What was the point of "males make the first move" anyway?

[Evil Dictators Happyland]

The original point was that women were barely considered people for centuries of European society, and we kept the social traditions from that era even after they made no sense.
It's like the QWERTY keyboard: it was put in place so that typewriter keys wouldn't get stuck on each other, so why is it on everything now even though it slows down typing for no particular reason? Tradition, that's why.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

The original point was that women were barely considered people for centuries of European society, and we kept the social traditions from that era even after they made no sense.
It's like the QWERTY keyboard: it was put in place so that typewriter keys wouldn't get stuck on each other, so why is it on everything now even though it slows down typing for no particular reason? Tradition, that's why.

True, and I mean, tradition is not such a bad thing. Sometimes tradition makes sense.

In this case, tradition is being challenged around the world in regards of "who makes the first move", and that's not a bad thing, but it is not a good thing either as in "it's progress", it just is, and some folks are happier for it, but some others stick to it.

[Costa Fierro]

The original point was that women were barely considered people for centuries of European society, and we kept the social traditions from that era even after they made no sense.

Not really. A limited example of dating largely did occur when royal dynasties and influential families were looking for a husband for their daughters or wives for their sons, in the sense that the daughter of a family would be formally "introduced" into the secluded upper echelons of society to find a suitor and marry him, if she wasn't given away like a prized cow to another royal family for political reasons. Modern dating concepts, in particular the idea of the "man romantically courting his love" are relatively recent in that they've really only existed since the 19th century. They're not rooted in some patriarchal traditions, but likely in the minds of some people who sold romance novels.

True, and I mean, tradition is not such a bad thing. Sometimes tradition makes sense.

In this case, tradition is being challenged around the world in regards of "who makes the first move", and that's not a bad thing, but it is not a good thing either as in "it's progress", it just is, and some folks are happier for it, but some others stick to it.

I wouldn't say "around the world". That would imply all societies have the same concepts as Western societies do, and there is enough social introspection to be aware of the "roles" in which men and women play during courtship. That simply doesn't exist.

[Costa Fierro]

Just say it already: you think we're stupid fools for falling in love.

There, was that so hard?

No. Love (well specifically the need to pair bond) is an innate biological drive. It's hardly stupidity if it exists to ensure successful reproduction.

Must be a terrible answer, then.

It is. Hence why I'd rather stay on the good side of moderation.

No, you don't have respect for people who devote their lives to science and the betterment of humanity.

You cannot speak for others, much less presume how they feel.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

The original point was that women were barely considered people for centuries of European society, and we kept the social traditions from that era even after they made no sense.

Not really. A limited example of dating largely did occur when royal dynasties and influential families were looking for a husband for their daughters or wives for their sons, in the sense that the daughter of a family would be formally "introduced" into the secluded upper echelons of society to find a suitor and marry him, if she wasn't given away like a prized cow to another royal family for political reasons. Modern dating concepts, in particular the idea of the "man romantically courting his love" are relatively recent in that they've really only existed since the 19th century. They're not rooted in some patriarchal traditions, but likely in the minds of some people who sold romance novels.

True, and I mean, tradition is not such a bad thing. Sometimes tradition makes sense.

In this case, tradition is being challenged around the world in regards of "who makes the first move", and that's not a bad thing, but it is not a good thing either as in "it's progress", it just is, and some folks are happier for it, but some others stick to it.

I wouldn't say "around the world". That would imply all societies have the same concepts as Western societies do, and there is enough social introspection to be aware of the "roles" in which men and women play during courtship. That simply doesn't exist.

Eh, true, "around the West" would be more accurate tbh.

[Scomagia]

So how do you explain the millions of people who claim to be happily married?

I would but I'd get reported and quite possibly banned if I did.

That is such an impotent argument. It seems like you don't have a thing to say, rather than being unable to say what you mean because of site rules. I've been on this site for almost a decade and there has never been a time that I couldn't express a controversial opinion. If you think you can't, maybe you need to find a way to post your point in a way that isn't deliberately inflammatory.

[Costa Fierro]

That is such an impotent argument.

It's not an impotent argument if what I could say could get me banned. It's being on the good side of moderation.

If you think you can't, maybe you need to find a way to post your point in a way that isn't deliberately inflammatory.

Then it's not really airing a controversial opinion isn't it?

[Scomagia]

That is such an impotent argument.

It's not an impotent argument if what I could say could get me banned. It's being on the good side of moderation.

If you think you can't, maybe you need to find a way to post your point in a way that isn't deliberately inflammatory.

Then it's not really airing a controversial opinion isn't it?

Be real, you're just copping out because you don't have anything to say.

[Costa Fierro]

It's not an impotent argument if what I could say could get me banned. It's being on the good side of moderation.



Then it's not really airing a controversial opinion isn't it?

Be real, you're just copping out because you don't have anything to say.

Nope. I do have something to say, but not everyone would like it.

[Scomagia]

Be real, you're just copping out because you don't have anything to say.

Nope. I do have something to say, but not everyone would like it.

Uh huh. Whatever you say, chief.

For what it's worth, this site has legitimate white supremacist and Stalinist communists. It isn't that you can't say what you want, you just refuse to do so in a way that's not against the rules. In other words, you're copping out.

[Diopolis]

Be real, you're just copping out because you don't have anything to say.

Nope. I do have something to say, but not everyone would like it.

I say things not everyone likes all the time. Worst I’ve gotten is a slap on the wrist.

[Scomagia]

Nope. I do have something to say, but not everyone would like it.

I say things not everyone likes all the time. Worst I’ve gotten is a slap on the wrist.

But you don't have whatever extremely potent yet too controversial argument that he has. The mods! The mods! Fear the mods! *nods*

[New haven america]

Be real, you're just copping out because you don't have anything to say.

Nope. I do have something to say, but not everyone would like it.

Got it, you have nothing to say.

[The Republic of Fore]

There wasn't a purpose. And today, you're more than free to ignore it. Personally I prefer the girl to make the first move.

[The Republic of Fore]

You sort of need to know what you're doing. If it's any consolation it'd be just as hard a few decades ago.

You sort of just need to not be a dick. Just seems some people find that really hard to do.

Yeah just don't be a dick. Because a girl could never turn around and destroy your life because she regrets sleeping with you.

[Scomagia]

You sort of just need to not be a dick. Just seems some people find that really hard to do.

Yeah just don't be a dick. Because a girl could never turn around and destroy your life because she regrets sleeping with you.

Never meet anyone by that logic, since everyone could fuck you over. Just stay in a cave and talk to a volleyball.

[The Republic of Fore]

Yeah just don't be a dick. Because a girl could never turn around and destroy your life because she regrets sleeping with you.

Never meet anyone by that logic, since everyone could fuck you over. Just stay in a cave and talk to a volleyball.

Nah, just be careful. But I was simply responding to their point. "Don't be a dick" doesn't mean jack or dip when somebody wants to screw you.

[Costa Fierro]

Never meet anyone by that logic, since everyone could fuck you over. Just stay in a cave and talk to a volleyball.

It doesn't mean you can't go out and have a social life, no one says you can't hang out with friends or have a hobby that involves other people, but it means that your social life doesn't have to revolve around the need to find someone to date or to have sex with.

Oddly enough, not becoming neurotic about how you look and how people perceive you and just enjoying yourself seems to be a lot more fulfilling.

[Northeast American Federation]

Never meet anyone by that logic, since everyone could fuck you over. Just stay in a cave and talk to a volleyball.

It doesn't mean you can't go out and have a social life, no one says you can't hang out with friends or have a hobby that involves other people, but it means that your social life doesn't have to revolve around the need to find someone to date or to have sex with.

Oddly enough, not becoming neurotic about how you look and how people perceive you and just enjoying yourself seems to be a lot more fulfilling.

But this is [insert current year here], you can't imply that people can seek something other than sex in their interpersonal relations. That's just so old fashioned and puritan.

[Wild mike]

I love how some if the comments are post is how drink some alcohol and go for it. Or you gotta get to know the other person. Either way you have to go up to the other person to real to them and get to know them. And some people will take it as being hot on, so no matter what is like a lose cause. It's the risk of rejection people has to go through.

[Northeast American Federation]

I love how some if the comments are post is how drink some alcohol and go for it. Or you gotta get to know the other person. Either way you have to go up to the other person to real to them and get to know them. And some people will take it as being hot on, so no matter what is like a lose cause. It's the risk of rejection people has to go through.

The risk of rejection is one thing. What's different now is that a guy's sloppy attempts can end up getting lumped in as being sexual harassment, and then it's off to court for the crime of not having smooth enough lines. When that risk starts becoming a factor, guys are much more hesitant to do anything than they were when the only thing to worry about was rejection.

[LimaUniformNovemberAlpha]

I love how some if the comments are post is how drink some alcohol and go for it. Or you gotta get to know the other person. Either way you have to go up to the other person to real to them and get to know them. And some people will take it as being hot on, so no matter what is like a lose cause. It's the risk of rejection people has to go through.

The risk of rejection is one thing. What's different now is that a guy's sloppy attempts can end up getting lumped in as being sexual harassment, and then it's off to court for the crime of not having smooth enough lines. When that risk starts becoming a factor, guys are much more hesitant to do anything than they were when the only thing to worry about was rejection.

Yeah, even before I heard of how child support law worked it had a lot less to do with rejection and a lot more to do with being considered inappropriate to put her on the spot in a public place vs. people assuming the worst if we met in a private place.

[Northeast American Federation]

The risk of rejection is one thing. What's different now is that a guy's sloppy attempts can end up getting lumped in as being sexual harassment, and then it's off to court for the crime of not having smooth enough lines. When that risk starts becoming a factor, guys are much more hesitant to do anything than they were when the only thing to worry about was rejection.

Yeah, even before I heard of how child support law worked it had a lot less to do with rejection and a lot more to do with being considered inappropriate to put her on the spot in a public place vs. people assuming the worst if we met in a private place.

Well, clearly that makes you a misogynist who supports rape culture or something. I mean, after all, if that wasn't who you were, what would you be afraid of? At least, that seems to be the prevailing logic.

[Costa Fierro]

But this is [insert current year here], you can't imply that people can seek something other than sex in their interpersonal relations. That's just so old fashioned and puritan.

Or even find solace in one's own company. I really can't understand that mindset. Sex is not the be all and end all of a social life, or even existence.

[Northeast American Federation]

But this is [insert current year here], you can't imply that people can seek something other than sex in their interpersonal relations. That's just so old fashioned and puritan.

Or even find solace in one's own company. I really can't understand that mindset. Sex is not the be all and end all of a social life, or even existence.

Don't let the lefties (or some of the ad agencies) hear you say that.