Question for the dating experts on here.

[fintstone]

Originally Posted by cockerpunk

plenty of women flirt with me. i have no issues with attracting and dating women. i enjoy dating very much because of it, even online dating. see, i actually like people. unlike everyone who hates dating, hates getting to know new people, think people with life experience are "damaged goods" etc etc.



yeah, most men are ****ty men. thats kinda been the point since page 1. if you are hitting on women at work, you are a ****ty man. this isnt complicated.

hitting on women at work is similar to hitting on women in male dominated hobbies.

hitting on women in male dominated hobbies is also foolish because women who participate in male dominated hobbies fall into 2 camps. the first is women who participate in male dominated hobbies for the male attention it gets them, and you dont want someone like that. and the second is women who participate in the male dominated hobby because they love it, and the male attention they get from it is a cost to doing the hobby. so dont be that guy and make the cost for her more expensive to participate either way, you loose, so dont do it.

hitting on women at work is like #2, except instead of loving the hobby, they need money to you know ... survive. so again, you can only loose.


the place to hit on women is somewhere where the rules are clear (ie, everyone is there to meet and flirt), a woman can protect herself so that safety isnt an issue, etc etc. the workplace is not like that.

this is actually a key reason why i prefer online dating to meet people. the rules are clear, everyone knows what the point is, and is choosing to participate. i love all these male creators telling men to get off the apps ... like, perfect. even better. i have had luck at bars/mixers etc, but even then, the rules are still a little muddy in that interaction, id rather just get a match, get a date, and move on from there.

A clue to you. In the workplace, female peers have all the power (as far as personal relationships). They have for a very long time. No, the problem is not men in general as you claim, other men just do not share your taste in women nor your viewpoint on what is appropriate or masculine.

You equate dating to "hitting on" women. I do not. I see dating as looking for a life partner.

[cockerpunk]

Originally Posted by fintstone

A clue to you. In the workplace, female peers have all the power (as far as personal relationships). They have for a very long time. No, the problem is not men in general as you claim, other men just do not share your taste in women nor your viewpoint on what is appropriate or masculine.

You equate dating to "hitting on" women. I do not. I see dating as looking for a life partner.

women do not have" all the power" in the workplace, or in personal relationships.

as already detailed by dixie, women are at the whim often with fundamental job security, depending on how they behave towards you at work. every time you hit on a woman at work (your words, not mine), you trigger a set of safety thoughts in her. how she behaves next can determine employment status, long term relationship dynamics (ie, she has to work with you for years, why would she **** you?), and short term issues, management, visibility around the office etc. this is stress, and its not sexy. by removing her ability to control her setting, by hitting on her at work, you have added stress, not improved her life. it also adds pressure for her to be personable, and not tell you what she really thinks or feels, its a trap basically. like a public proposal of marriage, terrible ideas. all about using public pressure to get a yes, rather than actually have her express her actual thoughts and feelings.

you'd know this if you had any friends who were women.

it was not my words, hitting on women, those were your words. i didnt start this conversation. you said hitting on women at work was a good idea.





dating isnt about *looking* for a life partner. dating is living a life with a partner. you should never stop dating a partner. if you arnt dating your partner 30 years into being married to them, you missed the point.

[fintstone]

Originally Posted by cockerpunk

women do not have" all the power" in the workplace, or in personal relationships.

as already detailed by dixie, women are at the whim often with fundamental job security, depending on how they behave towards you at work. every time you hit on a woman at work (your words, not mine), you trigger a set of safety thoughts in her. how she behaves next can determine employment status, long term relationship dynamics (ie, she has to work with you for years, why would she **** you?), and short term issues. this is stress, and its not sexy. by removing her ability to control her setting, by hitting on her at work, you have added stress, not improved her life.

you'd know this if you had any friends who were women.

dating isnt about *looking* for life partner. dating is living a life with a partner. you should never stop dating a partner.

Methinks you misrepresent Dixie's posts (as you have mine). Perhaps you should let her speak for herself.

"Hitting on women" were your words. I simply responded to them and pointed out that your use of them (responding to a post about dating) seemed to indicate how you actually view dating. I do not see it the same. I see dating as a path to a long-term relationship. Something that I have been quite successful with. You are hardly one to give advice in this respect.

Of course, I have lots of men and women that are friends. I just do not sleep with them (and have spent little time with either outside of school/work). They do not hang out at my home and play with my children (or me). Most of us grow up, become adults, marry and raise families (or are endeavoring to do so). We work with other serious adults in similar situations with similar viewpoints. There is little time to play.

Adult women I know are generally not androgynous or androgenous and are not searching for a mate (or date) that is. Just the opposite. They seem inclined to prefer a more traditional, masculine male. They are happy to find such men and enjoy attention from them (and do not hesitate to approach them). They have lots of girlfriends already. Simping and telling them they are oppressed by evil men does not score with many. The ones that it does appeal to are already angry and hate men anyways.

A female peer in the workplace does indeed hold the power and a man cannot really act untoward regarding any sort of relationship. Men rarely complain to HR regarding female attention (and would be laughed at by their peers for doing so) while the same is not true for women. A "he said, she said" claim will end his career immediately. While I do not have a lot of recent dating experience, I certainly have spent many decades in a work environment as a senior manager and have seen/been exposed to the workplace dynamics. They are not as you portray them (in a professional setting).

[cockerpunk]

Originally Posted by fintstone

Methinks you misrepresent Dixie's posts (as you have mine). Perhaps you should let her speak for herself.

"Hitting on women" were your words. I simply responded to them and pointed out that your use of them (responding to a post about dating) seemed to indicate how you actually view dating. I do not see it the same. I see dating as a path to a long-term relationship. Something that I have been quite successful with. You are hardly one to give advice in this respect.

Of course, I have lots of men and women that are friends. I just do not sleep with them (and have spent little time with either outside of school/work). They do not hang out at my home and play with my children (or me). Most of us grow up, become adults, marry and raise families (or are endeavoring to do so). We work with other serious adults in similar situations with similar viewpoints. There is little time to play.

Adult women I know are generally not androgynous or androgenous and are not searching for a mate (or date) that is. Just the opposite. They seem inclined to prefer a more traditional, masculine male. They are happy to find such men and enjoy attention from them (and do not hesitate to approach them). They have lots of girlfriends already. Simping and telling them they are oppressed by evil men does not score with many. The ones that it does appeal to are already angry and hate men anyways.

A female peer in the workplace does indeed hold the power and a man cannot really act untoward regarding any sort of relationship. Men rarely complain to HR regarding female attention (and would be laughed at by their peers for doing so) while the same is not true for women. A "he said, she said" claim will end his career immediately. While I do not have a lot of recent dating experience, I certainly have spent many decades in a work environment as a senior manager and have seen/been exposed to the workplace dynamics. They are not as you portray them (in a professional setting).

hitting on women at work, not my words.

dating is the action of going on dates. no matter your legal status, you should be dating your partner. if you dont like going on dates with your partner, you dont really get the concept of a relationship at a fundamental level. dating isnt a path to anything, its an action. the action of going on dates.

i dont know why you think i shouldnt get advice on the topic, i do a lot of dating. i love dating. i have a lot more experience than most people on the topic, due to the multiple long term relationships i cultivate, and the years i have spent cultivating them.

i dont even know the point of the whole next paragraph. you've already made it clear you dont think its appropriate to be friends with a woman, so that whole paragraph is nonsense.

the next paragraph after that, raising a family ... cool? like what about what i have said is in conflict with that? do you think you can't raise a family and date your partner? do you think you need to hit on women at work to raise a family? thats ... weird. super weird.

your lack of experience being friends with women really shows in your final paragraph. only once you are friends with a woman will you have the life experience to understand those power dynamics from a woman's perspective. and you will forever be the creepy dude at work.



i continue to feel bad for you finstone. humans are not some strict set of actions and robots. we are dynamic, bright creatures, at our best when we are free to express ourselves, and see each other fully.

[fintstone]

Originally Posted by cockerpunk

hitting on women at work, not my words. ...

Then you have a twin posting as you:

Originally Posted by cockerpunk

plenty of women flirt with me. i have no issues with attracting and dating women. i enjoy dating very much because of it, even online dating. see, i actually like people. unlike everyone who hates dating, hates getting to know new people, think people with life experience are "damaged goods" etc etc.



yeah, most men are ****ty men. thats kinda been the point since page 1. if you are hitting on women at work, you are a ****ty man. this isnt complicated.

hitting on women at work is similar to hitting on women in male dominated hobbies.

hitting on women in male dominated hobbies is also foolish because women who participate in male dominated hobbies fall into 2 camps. the first is women who participate in male dominated hobbies for the male attention it gets them, and you dont want someone like that. and the second is women who participate in the male dominated hobby because they love it, and the male attention they get from it is a cost to doing the hobby. so dont be that guy and make the cost for her more expensive to participate either way, you loose, so dont do it.

hitting on women at work is like #2, except instead of loving the hobby, they need money to you know ... survive. so again, you can only loose.


the place to hit on women is somewhere where the rules are clear (ie, everyone is there to meet and flirt), a woman can protect herself so that safety isnt an issue, etc etc. the workplace is not like that.

this is actually a key reason why i prefer online dating to meet people. the rules are clear, everyone knows what the point is, and is choosing to participate. i love all these male creators telling men to get off the apps ... like, perfect. even better. i have had luck at bars/mixers etc, but even then, the rules are still a little muddy in that interaction, id rather just get a match, get a date, and move on from there.

[cockerpunk]

Originally Posted by fintstone

Most men (and women) have little contact with the other sex outside of the 65 hours a week the work. It is unreasonable to expect that they would not date from that pool (among relative equals outside of the reporting chain).

your post defending "hitting on your coworkers"

you defended it. its yours.

[fintstone]

Originally Posted by cockerpunk

...

i dont even know the point of the whole next paragraph. you've already made it clear you dont think its appropriate to be friends with a woman, so that whole paragraph is nonsense.

the next paragraph after that, raising a family ... cool? like what about what i have said is in conflict with that? do you think you can't raise a family and date your partner? do you think you need to hit on women at work to raise a family? thats ... weird. super weird.

your lack of experience being friends with women really shows in your final paragraph. only once you are friends with a woman will you have the life experience to understand those power dynamics from a woman's perspective. and you will forever be the creepy dude at work.

i continue to feel bad for you finstone. humans are not some strict set of actions and robots. we are dynamic, bright creatures, at our best when we are free to express ourselves, and see each other fully.

I have always had male and female friends at work, school, etc. When work is over, I go home to my family. I do have few friends outside of work. As noted, there really is little time to play with boy and girlfriends when you have a family/household and work. Your time is generally devoted to your home/family. One can have friends (men and women) without dating them or playing with them. ne does not have to be effeminate to have female friend. They would like you if you were more masculine (maybe even more).

No, I do not "hit" on women (or men) at all. Those are your words...and somewhat demeaning IMHO.

[fintstone]

Originally Posted by cockerpunk

your post defending "hitting on your coworkers"

you defended it. its yours.

I see nothing in my post that says anything that you describe. You should stop the fiction or work on your reading comprehension.

[cockerpunk]

Originally Posted by fintstone

I see nothing in my post that says anything that you describe. You should stop the fiction or work on your reading comprehension.

thats your words. do you not believe them anymore? did you just pick a fight, to pick a fight?

[cockerpunk]

Originally Posted by fintstone

I have always had male and female friends at work, school, etc. When work is over, I go home to my family. I do have few friends outside of work. As noted, there really is little time to play with boy and girlfriends when you have a family/household and work. Your time is generally devoted to your home/family. One can have friends (men and women) without dating them or playing with them. ne does not have to be effeminate to have female friend. They would like you if you were more masculine (maybe even more).

No, I do not "hit" on women (or men) at all. Those are your words...and somewhat demeaning IMHO.

again, you defended hitting on women at work, not me.


and the rest of this post is a red herring. like what about it makes you think its a counter point to anything i have said? do you think that dating someone means you dont go home and do household work? or that you are not devoted to your family? do you think i believe that you must **** your friends? what is happening in your brain dude?

what a weird world you live in. i continue to feel sorry for you.

[fintstone]

Originally Posted by cockerpunk

thats your words. do you not believe them anymore? did you just pick a fight, to pick a fight?

As usual, you not only misrepresent what I post, but continue to do so once called on it. It does not help your argument to so obviously misquote another and misrepresent their position. It just shows that you are not entirely candid and that your argument is poor/failed.

[cockerpunk]

Originally Posted by fintstone

As usual, you not only misrepresent what I post, but continue to do so once called on it. It does not help your argument to so obviously misquote another and misrepresent their position. It just shows that you are not entirely candid and that your argument is poor/failed.

bro, you are the one who thinks a counter attack to "you should always be dating your partner" and "dont be the creep who hits on his coworkers" is "I'm committed to my family" like ... what?

i dont think we want to talk about misrepresenting anyones arguments here. cause you seem to have some pretty insane things to say in response to just like the bare minimum of masculine morality, dont hit on your coworkers

[fintstone]

Originally Posted by cockerpunk

again, you defended hitting on women at work, not me.


and the rest of this post is a red herring. like what about it makes you think its a counter point to anything i have said? do you think that dating someone means you dont go home and do household work? or that you are not devoted to your family? do you think i believe that you must **** your friends? what is happening in your brain dude?

what a weird world you live in. i continue to feel sorry for you.

I did not defend "hitting on" anyone...at work or otherwise.

No, I do not think one that has a family (or even a significant other) has time to date anyone else or spend a lot of time playing with friends/others when not working...or that it is appropriate (especially with the opposite sex). There is simply not time in the day to do so unless you deprive your family/SO.

[fintstone]

Originally Posted by cockerpunk

bro, you are the one who thinks a counter attack to "you should always be dating your partner" and "dont be the creep who hits on his coworkers" is "I'm committed to my family" like ... what?

i dont think we want to talk about misrepresenting anyones arguments here. cause you seem to have some pretty insane things to say in response to just like the bare minimum of masculine morality, dont hit on your coworkers

I did not even address that argument; much less "counter attack" as it was too stupid to acknowledge.

As noted before, you simply make up bad arguments for me because your positions are poor/fail.

It seems that you simply have different definition for words than are common for educated adults. Let me help:

""Dating" is a stage of romantic relationships in which two individuals engage in an activity together, most often with the intention of evaluating each other's suitability as a partner in a future intimate relationship. It falls into the category of courtship, consisting of social events carried out by the couple either alone or with others."

""Hit on" is an informal phrasal verb that means to show someone that you are sexually attracted to them. It can also mean to speak or behave in a way that shows you want to have a sexual relationship with someone."

[cockerpunk]

Originally Posted by fintstone

I did not defend "hitting on" anyone...at work or otherwise.

No, I do not think one that has a family (or even a significant other) has time to date anyone else or spend a lot of time playing with friends/others when not working...or that it is appropriate (especially with the opposite sex). There is simply not time in the day to do so unless you deprive your family/SO.

i already quoted your post doing so. if you were trying to make a different point, you could start with "i dont agree with hitting on your coworkers ..."

so you do or do not agree with hitting on your coworkers?


it sounds like you are talking about time, not love, support, or commitment. time is indeed a finite resource. but love, support, and commitment are not. time isnt commitment, time isnt love, nor is time support. time is time. spending all non-working waking hours with the same person, is not commitment, nor love, nor support. most people in the world actually hate that, and can be a form of codependency, which, ask any relationship expert, is a bad thing.

for example, tonight we are hosting family dinner. where my live in partner of 8 years and I host at our house, our friends, partners, family, basically anyone who wants to come over, bring your kids, bring yourselves, and have dinner and socialize all night. sometimes we have 5 people, sometimes we have 25 people, just depends on what people need or want.

we do this every week, we call it "st paul tuesdays"

what does commitment look like to you in a relationship? it sounds like you value one on one time over all else.

[cockerpunk]

Originally Posted by fintstone

I did not even address that argument; much less "counter attack" as it was too stupid to acknowledge.

As noted before, you simply make up bad arguments for me because your positions are poor/fail.

It seems that you simply have different definition for words than are common for educated adults. Let me help:

""Dating" is a stage of romantic relationships in which two individuals engage in an activity together, most often with the intention of evaluating each other's suitability as a partner in a future intimate relationship. It falls into the category of courtship, consisting of social events carried out by the couple either alone or with others."

""Hit on" is an informal phrasal verb that means to show someone that you are sexually attracted to them. It can also mean to speak or behave in a way that shows you want to have a sexual relationship with someone."

dating is the action of going on dates. it says nothing about any other status or conditions on the relationship. no matter the legality of your relationship, you should be dating. as someone who claims it to be very important to have one on one time with a partner, you should grasp this concept pretty easily.

hitting on is the action of expressing sexual desire for someone. it is inappropriate at work.

[fintstone]

Originally Posted by cockerpunk

i already quoted your post doing so. if you were trying to make a different point, you could start with "i dont agree with hitting on your coworkers ..."

so you do or do not agree with hitting on your coworkers?
..

You did not quote me defending "hitting on" anyone. As noted, those are your words not mine. I did not make any argument regarding hitting on anyone.

If you are looking for a debate, you should try debating what others post, not what you would like them to post (so your poor argument does not fail so badly).

[fintstone]

Originally Posted by cockerpunk

dating is the action of going on dates. it says nothing about any other status or conditions on the relationship.

hitting on is the action of expressing sexual desire for someone.

No kidding (somewhat of a paraphrase there)...although for most people, you can elaborate on that a bit (you may have a different purpose than most...and view men/women differently as well). Unlike "hitting on"...."dating" is normally with "the intention of evaluating each other's suitability as a partner"

You seem to use the terms interchangeably. I do not. Words mean things.

[cockerpunk]

Originally Posted by fintstone

You did not quote me defending "hitting on" anyone. As noted, those are your words not mine. I did not make any argument regarding hitting on anyone.

If you are looking for a debate, you should try debating what others post, not what you would like them to post (so your poor argument does not fail so badly).

i mean i quoted the exact post.

if you dont want to defend that statement, then feel free to say so. no one is stopping you.

[cockerpunk]

Originally Posted by fintstone

No kidding (somewhat of a paraphrase there)...although for most people, you can elaborate on that a bit (you may have a different purpose than most...and view men/women differently as well). Unlike "hitting on"...."dating" is normally with "the intention of evaluating each other's suitability as a partner"

You seem to use the terms interchangeably. I do not. Words mean things.

no, i dont use them interchangeably, i use them according to their definitions.

dating is an action, not a status. married is a status. partner is a status. dating is a thing you do.


you are referring to the idea of statuses and actions being co-linked into something often called the relationship escalator. which is the notion that actions and status are paired together and escalate in commitment and legal standing. ie, you meet, you talk, you date, you get married, you have kids.

but that isnt how the real world worked, and you'd know that if you didnt attack everyone as a deviant who told you otherwise. there are many relationships that have kids, but they are no longer married, maybe they are dating, maybe they were never married. there are plenty of relationships that no one wants children, or one person doesnt want children. there are further relationships were people want life long commitments, but dont want to get married and be legally enmeshed. and there are plenty of relationships where people only want to date, nothing else, perhaps not even be emotionally enmeshed. some people want emotional and romantic enmeshment but dont want to live with someone, or be married, or even have sex with them etc. like ACE people exist, do they not get to be happy to? none of these things are givens. they all have to do with the needs and wants of the people within them.

people are complicated, thats why relationships between them are complicated.

you'd know this if you werent so busy attacking anyone who lives even slightly differently than you do. like of course no one wants to tell you in real life about their actual lives and the complicated bits, you'ed offer no support, and instead attack them. thankfully i dont know you in person, so im safe to tell you are wrong.

reminds me of the trans thing, like a bunch of transphobes are always like "i dont know any trans people" and thats just telling on yourself. of course you know trans people, everyone does, if you know 100 people total, you probably know a trans person. the fact that you dont think you know a transperson, means you are unsafe for them to tell you. and thats just telling on yourself.

same with this kind of thing. like not understanding the nuances of human relationships is telling on yourself. i feel sorry for you that you lack the life experience needed, and instead of wanting some of that experience, you attack others for even talking about it.