nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Single life as a guy...

LordNorbury

Hi folks, just thought I'd start this thread, I'm a guy in my mid 30's and single, it occurred to me to start a general discussion on single life for guys in their 20's and 30's (and upwards!)... I'm single a few years now, after a few really long term relationships, was never married and never had kids.

I don't want this to be a thread on internet dating or how to pull women as a single guy, more about the pro's and the con's of single life, the best and the worst of it, aspirations for the future, maybe regrets about the past, what you do that is important to you to have and to enjoy your life, that is generally configured very differently from many people around you, (who at this age are generally settled down with a partner and kids)...

Just interested in generating some discussion on the subject, as your man on Star Trek says, "engage!"...

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

LordNorbury

SWL wrote: »

I can't agree with you when you say the courts are more balanced here than the US, certainly in certain States the ex wife can lay claim future money earned even while divorced, but that has also applied in the UK and Irish laws are similar, in most cases; especially with children the wife keeps the family home and the children, even if she has an affair or decides unilaterally the marriage is over, while society and the legal system hold the husband to account emotionally and financially until the children are 18 or 23 that's not balanced that outrageous.

But is there any alternative? If you think about it, the judge can't carve the house in two and hand each ex partner their half... Children when brought into the world, have to be raised, this has a cost associated with it, and why should anyone other than the two parents who conceived the child, have to shoulder the financial burden of that? It could be argued that the state is not hard enough on some fathers, particularly the ones that don't step up to the plate when they father ha child and the state is left to pick up the tab for it.

I know I've wandered off topic slightly, although the points are relevant to the subject matter I think...

When I'm dating online, I see (female) profiles all the time, stating that she wants a relationship and wants children, and I often wonder have these girls thought this through at all? I know women generally have a much stronger natural urge to want to have kids, etc, than men, but I often wonder how or why it is that they are not seeing the simple logic that I see every day. Then I copped one day that often, women I know in relationships, can often have an entirely different view of their own relationship, and of their friends relationships, than their partner has of their own relationship, or that their female friends partner has of his own relationship. Women seem to be more inclined to engage in "keeping up appearances", while men in the very same relationship will openly tell you over a quiet pint that he wishes he was still single, but as I've heard lately, "shure fúck it, it is what it is"...

Onthe3rdDay

LordNorbury wrote: »

I fully agree, but do you not think that a huge part of why this might be so, is down to financial considerations? The married folks I know who have kids, they seem to be really really struggling financially, every week seems to be a mission just to make it to the next week. It is no existence really I think, but the stress that must come from trying to raise 2 young kids in Ireland today with 2 parents on the average industrial wage (if they are lucky), I reckon is the cause of a lot of this marriage misery that I can personally vouch for seeing myself.

I'm sure close to this stress, is the stress of knowing that to do the right thing by your kids, that you cannot really leave, if they are young, and it seems to dawn on some of my mates that they just regretted ever settling down and getting married at all. It is when I have a chat with some of them about my single lifestyle, that it almost seems like I am rubbing salt into deep wounds at times, the reaction I get from some of my married mates.

No doubt money is a big part of the misery. I personally don't have to worry about anyone but myself because I'm single. Times are actually very tight over the next few months but all I have to do is cut back and wait for funds to return. When they do return in six months I won't have debts or overdrafts which I would have if I had kids. So yes I do agree that for some it's money pure and simple. However, for others it's almost as if they sleep walked into the situation. Money for them is not an issue but they won't walk away because of the kids. So they resign themselves to a good few years of mild misery.

I find myself not sharing what I get up to with some friends at this stage because I don't want to make them feel any worse. I'm planning two biggish trips aboard next year and am probably going to be away on holiday for 3 or so months. However, I'll have to give them the usual excuse that I have to travel for work and that I get the odd day off for sightseeing.

SWL

LordNorbury wrote: »

But is there any alternative? If you think about it, the judge can't carve the house in two and hand each ex partner their half... Children when brought into the world, have to be raised, this has a cost associated with it, and why should anyone other than the two parents who conceived the child, have to shoulder the financial burden of that? It could be argued that the state is not hard enough on some fathers, particularly the ones that don't step up to the plate when they father ha child and the state is left to pick up the tab for it.

I know I've wandered off topic slightly, although the points are relevant to the subject matter I think...

When I'm dating online, I see (female) profiles all the time, stating that she wants a relationship and wants children, and I often wonder have these girls thought this through at all? I know women generally have a much stronger natural urge to want to have kids, etc, than men, but I often wonder how or why it is that they are not seeing the simple logic that I see every day. Then I copped one day that often, women I know in relationships, can often have an entirely different view of their own relationship, and of their friends relationships, than their partner has of their own relationship, or that their female friends partner has of his own relationship. Women seem to be more inclined to engage in "keeping up appearances", while men in the very same relationship will openly tell you over a quiet pint that he wishes he was still single, but as I've heard lately, "shure fúck it, it is what it is"...

I agree 100% with the bold part, but it appears to be a given the house and kids are left with the mother irrespective of the circumstances of the separation. I am thinking about a friend of mine who married a long term girlfriend, he didn't drink, smoke, gamble have affairs etc. arrived home one day after a usual 13 hour day to find the wife had decided he need to move out etc. the house they was 80% paid for by him before he meet this girl, he now lives with his parents, sees the two boys at weekends and can't afford to do diddle squat by the time he has paid for everything.

Picked up his kids on weekend to find the new boyfriend had stayed over, I knew this girl, she was the lovely girl type , sex kitten etc. I would never have thought she could be so cold and emotionally abusive to her ex with no apparent motive or indeed confusing the kids by inviting a strange man to stay less than 3 months after their father moved out. The guy is been nailed to a emotional and financial cross and he don't know why, if his wife wanted to leave fine, people break up, but why would the living conditions automatically be in her favour.

Wibbs

PucaMama wrote: »

i really wish though that there was more acknowledgement *really dont think i spelled that one right* of that difference. i dont feel i myself or any women i know fit into the stereotypes of women i often see on those sites.

I agree 100%. As for those stereotypes? Honestly? I've met them and often enough too. The "gold digger" the "I'll forget to take the pill" babybrainer types, the intensely self involved narcissists, the paranoids, the emotion driven harpies etc. They defo do exist. However and it's a big however 1) I've met the same number of fcukwits who happen to be male and 2) I've met far more of both men and women who don't fit into such a category.

TBH and speaking personally I would broadly divide women into two camps, Women and "Chicks"*. The "women" your MRA/PUA types see and paint as one gender would match my Chick criteria pretty much exactly(see list above). Chicks are to avoided like the very plague, but I do find it amusing that your bloke PUA types who have success with their techniques are positively selecting for Chicks, the very type they're bitching about. That stuff is much more likely to attract the type. Irony ain't in it.

What I also found interesting about a lot of the US guys is that they see non American/Western women as better, much better than their "own women". They don't realise that damn near every bloke culture on the planet bitches about the local women. You see it here on Boards too. [insert nationality here] women are [insert generalisation here]*set local language*. It's a fecking worldwide meme. It's like bitching about politicians. Really. I've personally heard the same from Italian men, Spanish men, Brazilian men, French men, Russian men, Chinese men, the list is long. I've heard it so often I've thought that maybe it's down to some genetic imperative to seek the "foreign" to spread your genes as widely as possible? I've heard it from women too, but at a much lower rate. Though if a guy is "foreign" he will tend to do better than he would around his "own".

The US guys seem to see South America, the Far east and Eastern Europe and Russia as promised lands for the ladies. Where the ladies are better than western women(who are usually corrupted by left wind feminisim. And fat of course.). Those cultures would more likely throw up women interested in a traditional setup with more defined gender roles, but that can bring its own issues too. Be careful what you wish for Ted. They complain about gold diggers in the US, but some of the biggest and most overt gold diggers I've ever met were to be found to the east of Europe and seriously high maintenance with it(even then they were a low enough number). As for beauty? 1) it depends on individual preferences and 2) things aren't always what they seem. OK yes the US with its serious obesity problem is gonna be an issue if you dig thin women(or men), but beyond that people come in all shapes and sizes wherever you go. Even in the US, in the "fattest" state there are still plenty of men and women who are thin. It's just that the "grass is always greener" makes people put on special glasses that ignores what they don't wish to see when they go to their promised land. All I can report from personal experience by having more relationships with non Irish women than Irish is that I've seen feck all differences beyond some low level cultural quirks and you'd have to go looking for them. The individual trumps their birthplace pretty much every single time.

i really dont see why it has to be such a them v us situation.

Well, all the way back to the Greeks there has been some level of us and them where the genders are concerned. Mostly harmless enough, but occasionally flares up into daftness. I just think the interweb is magnifying this inherent background thing.

Deleted User wrote: »

The us V them arises because that's what it comes down to. :P I'm pretty cynical about everyone. However there's no man who's ever going to have a chance to destroy my life by legal means while destroying me emotionally. There's plenty of women who potentially could. :P

Actually yea that would make some sense to me. With men they're close mates, acquaintances, strangers... With women, while I have close women mates, when romance gets involved I do worry that the love drug/lust will get in the way of falling for the right person for me and she would have the potential to hurt me much more. I've had my heart broken and I'd not wish it on my worst enemy. Well... maybe my worst enemy

Women have that issue too(actually IMHO they can have it worse on this score. I've certainly known more women who ended up with complete tossers because of "love").

*I apply a similar approach to men; men and "dicks". The only real gender difference I apply is because I'm a hetero bloke who would get into a deeper emotional/romantic connection with a woman. I only apply this in that environment, in work and general life I don't, though I avoid chicks and dicks there too.

[Deleted User]

Wibbs wrote: »

Actually yea that would make some sense to me. With men they're close mates, acquaintances, strangers... With women, while I have close women mates, when romance gets involved I do worry that the love drug/lust will get in the way of falling for the right person for me and she would have the potential to hurt me much more. I've had my heart broken and I'd not wish it on my worst enemy. Well... maybe my worst enemy Women have that issue too(actually IMHO they can have it worse on this score. I've certainly known more women who ended up with complete tossers because of "love").

Personally I haven't seen that. I know lads for years who are with women a long time even after getting a hiding or 2. On outward appearances the women aren't so bad but they're very controlling and the lads have basically given up on anything else and will be with the women until the women decide otherwise.

[Deleted User]

As for my experience living the single life, I would very much like a relationship. Unfortunately I'm not into hooking up and what to get to know someone before doing anything physical at all. Which tends to get me into the friendzone. (Hopefully mentioning the friendzone won't de-rail the thread too far. :P )

NSAman

Deleted User wrote: »

As for my experience living the single life, I would very much like a relationship. Unfortunately I'm not into hooking up and what to get to know someone before doing anything physical at all. Which tends to get me into the friendzone. (Hopefully mentioning the friendzone won't de-rail the thread too far. :P )

Simple solution for that.

Recently I bought a small house in a relatively affluent area. While I have visited the area for a long time and have made many friends there, not once have I been asked on a date.

Since I purchased the house, I have had my secretary plagued by women asking for my phone number and one actually call me for a date.. could it be that I have suddenly turned into a sex god???

Onthe3rdDay

Wibbs wrote: »

Actually yea that would make some sense to me. With men they're close mates, acquaintances, strangers... With women, while I have close women mates, when romance gets involved I do worry that the love drug/lust will get in the way of falling for the right person for me and she would have the potential to hurt me much more. I've had my heart broken and I'd not wish it on my worst enemy. Well... maybe my worst enemy Women have that issue too(actually IMHO they can have it worse on this score. I've certainly known more women who ended up with complete tossers because of "love").

I agree with the point Buttonftw makes about controlling women. There are certain men I know that just follow orders. They literally have to ask for permission to go out for a pint (and I mean a hour and no more) and that permission is frequently refused for no apparent reason.

At the same time I have also come across women who are with the most unsuitable characters you'd ever come across, all because they love them. This became particularly clear when I was in college when girls in their early 20's were making excuses for fellas who were Barbarians at best.

It's like the time I was going out with a girl and we came across this man belting the living daylights out of his girlfriend. Obviously my girlfriend who had a kind heart wanted to intervene. A "is everything okay question" lead to us being attacked by the female victim while the boyfriend who had been beating her watched on.

Luckily There was a taxi nearby and we jumped into that and away from the confrontation. It taught me the lesson not to get involved in other people's relationships whenever possible.

LordNorbury

Deleted User wrote: »

As for my experience living the single life, I would very much like a relationship. Unfortunately I'm not into hooking up and what to get to know someone before doing anything physical at all. Which tends to get me into the friendzone. (Hopefully mentioning the friendzone won't de-rail the thread too far. :P )

The strange thing is, for single people these days, the internet/online dating thingy has created this whole new 'space' or reality, where you meet someone, you get to know them over a few dates, and somewhere between date 3 and 5, you are usually gonna be intimate/have sex with them, or else just not pursue it any further beyond date one. So, even though it is practically casual sex, it often doesn't feel like it, because you are hanging out together, probably been out together for a few nights, been for a meal or drinks on one of your dates, spent a day together, discussed family and friends, or whatever, but it is still effectively casual sex I think, although it is not what we would have considered in the past to be 'casual sex' as in a one night stand, sleeping with someone you just brought home from a nightclub, etc... relationships in my view for single adults these days, especially those who are dating online, have morphed into being a series of these types of short term/1-2 month max type relationships if you could even call them a relationship...

[Deleted User]

Onthe3rdDay wrote: »

I agree with the point Buttonftw makes about controlling women. There are certain men I know that just follow orders. They literally have to ask for permission to go out for a pint (and I mean a hour and no more) and that permission is frequently refused for no apparent reason.

At the same time I have also come across women who are with the most unsuitable characters you'd ever come across, all because they love them. This became particularly clear when I was in college when girls in their early 20's were making excuses for fellas who were Barbarians at best.

Wibbs will probably make the point and I'll that it's a two-way thing. There's plenty of lads who look for that kind of relationship. It's the ones who slip into it I feel for. Obviously it's fine to suggest that a guy who always ends up with an overbearing/abusive woman brings it on himself, not quite so fine if the genders were reversed. :P

[Deleted User]

LordNorbury wrote: »

The strange thing is, for single people these days, the internet/online dating thingy has created this whole new 'space' or reality, where you meet someone, you get to know them over a few dates, and somewhere between date 3 and 5, you are usually gonna be intimate/have sex with them, or else just not pursue it any further beyond date one. So, even though it is practically casual sex, it often doesn't feel like it, because you are hanging out together, probably been out together for a few nights, been for a meal or drinks on one of your dates, spent a day together, discussed family and friends, or whatever, but it is still effectively casual sex I think, although it is not what we would have considered in the past to be 'casual sex' as in a one night stand, sleeping with someone you just brought home from a nightclub, etc... relationships in my view for single adults these days, especially those who are dating online, have morphed into being a series of these types of short term/1-2 month max type relationships if you could even call them a relationship...

That hasn't happened for me. I can't even get girls to reply on online dating. Not that I'm bitter or anything. :P

LordNorbury

Deleted User wrote: »

Wibbs will probably make the point and I'll that it's a two-way thing. There's plenty of lads who look for that kind of relationship. It's the ones who slip into it I feel for. Obviously it's fine to suggest that a guy who always ends up with an overbearing/abusive woman brings it on himself, not quite so fine if the genders were reversed. :P

This is true though, I see men who are with women who are downright nutjobs, they didn't turn into nutjobs overnight, they always had a seriously difficult personality. Any guy who ends up with such a partner in my opinion only has themselves to blame and I imagine the same is true if you reverse the gender roles.

[Deleted User]

LordNorbury wrote: »

This is true though, I see men who are with women who are downright nutjobs, they didn't turn into nutjobs overnight, they always had a seriously difficult personality. Any guy who ends up with such a partner in my opinion only has themselves to blame and I imagine the same is true if you reverse the gender roles.

They could have if they're married. :P

Onthe3rdDay

LordNorbury wrote: »

This is true though, I see men who are with women who are downright nutjobs, they didn't turn into nutjobs overnight, they always had a seriously difficult personality. Any guy who ends up with such a partner in my opinion only has themselves to blame and I imagine the same is true if you reverse the gender roles.

When I was growing up I was always warned by women in my family about those that would try to marry me and then would change as soon as the wedding night was over. I used to think this was a traditional Irish Rural attitude (Biggest fear of all farmers, the son will marry the wrong woman)
However, as I have gotten older I have seen cases where this is the case, where men and women do change soon after marriage. They don't have to make an effort any more. You don't need to be having sex every year.:eek:

Daveysil15

Burger Please wrote: »

spend $150 on dinner for one.

:eek:

Jasus what are you eating? A fecking horse? :pac:

Wibbs wrote: »

They complain about gold diggers in the US, but some of the biggest and most overt gold diggers I've ever met were to be found to the east of Europe

The individual trumps their birthplace pretty much every single time.

What I've noticed about the Eastern European women is that they tend to get married very young. I know a lot of EE couples that got married in their early 20's and only ever had the one partner. Practically unheard of in Ireland these days. They expect a bit of old fashioned chivalry. I've dated a few Eastern European women and I was always expected to pick up the bill. I've found the Irish are more likely to pay their own way. That has just been my experience though.

Totally agree with the second sentence there.

LordNorbury wrote: »

The strange thing is, for single people these days, the internet/online dating thingy has created this whole new 'space' or reality, where you meet someone, you get to know them over a few dates, and somewhere between date 3 and 5, you are usually gonna be intimate/have sex with them, or else just not pursue it any further beyond date one. So, even though it is practically casual sex, it often doesn't feel like it, because you are hanging out together, probably been out together for a few nights, been for a meal or drinks on one of your dates, spent a day together, discussed family and friends, or whatever, but it is still effectively casual sex I think, although it is not what we would have considered in the past to be 'casual sex' as in a one night stand, sleeping with someone you just brought home from a nightclub, etc... relationships in my view for single adults these days, especially those who are dating online, have morphed into being a series of these types of short term/1-2 month max type relationships if you could even call them a relationship...

I kind of agree and disagree with this. Bear with me.

I think the online dating has created a kind of window shopping mentality with a lot of people. Have a look around, see what's there. Try something for a while, then bring it back and try something different. Maybe there'll be something better there next week.

From my experience though, and from what I've heard, online dating rarely results in casual sex, unless its a site like adult friend finder, which I'd imagine the vast majority of its users are male. That can be a problem with regular dating sites too. I remember listening to a comedian a while back, (I can't think of his name) but he said online dating for women must be like a 24 hour Tesco. They have so many options, loads of isles and multiple choices. And what do men get? One little corner in the back of fcuking Aldi. :pac:

But I can't see too many women looking for casual sex on a dating site TBH.

Burger Please

Daveysil15 wrote: »

:eek:

Jasus what are you eating? A fecking horse? :pac:

Well lets see a starter is about £40, main about £50, + wine + desert if I am in the humor.

NSAman

Burger Please wrote: »

Well lets see a starter is about £40, main about £50, + wine + desert if I am in the humor.

Has the gout been acting up lately?

Burger Please

NSAman wrote: »

Has the gout been acting up lately?

I am not sure what a gout is but this is at Le Manoir Aux Le Quat Saisons. A fantastic restaurant might I add.

Daveysil15

Burger Please wrote: »

I am not sure what a gout is but this is at Le Manoir Aux Le Quat Saisons. A fantastic restaurant might I add.

It'd fecking want to be for those prices.

RainyDay

LordNorbury wrote: »

But is there any alternative? If you think about it, the judge can't carve the house in two and hand each ex partner their half... Children when brought into the world, have to be raised, this has a cost associated with it, and why should anyone other than the two parents who conceived the child, have to shoulder the financial burden of that? It could be argued that the state is not hard enough on some fathers, particularly the ones that don't step up to the plate when they father ha child and the state is left to pick up the tab for it.

Sorry, but the typical scenario post-divorce or seperation here in Ireland is not that the two shoulder the financial burden, but that the man shoulders the financial burden, and gets to pay for his own flat or houseshare, while she enjoys the family home.

LordNorbury

Daveysil15 wrote: »

I kind of agree and disagree with this. Bear with me.

I think the online dating has created a kind of window shopping mentality with a lot of people. Have a look around, see what's there. Try something for a while, then bring it back and try something different. Maybe there'll be something better there next week.

From my experience though, and from what I've heard, online dating rarely results in casual sex, unless its a site like adult friend finder, which I'd imagine the vast majority of its users are male. That can be a problem with regular dating sites too. I remember listening to a comedian a while back, (I can't think of his name) but he said online dating for women must be like a 24 hour Tesco. They have so many options, loads of isles and multiple choices. And what do men get? One little corner in the back of fcuking Aldi. :pac:

But I can't see too many women looking for casual sex on a dating site TBH.

Defo agree with the window shopping analogy! Women obviously don't say they are seeking casual sex, but at the same time, sex on a 3rd or 4th date I've found is pretty much the norm when it comes to online dating, and I think most people who are dating online would agree with that statement. Certainly if it wasn't happening by date #5 I think you'd be wondering is there some sort of a problem. This to me, is effectively casual sex, but it is also the norm in my opinion. Ok, a woman would never agree that it is casual sex because you've met for drinks on the first date, then you went out for dinner & spent the evening together on your 2nd date, then the 3rd time you met you went out for drinks & ended up going for drinks, staying out all night and ended up back in her place or yours & slept together. It doesn't look like casual sex on the face of it because you've spent 3 evenings together, but it is casual sex in my eyes, because there is no commitment there whatsoever, and this is basically what both of you are up to and engaging in quite regularly.

It doesn't carry the traditionally shameful flag of 'casual sex', because it wasn't like the two of you woke up next morning after first laying eyes on each other in the chipper the previous night after the nightclub, and then had sex.

If you go on any of the well known dating websites Irish people use, you'll see the exact same faces there, these are often extremely attractive & successful women (can only speak for the women as I'm a straight guy so am only seeing female profiles), and they have been on the site for several years.

There is certainly a casual dimension to the online dating which enables a lot of casual sex along the lines I've described above, this is how people date these days, because I don't think there is any other way to account for the fact that on the dating website I use, the same familiar faces are on the site for the last number of years, and on paper, these women should have been snapped up in a very short time.

This brings me back to my main point, which is that men & women in the current times, they are dead fúcking wary of long term commitment. Women say they want commitment and are holding out for their 'knight in shining armour', but in reality they will run with a long line of casual enough encounters until this mythical entity in shining armour turns up. Men as well will say they are 'looking for a relationship', which really means putting in 3-5 dates and seeing what happens, knowing sex is easily on the table within that timeframe, and then after that it'll probably fizzle out somewhat to everyone's satisfaction... It's all one big game in my opinion, one that let's people have their needs met, while also providing suitable cover from the stigma that comes from engaging with regular casual sex...

ancapailldorcha

Daveysil15 wrote: »

But I can't see too many women looking for casual sex on a dating site TBH.

A mate of mine told me that one of his colleagues openly stated that she was using POF for weekend hookups. Another chap I know had a ONS with a woman he met on Tinder on the same night he started chatting to her.

Daveysil15

LordNorbury wrote: »

Defo agree with the window shopping analogy! Women obviously don't say they are seeking casual sex, but at the same time, sex on a 3rd or 4th date I've found is pretty much the norm when it comes to online dating, and I think most people who are dating online would agree with that statement. Certainly if it wasn't happening by date #5 I think you'd be wondering is there some sort of a problem. This to me, is effectively casual sex, but it is also the norm in my opinion. Ok, a woman would never agree that it is casual sex because you've met for drinks on the first date, then you went out for dinner & spent the evening together on your 2nd date, then the 3rd time you met you went out for drinks & ended up going for drinks, staying out all night and ended up back in her place or yours & slept together. It doesn't look like casual sex on the face of it because you've spent 3 evenings together, but it is casual sex in my eyes, because there is no commitment there whatsoever, and this is basically what both of you are up to and engaging in quite regularly.

It doesn't carry the traditionally shameful flag of 'casual sex', because it wasn't like the two of you woke up next morning after first laying eyes on each other in the chipper the previous night after the nightclub, and then had sex.

If you go on any of the well known dating websites Irish people use, you'll see the exact same faces there, these are often extremely attractive & successful women (can only speak for the women as I'm a straight guy so am only seeing female profiles), and they have been on the site for several years.

There is certainly a casual dimension to the online dating which enables a lot of casual sex along the lines I've described above, this is how people date these days, because I don't think there is any other way to account for the fact that on the dating website I use, the same familiar faces are on the site for the last number of years, and on paper, these women should have been snapped up in a very short time.

This brings me back to my main point, which is that men & women in the current times, they are dead fúcking wary of long term commitment. Women say they want commitment and are holding out for their 'knight in shining armour', but in reality they will run with a long line of casual enough encounters until this mythical entity in shining armour turns up. Men as well will say they are 'looking for a relationship', which really means putting in 3-5 dates and seeing what happens, knowing sex is easily on the table within that timeframe, and then after that it'll probably fizzle out somewhat to everyone's satisfaction... It's all one big game in my opinion, one that let's people have their needs met, while also providing suitable cover from the stigma that comes from engaging with regular casual sex...

So that's where I've been going wrong. The damn chippers is where its at.

No I understand what you're saying, but I'd imagine if a woman decides to have sex after 3 to 5 dates then she probably wants a relationship of some sort. I'd call that a casual relationship rather than casual sex. Although I agree that a lot of casual/short term relationships seem to result from online dating. Again its whole window shopping mentality. I've heard of people going on multiple dates with different people in a short period of time and trying to pick out the best. One woman here on boards said she went on 70+ dates in the space of 3 months. That's just mad. Serial daters I think they're called.

Daveysil15

ancapailldorcha wrote: »

A mate of mine told me that one of his colleagues openly stated that she was using POF for weekend hookups. Another chap I know had a ONS with a woman he met on Tinder on the same night he started chatting to her.

Yeah but like I said, there wouldn't be too many women doing that. They'd definitely be in the minority. I've never used Tinder though so can't comment on that.

route9

I do think it's all about the cues. You can approach a girl cold, but chances are it won't go anywhere and that could actually have nothing to do with you at all. It could be that she has a boyfriend, is in a hurry, is stressed, etc etc.

I have a funny one at the minute, it's one of those situations where it could be basically nothing - or something. There is a very good looking girl in my office who walks by my desk usually around twice a day. Up until lately I never caught her eye and usually this was just because I wouldn't spot her until she was almost past my desk and looking straight ahead anyway. She also looks like one of those 'ice queen' types, where her normal expression is quite, well 'ice queen-ish'. She is German too

Then last week, I happened to look up and she glanced down (as I was sitting down obviously). I smiled at her and looked straight back, maintaining our gaze for a bit, and she gave me one of the biggest smiles I've seen, haha. Now I've never seen her smile at anyone in the office, never mind a big one like that.

Then, I hadn't expected her to walk past again that same day, but she did and kinda caught me by surprise. She was walking past really slowly, looking down at her phone but then glancing at me again as she walked by. I was thinking I should have said a proper 'how's it going?', but she really did catch me by surprise! I will next time though.

So does that sound like something, or am I just reading into it?! It could be either I guess

Daveysil15

route9 wrote: »

I do think it's all about the cues. You can approach a girl cold, but chances are it won't go anywhere and that could actually have nothing to do with you at all. It could be that she has a boyfriend, is in a hurry, is stressed, etc etc.

I have a funny one at the minute, it's one of those situations where it could be basically nothing - or something. There is a very good looking girl in my office who walks by my desk usually around twice a day. Up until lately I never caught her eye and usually this was just because I wouldn't spot her until she was almost past my desk and looking straight ahead anyway. She also looks like one of those 'ice queen' types, where her normal expression is quite, well 'ice queen-ish'. She is German too

Then last week, I happened to look up and she glanced down (as I was sitting down obviously). I smiled at her and looked straight back, maintaining our gaze for a bit, and she gave me one of the biggest smiles I've seen, haha. Now I've never seen her smile at anyone in the office, never mind a big one like that.

Then, I hadn't expected her to walk past again that same day, but she did and kinda caught me by surprise. She was walking past really slowly, looking down at her phone but then glancing at me again as she walked by. I was thinking I should have said a proper 'how's it going?', but she really did catch me by surprise! I will next time though.

So does that sound like something, or am I just reading into it?! It could be either I guess

I'm not sure what any of that has to do with the thread?

Tarzana

Onthe3rdDay wrote: »

I agree with the point Buttonftw makes about controlling women. There are certain men I know that just follow orders. They literally have to ask for permission to go out for a pint (and I mean a hour and no more) and that permission is frequently refused for no apparent reason.

I do wonder why it seems to be more acceptable for women to be controlling. As a young 'un, my mother warned me to steer clear of controlling men. I don't think this warning would be rare, I think a lot of parents would endeavour to steer their daughters away from controlling or abusive men. But the opposite seems to be socially acceptable in this country. Why is that? My BF's friends and male workmates marvel at how often I "let him out". Apparently this makes me really cool and somewhat unusual. Like seriously, WTF?

He's a grown man, he can do what he wants. The only time he might ring me or be apologetic is if he's cancelling plans with me or if we had planned to watch a film that night or something.

Daveysil15

Tarzana wrote: »

I do wonder why it seems to be more acceptable for women to be controlling. As a young 'un, my mother warned me to steer clear of controlling men. I don't think this warning would be rare, I think a lot of parents would endeavour to steer their daughters away from controlling or abusive men. But the opposite seems to be socially acceptable in this country. Why is that? My BF's friends and male workmates marvel at how often I "let him out". Apparently this makes me really cool and somewhat unusual. Like seriously, WTF? He's a grown man, he can do what he wants. The only time he might ring me or be apologetic is if he's cancelling plans with me or if we had planned to watch a film that night or something.

It's probably to do with our matriarchal society. I've noticed it too. There are a lot of Polish people where I work. Sometimes I'd ask an Irish guy if he wants to go to such and such, and he'd say. "Ohh I better check with the missus first. Ask a Polish guy and he just says, "Yeah I'll be there. Kurwa!" As I said earlier they're a lot more old fashioned when it comes to gender roles, although there's always the odd exception.

LordNorbury

Daveysil15 wrote: »

It's probably to do with our matriarchal society. I've noticed it too. There are a lot of Polish people where I work. Sometimes I'd ask an Irish guy if he wants to go to such and such, and he'd say. "Ohh I better check with the missus first. Ask a Polish guy and he just says, "Yeah I'll be there. Kurwa!" As I said earlier they're a lot more old fashioned when it comes to gender roles, although there's always the odd exception.

I know this guy, he is married a few years but around my own age (mid 30's), the poor lad literally isn't allowed out of his own front garden and this is no exaggeration. If I'm out on the street (we live near each other) putting the bins out, or arriving home from work, etc, and we cross paths and stop for a yap, 2 minutes will not pass before she will be hanging out of the window calling him back in or else sends their child out with some silly request like, "mammy wants you to go back inside to do X"...

This isn't just me that this has happened with, it has been noted by myself and others that the guy isn't allowed actually interact with other people on the street. We've never seen him out for a pint with his mates in the local or anywhere else. The guy seems completely surrendered to this set up, and appears to have begrudgingly normalised it as how his life is. When he gets the call to go inside (which happens EVERY TIME), he throws his eyes up to heaven as he mutters something like: "have to go, sure you know yourself, I'm getting the evil eye here from herself"...

I leave him to it and would never interfere in someone else's relationship, but this kind of a set up leaves me in total wonderment and awe, at how much crap some people will put up with.

But I think a guy who allows himself to be treated like this, deserves to be miserable (and he certainly appears to be miserable).

Swede517

LordNorbury wrote: »

I know this guy, he is married a few years but around my own age (mid 30's), the poor lad literally isn't allowed out of his own front garden and this is no exaggeration. If I'm out on the street (we live near each other) putting the bins out, or arriving home from work, etc, and we cross paths and stop for a yap, 2 minutes will not pass before she will be hanging out of the window calling him back in or else sends their child out with some silly request like, "mammy wants you to go back inside to do X"...

This isn't just me that this has happened with, it has been noted by myself and others that the guy isn't allowed actually interact with other people on the street. We've never seen him out for a pint with his mates in the local or anywhere else. The guy seems completely surrendered to this set up, and appears to have begrudgingly normalised it as how his life is. When he gets the call to go inside (which happens EVERY TIME), he throws his eyes up to heaven as he mutters something like: "have to go, sure you know yourself, I'm getting the evil eye here from herself"...

I leave him to it and would never interfere in someone else's relationship, but this kind of a set up leaves me in total wonderment and awe, at how much crap some people will put up with.

But I think a guy who allows himself to be treated like this, deserves to be miserable (and he certainly appears to be miserable).

He's in an abusive relationship and all you can say is that he deserves to be miserable. Some people are are vulnerable and more easily controlled and manipulated by their abusers. His abuser has clearly brainwashed him to think that their relationship is normal. It's not, it's abusive.