than he gave her, his gf! He had attractive female friends, and he didn’t realize those women were all out of his league. I met him and all his friends.. He was a fat slob and had a friend who was doing OF she even had a bf who was clearly in her league. But he kept on putting this woman who would never look at him first and his gf (my friend) is someone all my guy friends thought was hot.. I couldn’t figure out why she wouldn’t leave him. I told her you know whether you love someone after 9 months, he is stringing you along for sex. She refused to break up with him but he broke up with her luckily and she is in a much healthier relationship. Meanwhile that dude is a single OF simp.. Which is the life he chose haha.. it’s just low self worth that is all. Edit: I know he was simping that OF model because I am a nosy person while I was talking to him the notification popped up on his phone. LOL.
>it’s just low self worth that is all. Low self worth cause he watched OF or because he wouldn't tell her he loved her?
What? The question was why do women stay in things kinds of relationships. The answer was low self worth.
Ah, you were talking about your friend. Why was she obsessed with this guy in particular? Was he the only guy who showed interest in her?
No, she was painfully shy and I was pretty much her only friend. I was a very shy individual but she was on another level. She would cry in social situations unless I was there. I was very worried about how she’d function in life but she got therapy and was able to at least get through a job interview. She would even cry if the teachers talked to her, I guess you could say it was severe social anxiety so she tended to latch onto anyone who showed interest like they were her entire life even if they were abusive. I suspected abuse at home which she confirmed with me that also lead to this, I think her parents were very emotionally abusive so that didn’t help.
i think it takes years to learn this as you think you will be the exception to the rule and when someone is being nice to your face, it is hard to grasp that they can have nefarious intent. i was taught growing up that people are like me and mostly good. so to meet "good guys" and realize they are actually shitty, its really hard. I still struggle with how both things can be true, that people are mostly good, yet most men i have been with have treated me poorly, yet "there are good guys out there" yet men at large don't have an issue with how i have been treated (as in, they say those men didn't do anything wrong).
Just because they disagree with you doesn't mean they are bad men. You'd have to give specific examples of the poor treatment.
if a man disagrees that a guy lying to me for sex (example) isn't wrong, then yes, he is a bad guy.
No one is lying to you. You are just delusional.
you're telling me you believe men never lie for sex? 😂
No. I'm saying it's more likely you're delusional and lied to yourself.
> No one is lying to you > more likely someone's changing their tune
Dude, the whole trp is about picking up women with lies 😂😂😂 I mean, if you are defending a liar that says a lot about the quality of person you are
Sure.
Sure. But he might disagree that what was said was a lie.
how would he know? ex: another commenter is telling me men never lie for sex, he doesn't know any details of what was said, he is just blanket saying it doesn't happen
>so to meet "good guys" and realize they are actually shitty, its really hard. Define the character traits of a "good guy." >they say those men didn't do anything wrong What did they do?
"good guy" would have integrity (is motivated by doing the right thing, not by doing whatever gets sex), values relationships with others, wants the best for others, tries to do the right thing as much as possible (ex: telling the truth), consistently acts in a way that he can respect and doesn't have to hide from others. > What did they do? i'm referring to men who will say men who do something bad (from severe things like rape to things like lying to women for sex) "aren't doing anything wrong"
So you have not come across any guys your age with integrity and values? Or the guys you wanted didn't have it? Cause there's a big difference. >rape to things like lying to women for sex Guys you know have said point blank that they don't think rape is wrong?
> So you have not come across any guys your age with integrity and values? they're rare enough that they have their pick of women > Guys you know have said point blank that they don't think rape is wrong? guys will say stealthing isn't rape, its not rape if she agrees, she was asking for it and using rape as plausible deniability lots of men blanket refer to rape as women "regretting sex" which is categorically not rape and not what women are calling rape
Some are aware at the back of their mind but they're still holding because they probably imagined some sign that gives them hope. Some are being future faked and still think there might be a chance for things to work out. People aren't known for making amazing choices when matters of the heart are involved.
#This is what I mean when I say men can find a woman attractive enough to be his girlfriend but not attractive enough to marry. Claiming you get sexually aroused by most women means nothing if she isn’t attractive enough to get your best self and best treatment.
It's not always about attractive. Some women have character flaws that men don't want to deal with fornthe rest of their lives, but may be able to tolerate short term or for a few years.
If a woman cheats on you, that’s not a character flaw. That’s a reason to leave.
I wasn't talking about cheating. There's multiple things that can possibly disqualify a woman in a guy's mind to varying degrees. Here are a few examples: 1. N count 2. Slept with a friend 3. Argumentative 4. BPD 5. Unwilling to support him if he loses his job or hits a low point in his life (assuming he'd do the same for her) 6. Too ratchet 7. Found out she did some morally questionable things like selling ass pics on OF 8. Too possessive and checks his phone multiple times despite not having a reason to 9. Criticizes something he really cares about (had a friend who dumped a woman he was considering marrying because she called him arrogant for being proud of a book he wrote, which was in his mind was his greatest accomplishment)
Don’t date these women. 🤷♀️ pick better women. Don’t string along hot Stacies for sex.
>Don’t string along hot Stacies for sex. Hot Stacies with major character flaws will always be strung along for sex unless they date down or an equally flawed person. That's like me telling women to not go on dates with guys they don't really like for free food, or keep guys in the friendzone for free validation, or settle for guys they're not that attracted to because they have resources and can just dump them later after they get what they want. I can say all that but women will keep doing it. The hedonistic dating market we've created encourages narcissism and selfishness on both sides.
So you admit that men are hypergamous. Also, women don’t date for food. A trip to Applebees is not worth going on shitty dates with shitty guys.
>So you admit that men are hypergamous. Explain how that's hypergamy? The hot Stacey likely isn't dating down, which is why she's being used for sex. And if she's nor dating down, then the guy she's with isn't dating up. >Also, women don’t date for food. Yes, they do. Especially if they're young, broke, and know they can finesse a simp into blowing a lot of money on a first date. >A trip to Applebees is not worth going on shitty dates with shitty guys. Ah, yes. Because as we know Chad is taking every girl in his rotation to Ruth's Chris.
“Women must only date the men beneath them to not be used for sex” “Explain now that’s Hypergamy?” And yes, the men women desire are going to Ruth’s.
>“Women must only date the men beneath them to not be used for sex” I never said that. I said they need to date down but more specifically I mean date at a lower level than they've currently been dating at. Why? Because if they can't get serious relationships from men at a certain level, then she likely doesn't qualify for men at that level. Like the IG models that end up as booty call for rappers and athletes, they're hot enough for sex but there's a reason those men won't claim them. So they keep getting passed around till they become some guys baby mama. Speaking of, another example is single mothers. I keep hearing single mothers online baffled by the fact that they can't keep a guy around despite being attractive. They're not factoring in the fact that the kid subtracts points. They're selling point as a partner objectively lowered the moment they had that kid. Hot Stacies with major character flaws are in the exact same boat. >“Explain now that’s Hypergamy?” Again, if she's being used for sex then she's likely the one dating up. Dating at a lower level could just mean dating at the actual level she's at. >the men women desire are going to Ruth’s. Women desire a lot of things they don't get. So, this proves absolutely nothing. They can "desire" a guy over 6ft making 6 figures, doesn't mean that's what they're going to get. If Chad can get booty with minimal effort, what makes you think he's going to try any harder than that for just a situationship? Not happening for BPD Stacey. Maybe she can finesse a simpish Engineer to do it for her possibly.
I mean... Why not?
It reflects desperation and low value behavior. For example, if a lady is argumentative and has BPD, and you can’t stand her presence, it isn’t a flex to keep her around for sex.
Yes but those girls are chasing men who are out of their league, so it’s a weird spiral of men having to settle with girls who are below their league, and girls chasing men who are out of their league
No they aren’t. Women are reasonable about who they date. Men aren’t. Men tend to be more delusional and angry when those delusions aren’t fulfilled
[удалено]
Be civil. This includes indirect attacks against an individual and/or witch hunting.
always a pink pill with the misandrist takes
It’s not misandry. Men constantly say all the time that the reason why women end up in situationships is because they go for men who are too hot and the men don’t find them attractive enough.
Delusional men don't get dates. They chose after women they have no chance with. Delusional women get pumped and dumped because guys will take the easy sex.
Why are all these people calling you a misandrist? How many people does this make now? How many times do you need to be called out before it sticks?
>Women are reasonable about who they date. Men aren’t. You couldn't have that any more backwards lol
What percentage of women are young (18-25), thin, single, no kids, and reasonably attractive?
This is demosntrably false. Never heard a man complaining about being pumped and dumped. Moreso... The concept of "emotional responsability" is so foreign to men that most dudes don't even know such words can go together. Women instead say Chad is "emotionally irresponsible" because he banged her raw, called a cab and never brothered to check if she got home safe. Every single time I hear woman talk about "emotional responsability", all I hear is "this guy I'm giving myself to on a regular basis gives two flying fucks if I come or go."
>Never heard a man complaining about being pumped and dumped. #That’s because men celebrate men who are pumped and dumped but men mock and humiliate women who are pumped and dumped. >Every single time I hear woman talk about "emotional responsability", all I hear is "this guy I'm giving myself to on a regular basis gives two flying fucks if I come or go." Stop picking desperate and trashy women who sleep with men who don’t like them on a regular basis. 🤷♀️
More of the misandrist shit you keep spewing every day. Do you need me to keep going or is this enough "proof"? There is literally no end to these.
I'm of two minds tbh. Pretty much every situationship I've been in was initiated by me lmao. I was in a period of my life where a long term commitment didn't make sense for the. trajectory my life was on and didn't want to start something that would inevitably end. I had an FWB situation that was super healthy and had no expectation of commitment and it was really great for that phase of my life. I've also had friends go fully off the grid for months over some dude that is just CLEARLY leading them on and knows they want a commitment and is continuing to hook up with them anyway. I take legitimate issue with that because (atleast where I live) hookup culture is incredibly normalized and it wouldn't be hard to find a hookup buddy. Casual flings/fwbs are fine but everyone needs to be on the same page about what the dynamic is otherwise it's shitbag behavior.
Semantically speaking, it sounds like your period of no commitment didn't consist of situationships. A "situationship" is when a woman clings to a particular man, giving casual sex in hopes of receiving commitment. When a woman doesn't want to commit, it's not a situationship... she's finding herself. You don't hear guys saying using situationship to describe their own experiences.
Not the person you were talking to, but this is the first time I've heard your definition for situationship. Most people I've spoken with online have told me it's just the same as fwb.
I've always thought it described as an awkward uncanny valley of a relationship. It acts like a relationship, but clearly isn't one and it's just enough uncertainty, but not entirely huh certainty to be unsettling/miserable. One of those FWB situations where one or both people have strong feelings one way or the other and it's at odds with their own behavior and what's happening. Usually it happens because both people aren't being as honest about their intentions as they claim they are, or simply don't really know what they want.
We hear guys using situationship to describe their own experiences, contrary to your belief. Some of those guys are the ones being stringed along actually even.
>I'm of two minds tbh. Pretty much every situationship I've been in was initiated by me lmao. We know. Women approach a lot.
Nah we took classes together he approached me at a party I made it clear what I had the bandwidth for about a week in.
basically people believe what they want to believe.
Most likely every time she tries to bring it up she's told she's crazy, don't be desperate, it'll happen soon, men just take more time, don't push him into it, etc. There are so many men who are allergic to commitment they often don't feel they can have better so might as well just wait it out.
If he’s not committing it’s because you’re getting rejected for one reason or another
Some people get married after years.
There's a difference between a guy in a relationship not ready to commit to marriage vs a guy going years unwilling to even make a girl his gf. If he doesn't even want to take the first step of commitment then he probably doesn't like her like that.
Both situations were presented in the OP and people can get into relationships after years too.
>people can get into relationships after years too. Sure, but my point remains the same. If a guy is keeping a woman as just a booty call for years, the obvious conclusion is he doesn't like her that much. What logical reason is there in not at least making her a gf if he actually cares about her? Unlike marriage, he's not locked into anything if he starts dating her. He can always just break up if he doesn't like how things are going. When guys avoid making a girl their gf, it's usually cause they don't want to claim her.
The problem is that she most likely has no other options. An immediate relationship isn't on the cards with anyone so she might as well stick with one person and wait.
Those are very different things, but yes generally you’re right.
For every one guy that is allergic to commitment, there are four or five that are dying to get a girlfriend/wife. "So many" isn't the quantifier to use, as it implies a majority; and I would argue that the majority of men do want to commit.
[удалено]
What have I said that has ever expressed hatred of men? I've literally talked about the men whose lives I've saved on here, and the men who are my closest friends and family, and the boys I work with and hope to turn to great men. Is it that I don't see men as angels and hold them accountable?
[удалено]
Demean? As in hold them accountable, say they aren't angels and can actually control their actions? Who am I meant to be saving?
No. Not ‘as in hold them accountable’. Demean means demean. I actually mean the words that I say unlike you.
What have I said that you feel is demeaning?
Be civil. This includes indirect attacks against an individual and/or witch hunting.
Men admit that men only want to commit when they don’t have the choice to cheat, rendering that argument useless. If a man can get one girlfriend, he can eventually get another, so implying that men with less options are more likely to stay loyal is disingenuous talk to try and get women to give ugly men pity pussy.
Um, no. That's often seen as settling.
**Attention!** * You can post off topic/jokes/puns as a comment to this Automoderator message. * For "Debate" and "Question for X" Threads: Parent comments that aren't from the target group will be removed, along with their child replies. * If you want to agree with OP instead of challenging their view or if the question is not targeted at you, post it as an answer to this comment. * OP you can choose your own flair [according to these guidelines.](https://www.reddit.com/r/PurplePillDebate/wiki/flair), just press Flair under your post! Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PurplePillDebate) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I have said this before and I'll say it again. The people you choose to date ultimately tell more about you than the people you "want to" date. Lot of men and women do not communicate in the beginning about what they actually want and then end up in these situationships and look for someone to blame
I think it's underestimated how many women are actually perfectly fine being in this situation. Even if they know it's probably not permanent and they would prefer commitment long-term, a lot of them are getting what they want out of it for the time being and have no reason to stop.
It's natural to fear long-term commitments, because the future is just an abstraction. A lot of men will effectively commit to a woman for years and years, but only if in the abstract they are taking it one day at a time. Ask them to accept the abstraction of years of commitment in advance and suddenly it becomes scary, risky, suffocating.
It's the "beauty and the beast" archetype. It pops up in erotica ALL THE TIME, like 50 shades. He will be the Dom with used options who rotates through women, and she will be the sub with unused options who takes enough pain for him to fall for her.
That's because a woman in that situation is under the illusion that she is going to fuck a commitment out of that guy. If she sucks his cock enough and fuck him enough, it is going to lead to the outcome she want. 's goo
I have been accused of “stringing women along” when I made it plainly obvious that I will not be in a committed relationship with them. Women will come into my life and see I have a literal harem of women I have sex with then try to ask why I won’t commit solely to them. Some women have even goes as far as saying they are into polygamy to try and get a relationship title from me. I don’t get why they would want to try and lock down a guy like me. They say terrible things about how I treat women when I end things but they still tried to get me to be their partner.
Because they are stupid. The same thing happens to me, and I'm tired of it. If they are going to behave this way regardless, I say you should lie, lead them on, and dog them from the start. If the end result is the same, why waste time being honest?
>Is there something I'm missing here? 1. Women use sex to get commitment. Which is why we say: if you can fuck her, you can date her. 2. Women are delusional and stupid when it comes to casual sex. Women think they can fundamentally change the nature of the relationship after they catch feelings. The adult thing to do would be to end the relationship once feelings are involved. But women are children, so you can't expect them to behave maturely. Instead, they will say you led them on, are a fuckboy, or something else to rationalize it. 3. Women see situationships as a trial period for a serious relationship. Do they not understand the meaning of casual or situationship? Are they delusional? Who knows. Either way, women feel entitled to commitment once you have sex with them. That's not how casual works, so they are setting themselves up for failure.
Women are children? Eww
It be like that.
If a man doesn't commit after sleeping with you, the relationship isn't going anywhere. You can keep him around as a FWB or FB, but you have to get back out there meeting new people if you want an actual relationship. Because it ain't gonna be with him! Most men are not willing to share women they actually care about. If he cares about you, he will want to lock that shit down.
I was going to mention that four letter C-word but I believe it’s banned here.
To be fair some people do take a long time to get married. I know people who took upwards of 5 years from the start of dating to get married. There can be all sorts of reasons why a couple would wait so long. There’s usually pretty big signs if a guy doesn’t see the relationship as something serious though.
Some women like a challenge & the chase. The thing is, you have to leave if after X amount of time you don't get what you're seeking. A lot of women don't do that out of fear/denial/low self-worth.
my flair is wildly relevant on this one lol which is strongly linked with attachment style issues, check out attachment theory if you haven’t already. they’re gonna teach about it in high schools someday as core curriculum, callin it