Tuesday, August 2, 2011

What If The Situation Was Reversed And Men Were Unapproachable?

What if the situation was reversed and men were the ones who were opposed to meeting women in public? What kind of excuses would men use to avoid meeting women in public? Using the same excuse format women use, along with exaggerated statistics and focusing on the negative, I came up with a hypothetical excuse list that men would use:

• When I'm out somewhere I'm too busy to make small talk with some chick who wants to chat. I got better things to do than hook up with some random slut. For all I know she's on the rebound and she's got some jealous ex lurking around the corner. I don't need the trouble!

• I'm just protecting myself from bitches and gold diggers who only care about my wallet. Just because I dress well and look good in a suit that doesn't mean I automatically want to take some chick out to an expensive dinner.

• I just don't want to deal with some chick who maybe has kids and is looking for a father who also doubles as Mr. Money Bags. You hear so many stories of men being taken to the cleaners in a divorce, or men being wrongfully charged with sexual assault. How do I know that the minute sex is over she won't call the cops and file a phony rape charge? I'm just protecting my interests.

• I've had plenty of bad experiences with women and their cockblocking friends, women who pretend to like you just to get free drinks, and women who just think they are all that. So if I come across as unapproachable to some chick I think I've earned that right.

Looking at the above ridiculous list you can see that there is not much difference between it and the excuses women currently use to avoid meeting men in public. It's a matter of bias and what you choose to focus on. Also enlightening is the fact that there are many more female gold diggers than male rapists but you don't hear men using that as an excuse to not meet women.

The fact is that men are very aware of the odds against them based on direct feedback from unapproachable females, but are still much more willing to APPROACH ANYWAY, at least until the reality finally hits them that it's a total waste of time and energy. But women, on the other hand, are risk averse and mostly rely on hearsay and whatever bad things they heard about men in the media to avoid meeting them, such as exaggerated rape statistics disseminated by the liberal media. But even given this very small (yet non-zero) risk why not just meet the guy in a public place and assess first hand what he is like, rather than exclude ALL possibility of anything happening by refusing to even take a chance in BROAD DAYLIGHT to go out with him. It's like refusing to go to a job interview because there's a chance the employer could turn out to be a sexual harasser. But in this cold economic-centric city jobs are naturally spun in a positive light so it's a non issue.

Furthermore, women in this city are very intolerant of male behaviour that is considered acceptable in other (less feminized) parts of the world. For example, looking at women here would be labeled as lewd staring. Incidental touching, like on a crowded subway, would be considered groping. And the occasional rude behaviour from a stranger man would be proof definite that all stranger men must be treated as potential perverts and avoided at all cost. You would think women here would learn to be socially astute so that they can differentiate the good from the bad. It's called life skills. But they have no interest in actively learning how to pick out the good from the bad where men are concerned, and instead prefer the one size fits all, throw the baby out with the bathwater approach to men and dating. And in spite of all this, women still tell guys that they should continue to carry themselves as gentlemen and keep trying to meet women, while at the same time not doing anything themselves to make it any easier for men. It's completely retarded and a form of mental illness, not that different from the tea-party rhetoric in crazy-town USA.

But anyway, I don't really have much more to say on this topic. This is my 100th post and I've said plenty already on this blog. Toronto women, at least the ones who are at least somewhat attractive, are not worth the effort to try and meet out in public. They're past the point of no-return on the delusion scale. So go out of town if you want to meet better women, or better yet go abroad to get a real feel for what real women are like, women who focus more on the positive aspects of men rather than the negative.

Related Post: Common Obstacles To Meeting Women In Public

14 comments:

Anonymous said...

HAHAHA! Great stuff man. I am subscribed to your blogs.

Anonymous said...

Hear! Hear!

I'm glad I stumbled across your blog. you articulated my thoughts perfectly on women in this city. Living here and getting rejected by cold women for a couple years is enough to give any goodlooking, formerly confidant man an inferiority complex.

Mick said...

you should accept articles from men in the city dude, I would write one for you to publish if I could

John said...

^^^ For sure. You can email me the article you would like published at jakob[at_sign]beyondroutines.com

Anonymous said...

Good Post John.....sadly no matter how "unfair" it seems, men want what women have and will do whatever it takes to get it. As long as this dynamic exists, women can make whatever rules, rationalizations, biases, decisions without affecting her mating chances. There's not much we can individually do about it.

Anonymous said...

To Anon, the dynamic is the same the world over. However it is thrown greatly out of balance in Toronto due to there being excess single men in every single age category. Even subpar women have their pick of the lot.

In the 25 to 39 age range, there are 16% more single Toronto men than women, or 44,000 men for which no single woman exists. In Ontario, there are 108,000 more single men than women (almost 20% more single men than single women).

What's it like to live in a city where 44,000 men compete for every extra single woman?

Anonymous said...

Anon, only men with a very low sense of self-worth will do whatever it takes to get what women have, and paradoxically, these men are not the ones that are attractive to women.

Its a funny little thing about life that those men who think like you - who are willing to do whatever it takes to get what women have - are the ones who actually dont get the women at all. One of the more interesting seeming paradoxes of life that most men dont get. Its a built in feature of the sexual system.

To that end, the man who thinks like John does in this post helps himself and men as a group.

What is troubling to me is how few men seem to genuinely care about their self-esteem and will use all sorts of rationalizations to cling to their belief in their low self-worth. Lots of men genuinely believe that you need to humiliate yourself to get sex, and if you tell them that precisely by refusing to humiliate yourself you will get sex, they will use all sorts of arguments and rationalizations to say, no, after all, women call all the shots and you as a man have no choice but to bow down to them if you want sex (which shows they completely missed the point in their desperation to cling to their low self-image).

Ive seen this line of argument play out on game blogs all the time, and its very disturbing - its almost as if men WANT to have this feeling of low self-worth and will resist any effort to get rid of it, even if you tell them getting rid of it will help them get sex!

The biggest obstacle in getting men to accept this anti-game stuff is their attachment to their own humiliation, which I would not have believed if I had not seen it first-hand on all the game blogs. And if not attachment, at least most men have no particular desire to have self-respect and any message that has that as its focus simply holds no appeal to them. Its a said, vicious circle.

What do you think, John, WHY do so many men seem attached to their humiliation at the hands of women and resist any effort to change? Is it simply fear that without bowing to women they really wont get sex? Why will many men take the idea that to get girls you have to not bow down to them, and twist it into the idea that you have to bow down to them, as happened with game?

John said...

"What do you think, John, WHY do so many men seem attached to their humiliation at the hands of women and resist any effort to change? Is it simply fear that without bowing to women they really wont get sex? Why will many men take the idea that to get girls you have to not bow down to them, and twist it into the idea that you have to bow down to them, as happened with game?"

*** I think it's a case of taking the position that the customer is always right, where the customer in this case is women you are attracted to. With this mindset it's easier to simply go after what you want and do whatever it takes. Except that it takes two to tango and the fact that women themselves (especially western women) are hardly proactive at all in getting men, when there's no reason not to be, means that the dynamics are heavily biased in their favor. To gamers (and some highly ambitious types), if you want something from someone then they are always right, and the only thing that matters is figuring out what it takes to get it from them, and if you don't do this then you will go without. It's a mindset taught as truth without actually being the truth because acting as if it's true will make you as proactive as possible towards achieving your goal.

Guys learning game embody the idea of not bowing to women only in the context of doing whatever it takes to get them. It's comforting to them to feel like they are not bowing to women while also being as proactive/productive as possible in getting women. It fills two emotional needs at once even though they contradict each other.

Anonymous said...

What is puzzling to me is why guys dont jump at the message of not needing to lower yourself to get women, but I think you hit the nail on the head - it makes them feel powerless.

I want to figure this out so I can better show men why they shouldnt lower themselves to women, but I cant do that if I dont understand what the source of their resistance is.

So lets see if I get this - a mans need for feeling that he is in control of the process of getting sex is separate from his need for sex itself, which is why most men will argue so tenaciously against the idea that lowering yourself to women doesnt work, because his need for control is separate - and maybe even more important - than his actual need for women.

In fact, if you look at Mysterys idea of *fools mate* this fits in perfectly - the need for control trumps the need for sex even, as what is wanted is not easy sex but sex only in such a way that you feel like you are in control of getting it!

The problem is that if your need to get girls is so strong that you are willing to sacrifice other things you should care equally about, like your self-respect or status, then your need for control actually becomes a source of weakness, and not a healthy desire for mastery.

It isnt a source of mastery because it is willing to sacrifice other equally good things to its satisfaction - in other words, it has mastered you, not you it.

This is why girls dont like guys who need to control the process of getting sex to the point of lowering themselves, because it shows an emotionally weak man mastered by his needs, and if you cant look after your status, you probably wont be a good mate/provider, etc.

Thats why game doesnt work - to the extent that it forces you to lower yourself (by needing to DHV, putting up with bitch shields, etc) you are signaling to girls that you are mastered by your need for sex to the point of surrendering your need for status (important for survival).

Any thoughts, John?!?!?!

BTW, your blogs are brilliant - I have vaguely thought all these things but have not been able to articulate them as well as you. Keep up the good work!

John said...

"What is puzzling to me is why guys dont jump at the message of not needing to lower yourself to get women, but I think you hit the nail on the head - it makes them feel powerless."

*** Men have an ingrained deep need to do something proactive where women (or any other object of their desire) are concerned. And pursuing, being active, hard selling yourself, using PUA methods, etc. is a way to do something in a powerful way. That's a big part of the appeal.


"I want to figure this out so I can better show men why they shouldnt lower themselves to women, but I cant do that if I dont understand what the source of their resistance is."

*** I think there's a big cultural component. Women are so darn passive when it comes to meeting men that there is a tendency for men to compensate by over-reaching and do more than their fair share when it comes to meeting women. And failure is often interpreted as not doing enough X, Y, or Z. PUA methods especially enforce this point of view.


"So lets see if I get this - a mans need for feeling that he is in control of the process of getting sex is separate from his need for sex itself, which is why most men will argue so tenaciously against the idea that lowering yourself to women doesnt work, because his need for control is separate - and maybe even more important - than his actual need for women."

*** I think there's definitely truth in that. Feeling like you're in control and can always control the outcome is a VERY appealing thought, and forms the basis of self-help books and seminars. Of course, a lot of self-help is just snake oil anyway.


"In fact, if you look at Mysterys idea of *fools mate* this fits in perfectly - the need for control trumps the need for sex even, as what is wanted is not easy sex but sex only in such a way that you feel like you are in control of getting it!"

*** Very true! Fool's mate lays are frowned upon because they take "no skill", are luck based, and because there is no difficulty present. But difficulty means that the girl doesn't really want you and it's almost impossible to turn that around anyway. So really, all lays are basically fool's mate lays anyway, since a girl that likes you makes it easy for you. And from this the question becomes, how do you get girls to make it easy for you? That depends on them as much as you. But this view communicates lack of control which is why it's not very popular among men.


"The problem is that if your need to get girls is so strong that you are willing to sacrifice other things you should care equally about, like your self-respect or status, then your need for control actually becomes a source of weakness, and not a healthy desire for mastery.

It isnt a source of mastery because it is willing to sacrifice other equally good things to its satisfaction - in other words, it has mastered you, not you it."

*** Yes. That's what ends up happening. Your need for control ends up controlling you.


"This is why girls dont like guys who need to control the process of getting sex to the point of lowering themselves, because it shows an emotionally weak man mastered by his needs, and if you cant look after your status, you probably wont be a good mate/provider, etc.

Thats why game doesnt work - to the extent that it forces you to lower yourself (by needing to DHV, putting up with bitch shields, etc) you are signaling to girls that you are mastered by your need for sex to the point of surrendering your need for status (important for survival).

Any thoughts, John?!?!?!"

*** Game is unattractive to women for the reasons you stated. It is basically like putting on a "man mask" to boost attractiveness, rather than actually being a man.

Anonymous said...

Thanks for your responses, John, youve helped me clarify my own thoughts on this!

A J said...

*Good Post John.....sadly no matter how "unfair" it seems, men want what women have and will do whatever it takes to get it. As long as this dynamic exists, women can make whatever rules, rationalizations, biases, decisions without affecting her mating chances. There's not much we can individually do about it*

I was the anon who posted this. I in no way pedastalize women, have low self-worth, or think they're special b/c of their p*ssy. I was just stating that until men as a whole change the way they view women, not as objects to be conquered but as humans just like us, this dynamic of "you have something I want and I'll do whatever it takes to get it" will persist. A man's sex drive can cause him to do really stupid things. If you need further proof look at many politicans embroiled in sex scandals. It seems like if men are willing risk their careers, families, and reputation for a piece of strange then we still have a long way to go.

Anonymous said...

Yeah, its great to hear about "game" and all that, but for me (and I am 40 years old) what Toronto Women want is money. Don't get me wrong, you have to be somewhat "attractive", but money and confidnece go a long way. Perhaps not quality success, but quantity for sure. I have seen it. Toronto women want MONEY.

Anonymous said...

Great post man. As a guy in his late 20s who takes pride in taking good care of himself, socialize, dress well, and just have a good time, I can honestly say most of the somewhat attractive women (I should say "girls") in this city have little to no social skills whatsoever. All they think is that all men only want sex from them.

I partly blame them and at the same time blame the other guys who treat them like that. Whatever happened to having self-confidence, being open-minded and just having a good time?! Oh well I'll keep at it only because that's what makes me happy and who I am.

Again, great post!