How long has Tinesha been dating?

Stephen Green (Vodkapundit) over at Instapundit has a new post up about a WSJ article:  Who Pays on the First Date? No One Knows Anymore, and It’s Really Awkward.  The WSJ article is behind a paywall, but the Instapundit post includes a snippet, including this gem:

There was a time when Tinesha Zandamela would dig around for her wallet at a first date, anticipating that the guy would insist on paying.

That was before she went out with one who “forgot” his wallet, or the one who requested to split the check 50-50 after eating nearly all the food. Now when the bill arrives, she sits still, not even attempting what some call “the reach.”

Green offers the following analysis:

The only awkward part is the confusion created by women who want to be seen as willing to pay when they actually aren’t — and skinflint beta males eager to exploit the chaos.

This kind of post is pure Trad Con bait, and the resulting Instapundit comments don’t disappoint:

If a fella pays for his girl’s meal, he was raised right. If the girl expects him to pay, she was raised wrong.

But whose girl is Tinesha?  Who is her “fella”?  It sounds like a long string of men, perhaps over several decades, have mistakenly thought Tinesha was their girl.  More importantly, why should beta men pay for the experience of taking Tinesha (or modern women in general) on a test drive?  I get that modern women need the energy to properly service bring the movies man (language warning).  But why should a beta sign up to be the one to feed her?

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Death of courtship, Disrespecting Respectability, Game, Traditional Conservatives, Turning a blind eye, Ugly Feminists, Weak men screwing feminism up. Bookmark the permalink.

123 Responses to How long has Tinesha been dating?

  1. Frank K says:

    “and skinflint beta males eager to exploit the chaos.”

    Methinks it’s the alpha males who “forget their wallets”. Betas, at least from what I’ve seen, are more than eager to pay.

  2. Pingback: How long has Tinesha been dating? | @the_arv

  3. Damn Crackers says:

    Paying to be a cuckold is just as bad as paying for sex itself.

  4. Anonymous Reader says:

    “Date”? Nobody under 30 goes on a “date” anymore from what I see and hear. The “why” of that is complicated and discussed in the ‘sphere ad infinitum, but it’s pretty obvious to anyone who is willing to shut up and listen. Hanging out, hooking up, Netflixing – yeah. “Date?” Not.

    In the younger age group, the high school set out here in my part of flyover, if a couple of students actually do go out on something sort of like a “date” they are considered to be an item, leading to all the usual high school drama.

    PS: these adverts are really annoying, the constant reloading slows down reading or posting.
    Another WordPress “innovation” that doesn’t work.

  5. feministhater says:

    So they freely admit they’re whores, it’s just bickering over the price! Lol!

  6. Carnivore says:

    Women have it hard now. The good old days were better. Vox posted a better example:

  7. anonymous_ng says:

    I don’t even understand this. Who has dinner dates?

    I was under the impression that adults meet for coffee or drinks as a first date. I would think that you could suss out in that short meeting that Tinesha is a cheap liberal, and proceed to lose her number on your way out the door.

  8. Yoda says:

    Who Pays on the First Date? No One Knows Anymore, and It’s Really Awkward

    Important First World Problem this is

  9. Yoda says:

    If a problem for Tinesha this it is,
    then too many first dates she does do.

    Wonder how serious she would be I do

  10. Yoda says:

    Churchill: “Madam, would you sleep with me for five million pounds?” Socialite: “My goodness, Mr. Churchill… Well, I suppose… we would have to discuss terms, of course… ”
    Churchill: “Would you sleep with me for five pounds?”
    Socialite: “Mr. Churchill, what kind of woman do you think I am?!” Churchill: “Madam, we’ve already established that. Now we are haggling about the price

    Winston S. Churchill

    http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/300099-churchill-madam-would-you-sleep-with-me-for-five-million

  11. Kgaard says:

    Well, I don’t have a problem paying for dinner with a woman. I think it’s just part of the deal: Men pay because men are producers. Women are distributors. The issue is not haggling over meat from the deer you just shot — it is reasonable for a man to spread that around to the weaker members of the tribe. The problem comes in when women demand a call option on FUTURE deer you haven’t shot yet, and/or hold out sex in demand of more deer meat, and/or hold out access to children in demand of deer meat. Those things are unacceptable. But laying out 80 bucks for dinner for two? Yeah so what? It’s signaling that there is more where that came from (which there is).

  12. Desiderius says:

    “I don’t even understand this. Who has dinner dates?”

    Yes, those don’t happen until you’re at the point where who pays is moot.

    Punditeers unfortunately advertising their cluelessness here.

  13. PokeSalad says:

    The foundation of TradCon cuckitude here is the continual false equivalence of “Tinder” with “dating.”

  14. Vanamé says:

    I went on about 10-15 first dates in the space of a year, and the only girl to not offer to pay (or say thanks, IIRC) was the non-Christian, whom I met while seeing a friend’s band play. (OK, nominally she was Portuguese Catholic, but otherwise typical American agnostic feminist.)

    You’d think ‘traditionally-minded’ Christian girls would be more likely to expect a free meal / drink / coffee, but that hasn’t been my experience. Sample bias, maybe.

  15. RecoveringBeta says:

    @Carnivore
    I wonder if “faithful” gets the irony

  16. Hose_B says:

    A recent “date” cleared a lot up for me.
    The subject of paying came up as soon as we ordered because the restaurant/bar wanted a card for a tab. She wanted to split because if I paid, it would be a “date” instead of casual dinner. I found it amusing at the time. And while it couldn’t be a “date” the “hookup” offer was on the table before long, even while a relationship status was not.
    In the past,I have mistakenly equated this to the girl not wanting to feel “obligated to more” by the guy paying, it seems much more related to their independence and what allowing a guy to pay means as far as a label.

    Of course, this is NOT consistent. But I think she why behind it will reveal a lot about that persons mindframe.

  17. Malcolm says:

    Women who insist on men paying for a first date are in the habit of having many first (and only) dates. Paying would get very expensive for them.

  18. Men should pay for the first date. The first date should also be cheap enough where you don’t really care that you’re paying. No dinners. Coffee for non-drinkers and a drink for drinkers.

    Most girls do at least offer to split the check

  19. Per Desteen says:

    Men who insist on men paying for a first date are in the habit of having many dates and no sex, because they’re white knight betas. Paying will get very expensive for them.

    FTFY

  20. Jim says:

    If a fella pays for his girl’s meal, he was raised right. If the girl expects him to pay, she was raised wrong.

    She’s “equal” she can pay her own bill. geez these cucks are so pathetic.

  21. mgtowhorseman says:

    Re faithful

    Fight for you?
    Nah, Dude you want her cheating ass, have at it.

    No concept of consequences, incentives or what men value in SMV.

  22. mgtowhorseman says:

    Breakup implies some form of LTR.

    Forgive and she sees you for the weakling you are for accepting this. So no attractive man for her.
    Act properly and dump her she sees you as attractive afterwards. So no attractive man for her.
    Cheating dude is attractive but he’s been there done that. So no attractive man for her.

    So what exactly was the risk reward equation here??

    Am I missing something???

    Oh right, …..feelz.

  23. Cane Caldo says:

    I recommend a Google search for “Tinesha Zandamela”.

    There is, in Utah, one Tinesha Zandamela who describes herself as a biracial, feminist, Mormon author. She has a $5 book for sale on Amazon. It is 29 pages long.

    Somewhere a biracial boy named Creed Zandamela died. One Tinesha Zandamela set up a $15,000 GoFundMe to crowdsource the cost of his burial. It is almost funded.

    Women named Tinesha Zandamela seem to think meager investments should reap major contributions.

    A personal anecdote: I have the opportunity to observe a large number of “dates”, and I have observed that young black men almost never pay; regardless of the skin tone of their dates.

  24. Anonymous Reader says:

    Kgarrd
    Well, I don’t have a problem paying for dinner with a woman.

    Where do you live?

  25. Boxer says:

    Dear MGTOW Horseman:

    Forgive and she sees you for the weakling you are for accepting this. So no attractive man for her.

    That’s right, and nowhere is this more readily illustrated, than in the personal stories that constantly crop up on this comment section here on Dalrock.

    So your skank-ho wife has banged a bunch of other men? Now she’s asking for forgiveness? Ask around in this very blog to see how well it turned out when older and wiser bros did that. Shocking to note – not only are such men never thanked for their patience and love and forgiveness, but the skank-ho wimminz they didn’t divorce take it as permission to do it over and over again.

    Wimminz only ask for forgiveness for being caught, and only when the divorce will be inconvenient. Moral of this story is to expect nothing from a skank-ho, and only do what will advantage you. Her pleadings should mean nothing.

    Boxer

  26. Boxer says:

    Men should pay for the first date. The first date should also be cheap enough where you don’t really care that you’re paying. No dinners. Coffee for non-drinkers and a drink for drinkers.

    Most girls do at least offer to split the check

    Whoever asks for the date should pay for it. If she asks you out, she should have no problem footing the bill. I always make that clear up front, and almost no woman balks at it. Moreover, there’s a near perfect correlation between paying and laying on the first date. If she does say no, it wouldn’t have gone anywhere, so let the hours saved count as consolation.

    Boxer

  27. Dave says:

    How about “Whoever invites the other pays for the date”?

  28. Pingback: How long has Tinesha been dating? | Reaction Times

  29. earl says:

    ‘Who Pays on the First Date? No One Knows Anymore, and It’s Really Awkward’

    Isn’t it as simple as whomever asks for the date is the one that pays for it? And more often than not the men is the one who instigates things? Of course in the cad hookup-pseudo relationship-strong independent grrl power times we live in…things like taking responsibility for something as simple as paying for drinks do get lost in the fold.

  30. MC227 says:

    Tinesha? Who goes out with someone named Tinesha? I wouldn’t buy that train wreck a gumball.

  31. earl says:

    “and skinflint beta males eager to exploit the chaos.”

    Methinks it’s the alpha males who “forget their wallets”. Betas, at least from what I’ve seen, are more than eager to pay.’

    Nah they got the right greek letter applied to that particular group of men. Sexually deviant men think more highly of themselves than they truly are. And since this society is all about equality…women also tend to do that too.

  32. Tarl says:

    Well, I don’t have a problem paying for dinner with a woman. I think it’s just part of the deal: Men pay because men are producers. Women are distributors.

    Screw that. If she’s got a job – and most women these days do – she can pay for what she ate.

    You forgot the part of the “deal” these days where women are empowered and equal! Indeed, not merely equal, but superior to mere men! They don’t need no man to shoot a deer for them!

    Of course, “the man should pay” is just another example of women wanting all the benefits and none of the disadvantages of both equality and chivalry at the same time.

  33. I do look forward to the death of the Trad Con point of view.

    It’s a paean for “why can’t I be a Princess anymore?”. Another version of unending desire for the resources of others.

  34. Kevin says:

    This is in Provo, UT. Coffee or drinks are not an option.

    Best option for guys there is just to make sure first dates are as cheap as possible without revealing that – don’t go to taco bell just go hang out.

  35. okrahead says:

    This is the only way to date: http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/relationships/dating/la-man-paul-gonzales-takes-women-on-dates-then-leaves-them-with-a-massive-bill/news-story/ec15113f850e71dda228b455d57951c7
    1. Ask womyn out to expensive restaurant.
    2. Order everything on menu as if you are a super high roller.
    3. Sneak out the back and leave womyn with the bill.
    4. Repeat over and over.
    lolz forever

  36. Gary Eden says:

    First date? You’re probably fishing in the wrong pond. You want someone whose father insists on a chaperon.

  37. Frank K says:

    Tinesha? Wasn’t that the name of Kip’s bride in Napoleon Dynamite?
    Just kidding 🙂

  38. The Question says:

    The modern dating market for men is akin to the Somme for British tommies. Go “over the top!” at your own risk.

    Until some sanity improves, I’m sitting back with a bottle of Cabernet in Bordeaux and waiting this thing out. It pays to have a low time preference with these kinds of things.

  39. Vanamé says:

    Being rather patriarchal myself I prefer the idea of paying for the first whatever (yes dinner first dates are passé), but that made more sense in a time when women didn’t work (or earned less than men), when dates were more clearly courtship-minded (not just hanging out or casual), and there was the unspoken agreement that if the first date wasn’t a disaster there’d be a second one. Today if a girl doesn’t get the tingles from date one, there will be flaking in your future. Also, as stated by others, paying for a girl you hardly know runs the risk of you looking like a chump, another reason to keep first dates cheap and simple.

    Almost all dates (first or otherwise) are initiated by the man, especially online, so the “s/he who asks, pays” rule is a non-starter. But a girl who doesn’t at least offer to split, or express gratitude, that’s a red flag. Of course, if she insists, no DEMANDS to pay… well, that’s a big red flag too.

  40. CSI says:

    Also Vaname, there was an unspoken agreement the woman wouldn’t order extravagantly, which was helped when people dated people they mostly knew, instead of strangers met through online dating. Nowadays a man who always pays for the woman, without argument, is likely to wind up buying expensive food and drink for women who he will never get a second date with.

    “and skinflint beta males eager to exploit the chaos.”

    Once again we have women trying to twist manosphere terms for their own end. No, an Alpha male isn’t always a perfect gentleman who pays for everything. An Alpha male is simply a man who is successful with women. He may be a “gentleman”, he may be a scumbag, just so long as he gives you tingles it doesn’t matter.

  41. BillyS says:

    Good post about a “blame dads” article in the WSJ. I can’t read the whole article, since I am not willing to pay.

    https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/268547/

  42. feministhater says:

    Well, I don’t have a problem paying for dinner with a woman. I think it’s just part of the deal: Men pay because men are producers. Women are distributors. The issue is not haggling over meat from the deer you just shot — it is reasonable for a man to spread that around to the weaker members of the tribe. The problem comes in when women demand a call option on FUTURE deer you haven’t shot yet, and/or hold out sex in demand of more deer meat, and/or hold out access to children in demand of deer meat. Those things are unacceptable. But laying out 80 bucks for dinner for two? Yeah so what? It’s signaling that there is more where that came from (which there is).

    That’s because you’re a cuck. You haven’t secured anything from a woman you’re going on a date with and hence the rest of your post is bullshit as it only applies to a woman who has submitted as your wife and takes care of the family, not some floozy. You’ve spent 80 bucks on women whom have zero loyalty to you and have provided you with nothing. That’s wasting resources.

    Women cannot have it both ways. They must pay or they must submit. Choose one. There is no ‘deal’ anymore, that was broken by women long ago. It does not exist.

  43. feministhater says:

    That should be ’80 bucks on a woman who has…..’

  44. Snowy says:

    Now 13 years after my divorce, with 9 years of voluntary celibacy, I’ve started dating a lovely lady. Our first official date is this Friday. I’m going over to her place, where she’s cooking dinner. When she had suggested we do lunch or dinner, I told her that I could not presently pay for an outing. She said she wasn’t talking about that, but rather a home meeting. I was thrilled. She’s more old school, like me. I would want to pay for her if I took her out. Not to show off, but because I know she’s not particularly financial at present. I’m 50 years old; she’s 60. She’s still as pretty and sexy as she was in the photos I’ve seen of her in her younger years. She’s just got a few extra creases and wrinkles on her face, that’s all. I’m glad to be getting my mojo back, after the huge soft-on created by the divorce and its aftermath. Praise be to the Lord.

  45. Anonymous Reader says:

    Earl
    Isn’t it as simple as whomever asks for the date is the one that pays for it?

    Sure. One milkshake with two straws after the sock hop or a movie at the drive in, right?
    Because “ought” and “is” are the same word.

  46. Anonymous Reader says:

    Kevin
    This is in Provo, UT. Coffee or drinks are not an option.

    Unless you drive up to Salt Lake. I found a couple of good brew pubs there a few years back.

    Provo used to have a couple of mini-golf places and other inexpensive entertainments. Somehow, though, the girly in the original article does not seem to be the mini-golf type. More a darlin’ Clementine type. No surprise that the WSJ would be interested in her side of the story to the exclusion of all her “first dates” over the years.

  47. American says:

    How long has she been dating? Is she divorced? If so, how many times has she married and divorced?

    With so many males struggling today in an economy that:

    1. Shipped millions and millions of industrial and manufacturing jobs overseas which U.S. men no longer have access to. This also resulted in the closure and downsizing of many small businesses which existed to service these plants and workers which were downsized and offshored.
    2. Shipped an enormous amount of U.S. capital investment overseas that was not spent in the U.S. depriving U.S. small business owners of that income further eroding the domestic labor market.
    3. Shipped an enormous amount of U.S. invention/innovation to foreign nations and firms helping them form their own firms to further displace labor opportunity in the U.S..
    4. Insourced millions and millions of foreign born workers further destabilizing the domestic labor market for men and reduce wages and compensation for those employed.
    5. Outsourced company and government contracts en masse to foreign firms that don’t hire them.
    6. Encouraged oligarchy to form in an environment of monopoly capitalism (e.g. Amazon, Walmart, etc…) negatively affecting their ability to form sustainable small businesses and compete locally as small business owners which once was the norm in the U.S..
    7. Attempting to compete in what remains, often called a “service economy” that favors women over men.

    Etc… etc… etc… we see many men (including college educated men with advanced degrees) struggling economically today in ways not since the Great Depression!

    Where I live thirty-something public union feminists sporting belly rings teach elementary school children their ABCs and simple arithmetic for an average of about $70k for a nine month year with all the benefits (including student loan forgiveness) while highly educated engineers with advanced degrees struggle to find work of any kind.

    More women in college than men today, more women in the workplace than men today, etc…

    Maybe it’s time to change our cultural norm to each person pays for themselves unless one person wants to pay for the other sans-expectation to do so.

    -American MBA

  48. Anon says:

    Despite wide disagreement on almost every other aspect of Game, few points are as universal, across PUAs and eras, than the point that a man who buys women dinner before having sex with her is a loser.

    Coffee dates should be the default. Meeting in a lovely park 90 mins before sundown (if not winter) is even better.

  49. Emperor Constantine says:

    @BillyS said:
    “Good post about a “blame dads” article in the WSJ. I can’t read the whole article, since I am not willing to pay. https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/268547/

    From the article:
    “These factors explained the older sisters’ behavior. “The prolonged presence of a warm and engaged father can buffer girls against early, high-risk sex,” Dr. DelPriore said. This doesn’t mean that divorced fathers can’t provide quality care. “A silver lining,” she adds, “is that what dad does seems to matter more than parental separation.” In other words, a divorce may be less harmful for a girl than more years with a bad dad.”

    This article strikes me as condescending to fathers, although it implies they are helpful in reducing the risk of slutty daughters. In my opinion, since 90% of the time women frivorce their husbands (their daughter’s father) to have sex with hawt alphas, this is sending a very clear message to the daughters that being a slut is OK and actually something you can upend your life and everyone else’s to achieve. The female author of the study chose to overlook that of course.

  50. Emperor Constantine says:

    @Snowy:

    Good for you.Once you get your “sea legs” back with women, trust me, you can go younger if you want. Young women love confident, fun older men, they really do.

  51. Anon says:

    Bad : Stephen Green, who sort of gets the misandry of the situation, but still closes with ‘skinflint beta males looking to exploit’. This half-sentence reveals so many layers of ignorance that it is funny.

    Worse : The cuckservatives who still think the typical man can find a wife after, say, buying three women dinner.

    The cuckservatives in the comments are getting slaughtered by the red-pill guys, who appear to outnumber them.

  52. Anon says:

    She’s “equal” she can pay her own bill. geez these cucks are so pathetic.

    Cuckservatives really are hard-core socialists. They just want their socialism to be sharply defined as men paying and women receiving.

    It is not just in this ‘who pays for dates’ thread, but also any discussion about how men pay for most healthcare and women consume most it. Cuckservatives would not have it any other way, even if the men and women don’t know each other and the government is the intermediary and redistributor.

  53. earl says:

    ‘Sure. One milkshake with two straws after the sock hop or a movie at the drive in, right?’

    Well I am talking about dates that don’t cost a lot. The point is to get to know the person…not to prove how much you can spend on them.

  54. Anon says:

    Again, in all the various schools of Game, across all eras (Ross Jeffries 1990s to Krauser, BlackDragon, and Christian McQueen now), and across the very different schools of Game (night Game, daygame, online, and social circle, which are quite different from each other and a specialist in one cannot easily do well in the other without practice), there are really just 3-4 points of universal agreement.

    1) Never seem needy or supplicating.
    2) Always have a pipeline, so as to avoid oneitis
    3) NEVER buy dinner for women you are not having sex with.
    4) Know how to escalate, recognize the signs, and err on the side of more boldness..

    That is it. Almost no other principles are universal across types of Game, across eras, and across the various experts…

    What is hilarious is despite the WSJ article explicitly mentioning Tinder, the cuckservatives still think a) dinner dates are the etiquette, and b) a man can easily find a wife after buying dinner for, say, three women.

  55. Anon says:

    The Question,

    Until some sanity improves, I’m sitting back with a bottle of Cabernet in Bordeaux and waiting this thing out. It pays to have a low time preference with these kinds of things.

    A reasonable position. Don’t forget VR sex, which is about 3-4 years away from being more compelling than 90% of women, that too before factoring in monetary cost, accusation risk, transit time, hassle, STDs, feminist opinions, errant hairs, skin blemishes, and farting.

  56. Anon says:

    okrahead,
    This is the only way to date:

    That guy is a dick and will probably go to jail, yes, but his existence is necessary in the broader scope of cosmic justice, given the situation that the FI has created. Much like the Nigerian scammers who swindle women over 55 who are ‘Done with men’ but collected their cash and prizes.

  57. The Question says:

    @ Anon

    “Don’t forget VR sex, which is about 3-4 years away from being more compelling than 90% of women, that too before factoring in monetary cost, accusation risk, transit time, hassle, STDs, feminist opinions, errant hairs, skin blemishes, and farting.”

    Compounding that further is that men’s value to women increases until roughly 40 – if they take care of themselves and don’t muck it up. Who knows what may happen to the marriage market within the next decade? We could easily see it turn completely around so that men can make insane demands and offer little in return. Why be a buyer in a seller’s market when it could be a buyer’s market in the future and you have the time to wait?

    Even if the situation doesn’t improve, sitting poolside is still a perfectly acceptable prospect for the next 50 years.

  58. PokeSalad says:

    But laying out 80 bucks for dinner for two? Yeah so what? It’s signaling that there is more where that came from (which there is).

    You are hiding your light under a bushel……National Review surely needs another pundit….

  59. Anon says:

    But laying out 80 bucks for dinner for two? Yeah so what? It’s signaling that there is more where that came from (which there is).

    Note the premise here. He assumes that beta bux is still attractive to women. What is this, Poland circa 1970, where malnutrition was a widespread problem?

    But recall, the current three-party arrangement requires cucks like Kgaard to work smoothly, for :

    Alpha males want to have sex with women.
    Women want to have sex with alpha males.
    Kgaard gets to pay the bills.

    Everybody wins! Especially Kgaard, who gets to man up, step up, and enable a woman to have sex with the men she wants. Without him, this wondrous arrangement would not be possible.

    Everybody reaches their full potential, so everybody wins!

  60. Anonymous Reader says:

    Earl
    Well I am talking about dates that don’t cost a lot. The point is to get to know the person…not to prove how much you can spend on them.

    Which proves you did not bother to read the article Dalrock linked to. Might want to try that. Do you know what Tindr is, and what making “dates” via Tindr implies?

    Reference to the OP linked article: I do not know what kind of “account” an 18 year old “account manager” would “manage” but even with the serious title inflation we’ve seen for the last 15 or more years, odds are her paycheck is bigger than that of any 20 year old men that she might want to go out with. But she still expects them to pay, because “chivarly” or something.

    I’m still wading through the comments at PJmedia. There’s some definite red pill / Glasses posting there. Good.

  61. earl says:

    ‘Which proves you did not bother to read the article Dalrock linked to. Might want to try that. Do you know what Tindr is, and what making “dates” via Tindr implies?’

    Well yeah, but we are talking about the confusing subject about who pays for dates here…not about what a hookup app is for.

  62. BillyS says:

    I would not date a women 10 years my senior now Snowy. Hope it works well for you, but that is a huge gap. (If I was right to read you are 50 and she is 60.)

    My wife was older than I was, which was a part of our problems that made things unstable over the very long term.

    I have to consider what to do in the area being discussed though, since I could potentially face dating and I am not sure my chivalrous instincts are that productive. I don’t expect I would just pony up for dinner for someone I had just met, especially online.

    I definitely will not seek sex before marriage no matter what, so I guess that would make me a chump in the eyes of some. I don’t really care about what they think however and my odds of finding someone appropriate are quite low.

  63. earl says:

    ‘I definitely will not seek sex before marriage no matter what, so I guess that would make me a chump in the eyes of some.’

    Not here…that’s actually a good way to avoid a lot of headaches from promiscuous women and you get a better idea what type of person they are quicker.

  64. Mistral says:

    Google “Jessica Sporty”. She was a singleton in NY whose salary wasn’t meeting her lifestyle expectations so supplemented it by going out on dinner dates with guys from Match (or whatever) so she could eat nice dinners on their tab. Thus the “date” was a disingenuous pretext

    She had to keep a spreadsheet of guys she went out with so she wouldn’t go out with them more than 2-3 times. I remember seeing her interviewed when the story broke and she said that if a guy asked her to split a check she’d think “Well that’s not very traditional.” Of course, neither is being a “food hooker” but I guess that point was lost on her.

  65. Frank K says:

    “What is hilarious is despite the WSJ article explicitly mentioning Tinder, the cuckservatives still think a) dinner dates are the etiquette, and b) a man can easily find a wife after buying dinner for, say, three women.”

    They also don’t realize that after the $100 dinner is over and you say your goodbyes, she goes and has sex with her alpha bad boy, who NEVER buys her dinner:

  66. Anon says:

    FrankK,

    They also don’t realize that after the $100 dinner is over and you say your goodbyes, she goes and has sex with her alpha bad boy, who NEVER buys her dinner:

    But that is wonderful! The cuckservatives are willing to pick up the tab so red-pill men can reap the benefits free of cost. Don’t try to convert cuckservatives! That is both futile and undesirable.

    I mean, they have made it clear that they are willing to pick up the tab. This is incredibly good luck for red-pill single men! The new sheep they brainwash are not worthy of sympathy anymore. It is 2017, and someone who is still not red pill has no one to blame but himself given the decade-plus of Internet archives and red-pill memes on some high-traffic blogs.

  67. Boxer says:

    Dear Anon:

    But that is wonderful! The cuckservatives are willing to pick up the tab so red-pill men can reap the benefits free of cost. Don’t try to convert cuckservatives! That is both futile and undesirable.

    I read all these complaints and I get the feeling you guys don’t know what you’re talking about. I buy women first date dinners sometimes, and I’m able to convert almost all of them into hardcore action within two hours. The ones that don’t get converted are all women that I end up nexting for some reason (sometimes their attitude turns a man off during the meal, and he just has to eject.)

    Women (20-something women in my town, anyway) aren’t picky. They’re basically prostitutes. If you’re constantly buying expensive meals and not getting anything out of it, then there’s some deeper problem with what you’re doing, that has something to do with you. Maybe you’re not selecting the prospects properly, or maybe you’re acting like such a dork during dinner that she blows you off… but really, these ho’s are so pathetic, I can’t see that happening.

    Also: why are you guys spending 100 dollars on her meal? I buy the ho’ a 10 dollar taco, or maybe a 20 dollar plate at a mom and pop joint. That’s as much as I spend parking my car in a garage when I go downtown in my ‘ville. It’s not a big deal.

    Sorry fellas. If a broke-ass schoolteacher with a pinky-size dick can consistently play this game, and win every time, then it makes him skeptical about all these dating horror stories.

    Boxer

  68. Emperor Constantine says:

    @Boxer said:

    “I read all these complaints and I get the feeling you guys don’t know what you’re talking about. I buy women first date dinners sometimes, and I’m able to convert almost all of them into hardcore action within two hours.”

    That’s my (very limited) experience. I’m sure statistically that being a tightwad and not a BB probably has an impact, but I have money and basically don’t want to waste my time eating bad food. If the women I am with is too stupid to figure out that I don’t need to buy her dinner and I have options, then frankly she is too stupid to be attractive to me. Dumb/slutty women are actually not very sexy.

  69. Boxer says:

    Dear Emperor Constantine:

    That’s my (very limited) experience. I’m sure statistically that being a tightwad and not a BB probably has an impact, but I have money and basically don’t want to waste my time eating bad food.

    No doubt Becky is a big hit at the Soirée autour du Foie Gras, at River Oaks Country Club. For us normal folks who don’t like to be embarrassed, though; we take these ho’s to places where they don’t have to choose between forks.

    Dumb/slutty women are actually not very sexy.

    Of course they are. Otherwise, you guys wouldn’t be here whining that (for what reason I can’t fathom) you can’t seem to connect with any of them.

    Here’s a free tip for all you thrifty aspiring libertines: About half the time when I ask a ho’ out, I invite her to a certain Starbucks that is far removed from my professional and social crowds. A couple of the baristas know me at this place, and there’s no danger of meeting up with anyone I work with. I usually get there about half an hour early. When the ho’ shows up, I’m deep into working on my laptop (ho’s like that sort of thing – they want to think you’re somehow important). I let them buy their own drink. I then make them compete with the illusion of work for my attention. About half the time I opt for this route, they don’t get anything, which is fine by me. My chances of fun-and-games hover at 99% either way.

    Best,

    Boxer

  70. feeriker says:

    Tinesha? Who goes out with someone named Tinesha? I wouldn’t buy that train wreck a gumball.

    You took the words right off of my fingertips.

    The (obvious) answer to your second question is “no human male with any common sense or self-respect.”

    Fortunately for “Tinesha,” there is a great dearth of those these days.

  71. feeriker says:

    To clarify my last, if it’s NSA sex with “Tinesha” that you want, then that’s one thing. It’s dignifying it with anything as serious as a date that is the height of idiocy.

  72. CSI says:

    Actually who wants to have sex on a full stomach? There’s another reason not to buy a woman an actual meal (versus a snack or some drinks).

  73. Snowy says:

    @ Emperor Constantine

    Thanks for the kind thoughts. I can get younger now, if I want to. I met the older lady through her daughter, who is 41 years of age. They’re both sexy mommas. Her daughter would have me, but she’s already got a man. She introduced me to her Mum. They’re both equally lovely. At my age now I’d be happy to settle down with the lovely 60 year old girl, and see the rest of our lives out together. She’s simply going to have to agree that she is going to follow me wherever I go, to the ends of the earth. That’s the only way it can be for me from here on out. Thanks again, Emperor.

  74. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    Cane Caldo: Somewhere a biracial boy named Creed Zandamela died. One Tinesha Zandamela set up a $15,000 GoFundMe to crowdsource the cost of his burial. It is almost funded.

    How do we know this boy even existed? Are these GoFundMe claims ever verified?

  75. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    BillyS: My wife was older than I was, which was a part of our problems that made things unstable over the very long term.

    Why would that be? I thought that older wives made for more stable marriages, as she’d be less likely to stray. Do older wives really think they can find a better, even younger, man after a frivorce?

  76. Snowy says:

    As much as I love younger girls (my ex-wife is 6 years my junior), I’ve long had a thing for slightly older women. When I was 24 years old, I met one of my only major girlfriends. She was 32. Something about maturity, perhaps. I think I have an older mind. We spent the next 4 1/2 years together. I would have married her if she had wanted to, but she didn’t want to have children, while I did. Otherwise, we were a very good match.

  77. Höllenhund says:

    This kind of post is pure Trad Con bait, and the resulting Instapundit comments don’t disappoint:

    If a fella pays for his girl’s meal, he was raised right. If the girl expects him to pay, she was raised wrong.

    Shouldn’t that be “she was raised right”?

  78. Opus says:

    Why would you want to ask a woman to dine? Food is just a form of cock-blocking where you pay for the blocking; further, the chances are that you have invited her to a restaurant – and not your dining room; thus making your ultimate purpose the more difficult of achievement.

  79. Anchorman says:

    “Everyone is ‘conservative’ about what they know best.”

    I’m struck by that phrase when hearing about men not jumping at the chance to pay for a woman’s meal.

    I, for one, welcome women taking bold ownership of the terms of the first date. I think women should be given contract negotiation classes in middle school. Later in life (hopefully much later, but I’m an old fuddy duddy), the young girl will be able to give her gentleman called (“call guy”) the right fee structure for certain delicacies. The more he spends, the more she guarantees.

    As far as I can tell, the current price structure seems inverted from stated female preferences:

    Hardy handshake and no second date = Elegant dinner and open air music festival at a winery.
    Peck on the cheek and possible second date = Dinner and a movie.
    Spit, swallow, or gulp: She buys dinner and drives him to the drug store for condoms neither intends to use.
    Three hole qualify in a night: She buys a movie online and he brings Skittles.

  80. Opus says:

    @snowy

    The mist of rememberance appears to be clouding your vision (if I may say so).

    A twenty-four year old dating a thirty-two year old is – for a man – like dating your Mother. You were the toy-boy of a woman who could not get that Alpha she craved for and so she settled for your youthful testosterone and doubtless hoping that your youth would rub off on her – that sort of thing strikes me as a close cousin of child abuse; of course she wanted children but with the recalcitrant Alpha for whom she yearned. You learn your cooking on old pans. Narrow escape.

  81. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    Opus: Why would you want to ask a woman to dine? Food is just a form of cock-blocking where you pay for the blocking; further, the chances are that you have invited her to a restaurant – and not your dining room; thus making your ultimate purpose the more difficult of achievement.

    My “ultimate purpose” was never to have sex. My ultimate purpose was to find a wife.

    My purpose for dating was for us to get to know each other, seek an emotional connection, build on that connection, leading to love, and finally marriage. Sex being only part of marriage, and not the most important part.

    IAE, none of my dates led to marriage, and as I’m in my 50s, I’ve become a reluctant MGTOW.

  82. Boxer says:

    Dear Fellas:

    You guys are so funny. I doubt Dalrock wants me to hijack this thread with Seduction 101 material, but at the same time, I think this might be sorta useful for the newly divorced bros who are finding their feet in a society that has radically changed since last they navigated it as a single fellow.

    Tinesha? Who goes out with someone named Tinesha? I wouldn’t buy that train wreck a gumball.

    You took the words right off of my fingertips.

    The (obvious) answer to your second question is “no human male with any common sense or self-respect.”

    Make of it what you will. Some of us like to get our needs met, and we’re not the marrying kind. For men like us, the names of women are irrelevant. A week after we’re done with her, most of us won’t remember whether her name was ‘Tinesha,’ ‘Laquisha’ or ‘Jennifer’.

    What matters to us is almost exclusively based on how she looks. Fuck what her name is. She isn’t going to bear our children, and we’re not hiring a cook/dishwasher/laundress either.

    Why would you want to ask a woman to dine?

    You take women to dinner for the same reason you negotiate a merger or limited partnership over dinner. My guess is that we evolved to do such things around a campfire, sharing a leg of wildebeest, and we’re not much changed.

    Food is just a form of cock-blocking where you pay for the blocking; further, the chances are that you have invited her to a restaurant – and not your dining room; thus making your ultimate purpose the more difficult of achievement.

    You’re in the heartiste paradigm, and that’s an inversion of the truth. If you’re the hunter, then you should accept the fact that you’re the one that’s cock-blocking her. You owe it to yourself to make sure that she’s not a nut, and you should make her pass a few “shit tests” of your own before she learns your address. If she doesn’t measure up during the interview, then you politely thank her for her time, and move your ass on to the next bitch. There is an unlimited supply of them.

    Now, you guys will call me a skank-ho male slut, and you’ll have a point, but in reality, you should be down on your knees kissing my whitesnake for knowing my own limitations. I’d otherwise be marrying your sister or daughter, and that’d be a disaster for all of us.

    Furthermore, you newly divorced bros should be using these women for sex. Dealing with them will probably help you to recognize the tells of a woman who claims to be second-wife material, but who will fall short a year after the wedding. It will also help you build your confidence until you can find someone who is actually worthy of your commitment.

    Regards,

    Boxer

  83. Boxer says:

    Dear Red Pill Latecomer:

    My “ultimate purpose” was never to have sex. My ultimate purpose was to find a wife.

    My purpose for dating was for us to get to know each other, seek an emotional connection, build on that connection, leading to love, and finally marriage. Sex being only part of marriage, and not the most important part.

    No disrespect, but every Hollywood film, every popular song, and every Broadway show created for mass consumption in the last 30 years would clue you in to the fact that people don’t go on dates for emotional connections. If you didn’t realize as much, then it’s largely on you.

    In our contemporary matriarchy, people have sex first. Jack Donovan calls it the Bonobo Masturbation Society. I think he’s got a good handle on it.

    http://www.jack-donovan.com/axis/2012/07/everyone-a-harlot/

    You can argue that this isn’t the ideal society, and I might agree; but it never pays to deny reality.

    IAE, none of my dates led to marriage, and as I’m in my 50s, I’ve become a reluctant MGTOW.

    If you’re in your 50s, then you’ve probably got a home and lots of disposable income, so you’re making good decisions. Why would you want to invite a skank-ho to take that away?

    You should be grateful that you’re free to do what you want with the rest of your life. Even so, if you really want to get married, you can always go to some patriarchal society (Eastern Europe, Latin America, etc.) where the odds are a little bit better.

    Boxer

  84. Emperor Constantine says:

    @Boxer said:

    “In our contemporary matriarchy, people have sex first. Jack Donovan calls it the Bonobo Masturbation Society. I think he’s got a good handle on it.”

    Sadly, this is only a slight exaggeration. Also, Boxer didn’t say it but so-called “Christian” women are the worst in this regard, I think because they think they have access to cheap grace.

    OT

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/for-a-more-productive-workforce-scientific-know-how-helps-1498572000

    This article in the WSJ claims that companies that hire more engineers and scientists are more productive. This group of people is predominantly male. I’m guessing that companies that have more men are more productive, because running the company is then about logic, not feelz.

  85. Lost Patrol says:

    Who buys who a taco is pretty tame stuff compared to the embedded link about “bring the movies man”.

    What a snapshot (now 7 years ago) of the depths we’ve plumbed by letting young women run amok and make all their own choices. One teenage girl kills another over a 5’5″ tall “alpha” male with a woman’s hairdo. AF/BB at 18 years old.

    The deceased high school girl had to use her own father as the beta bucks to provide for and enable the disaster. He himself reporting that there is nothing you can do about a high school girl that’s “in love”. Even if those girls had just kept hating each other without bloodshed, they both would have been nexted by the guy in short order. On the street and alpha widows already by the age of 20. Hovering out there somewhere beta male providers waiting for the chance to buy them dinner on the first date, man up and marry them I suppose.

  86. Opus says:

    I am conscious that I was talking of casual sex rather than Matrimony, but even so wondered exactly how best one might court a woman with a view to marriage. How exactly would a female be able to distinguish the one from the other. Say, for example, I invite a woman out to dinner; what other behaviour of mine would persuade her that I am seeking a wife rather than a quick lay? Coming on strong about ones intentions and that one would not indulge in sexual intercourse outside of marriage even if it does not persuade her to run for the hills will perhaps persuade her that you are domineering and rigid or – worse – a man who can’t get laid.

    As to women in their early thirties I have by chance been watching a largely incomprehensible movie with the late Susannah York then aged thirty-two or three and she poses full frontal on her side on a bed. That is not the body of a woman in her prime, one can see the folds and curves and sagging. As the old song refrained ‘Don’t put your daughter on the stage’.

  87. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    Boxer: If you’re in your 50s, then you’ve probably got a home and lots of disposable income, so you’re making good decisions. Why would you want to invite a skank-ho to take that away?

    I do have a home (100% equity) and lots of disposable income. I no longer have to work. I don’t plan to marry at this point in my life, hence the “reluctant MGTOW” part. Women in my age range are dreadful — lots of tattooed, overweight, single mothers. Even the women in their 40s who still look decent are entitled hos.

    However, I wish I had married in my 20s. I wish I had red pill wisdom in my youth. To have married young and grown old together with a devoted helpmeet. To have loving heirs to leave my wealth, and personal belongings, and family photos (of my parents, grandparents, etc.), and family heirlooms to. I think about dying alone and having strangers sift through and toss my personal belongings and family mementos.

    Some of us like to get our needs met, and we’re not the marrying kind. For men like us, the names of women are irrelevant.

    That’s fine for you, but I have no desire to be a PUA. I’m still a blue pill romantic at heart. I want a unicorn. There are none. And older women are too broken to be turned into anything even halfway decent. I accept my reality. I’m just not too happy about it.

  88. anonymous_ng says:

    Riffing off of Boxer’s comments. IMO, newly divorced guys, neh all men, would do themselves a world of good to spend some time in the pickup world. If you’re truly devout, just don’t take them to bed. At the same time, it goes a long way toward opening one’s eyes to the possible and to the reality of women.

    I live ten miles from a major university. Were I not interested in my immortal soul, I could be sleeping with coeds regularly, and a different divorced soccer mom every day of the week. That’s just the reality of women these days.

    But, to find a woman worth marrying? That’s like hunting for a unicorn. The eldest single woman at church is 3-4 years older than my eldest daughter and half my age.

    Sadly, there are no sure fire ways to distinguish the unicorn from their mundane counterparts.

  89. earl says:

    ‘Sadly, there are no sure fire ways to distinguish the unicorn from their mundane counterparts.’

    Well things like attitude, behavior, how they dress, things like tattoos, piercings other than the ear, listening to things they say, if they take contraception, how they feel about children and motherhood etc…can give you a good idea if you have mundane. If I have any advice on how to spot the unicorn, take a look at the Virgin Mary…what she said and did in regards to submitting to God’s will. The closer a woman is to that…the better idea you have of the unicorn.

  90. Boxer says:

    Folks write stuff like:

    I’m still a blue pill romantic at heart. I want a unicorn. There are none. And older women are too broken to be turned into anything even halfway decent. I accept my reality. I’m just not too happy about it.

    and:

    Sadly, there are no sure fire ways to distinguish the unicorn from their mundane counterparts.

    There are no unicorns, in that there are no perfect women. There are no perfect men, either. There are, in my experience, women who are way better insurance risks than their peers, though.

    Most of these women were raised in traditional families. They’re often (not always) immigrants. They’re often (not always) very religious (often Muslim, sometimes Christian fundamentalist) girls.

    The first tell that betrays such women is the fact that they don’t go on “dates”. They know instinctively what you guys refuse to acknowledge: that when ya boy Boxer proposes “let’s meet at Starbucks” he has an ultimate goal in mind.

    Doesn’t matter how they giggle and play with their hair, and it doesn’t matter how much they seem interested. They generally riposte something like “my parents wouldn’t like that” before suggesting I come with them to some function where their dad is going to be present, usually at the local church or Islamic center. lol

    None of this means that, two years after the wedding, these women won’t go full feral, take you to divorce court, and subsequently turn the house that you bought them into their own personal brothel. I’m just saying that there are “good girls” who seem to be more interested in being a wife and mother, than in being my personal blow-up doll. While life has no guarantees, I would guess that such women would be much more likely to be faithful and a good wife, than one of the usual skanks you scrape off the dance floor at the nightclub. If I was like you guys, I would start moving in their circles.

    Boxer

  91. pavetack says:

    “If you love me you’ll fight for me”.

    So he’s a terrible human being for allegedly having said that, but every woman should expect that from their suitors? Chivalry is dead, and you b*****s killed it.

  92. Kgaard says:

    Wow … you guys are all pounding on me for laying out 80 bucks for dinner. I think you’re missing the point. For me 80 bucks is nothing. Not even a rounding error. It’s just another form of signaling — like driving a fancy car (which I don’t do). The issue is not the 80 — it’s limiting your liability on the back end — which can run in the 6 and 7 figures. This just seems like basic math here. Dalrock? Care to weigh in?

  93. feministhater says:

    Wow … you guys are all pounding on me for laying out 80 bucks for dinner.

    Triggered? It’s not the 80 dollars smart ass. You’re flashing money to a whore. That’s all you’re doing; and in the end, they’ll use you like a cuck.

  94. Snowy says:

    @ Opus

    Even through the red pill eyes I have today, I don’t quite see it the way you do. To say that a 24 year old man having a relationship with a 32 year old woman is like him dating his Mother is a bit of a stretch…but maybe. It didn’t seem like it at the time. In any case, she was a sexy momma! And how do you know I wasn’t her ‘Alpha’? Just because (at the time) I didn’t root everything with two legs and a vagina doesn’t mean I was any less an ‘Alpha’. The manosphere always seems to equate ‘Alpha-ness’ with sexual notch count. As it is, I did have a high notch count in my younger days. Doesn’t necessarily make me ‘Alpha”, but just saying. I was wanting to settle down, and we did settle down for 4 1/2 years. She didn’t want to have children…period…with any man. Though I never pressed her really hard on the “Why not?”, I’m certain it was because she had great fear of childbirth itself. She was a very petite, tiny, woman. To be blunt, she was extremely tight down below. She was a candidate for Caesarean section for any baby she might produce. She was shit-scared of childbirth. It is the major reason I broke it off with her in the end. Though I can’t be 100% certain, according to my research, she has not had children to this day.

    Boxer says, “It will also help you build your confidence until you can find someone who is actually worthy of your commitment.” This is good advice, and a good reminder to me, at this time. It reminds me to slow it right down, and to not let my dick do my thinking for me. However, at the same time, I find that my main concern is not really about my commitment, or my capacity to commit, but hers. If I’m to settle down with a woman, she will have to commit totally to following me whither I go, to the ends of the earth. Nothing less will do.

  95. Kgaard says:

    80 dollars is not flashing money. It’s just dinner. If we just assume we are now in a post-marriage environment, something akin to the hunter gatherer world laid out in Sex at Dawn, then the relationship will always have some modest transfer of resources from man to woman. It just needs to be consistent with what you’re getting back. And in a post-marriage anonymous urban environment where the vast majority of women are post-monogamous, I’m not sure the term “whore” has much usefulness anymore. I think one just rolls with the tide in this era. If something better presents itself, great.

  96. Boxer says:

    80 dollars is not flashing money. It’s just dinner. If we just assume we are now in a post-marriage environment, something akin to the hunter gatherer world laid out in Sex at Dawn, then the relationship will always have some modest transfer of resources from man to woman. It just needs to be consistent with what you’re getting back. And in a post-marriage anonymous urban environment where the vast majority of women are post-monogamous, I’m not sure the term “whore” has much usefulness anymore. I think one just rolls with the tide in this era. If something better presents itself, great.

    Everyone who is dogpiling you (I’m looking at you particularly, Anon) does this on the regular themselves. Every single one of these guys has had some hot woman make eyes at them, and a few hours later these same guys had sex with that same hot woman. Maybe they resent themselves for doing that (probably rooted in guilt for breaking the rules of their religion) but it’s just a fact.

    They can deny it. We all know they’re lying. The ones that come down hardest, calling you “cuck” and such, surely bang more ho’s, more often, than anyone else.

    Even in the cases where you don’t buy the ho’ dinner, you’re laying out hours of your life that you will never get back. Big deal. Men like to have sex, and there is always a trade-off, whether you are married or not.

    Boxer

  97. Anonymous Reader says:

    If we just assume we are now in a post-marriage environment, something akin to the hunter gatherer world laid out in Sex at Dawn, then the relationship will always have some modest transfer of resources from man to woman.

    First of all, that’s not even close to what you originally stated, which came off as standard TradCon “man UP” fare.

    Second:
    Why would you make that assumption? In the under 30 age group, I see women who are netting more than men with equivalent credentials. Those women are their own providers, their own betas, as a result of decades of feminist distortions in the economy. In the middle class and upper middle class world, thanks to over a generation of Title IX, affirmative action, k-12 anti-male teachers, etc. the women have pulled ahead of men as a group, and there’s no end in sight.

    Go find a 25 year old man who’s working three part time jobs with zero benefits that he should pay for a 19 year old “account manager” woman’s dinner, when she’s all but certain to be out earning him.

  98. feministhater says:

    Everyone who is dogpiling you (I’m looking at you particularly, Anon) does this on the regular themselves. Every single one of these guys has had some hot woman make eyes at them, and a few hours later these same guys had sex with that same hot woman. Maybe they resent themselves for doing that (probably rooted in guilt for breaking the rules of their religion) but it’s just a fact.

    They can deny it. We all know they’re lying. The ones that come down hardest, calling you “cuck” and such, surely bang more ho’s, more often, than anyone else.

    You can be a bit self-righteous sometimes but no one is banging hoes, least of all me. He stated he spends 80 dollars on a dinner because he uses it as a status symbol, like driving an expensive car. That’s his own words. In the end, those still in the game and I don’t count myself amongst them, want a wife, not a whore. If that’s all he wants, he need not spend 80 dollars to get it.

    Once again, it’s not the 80 dollars, that’s merely a figure he used, it’s the principle. Using money to buy chicks.

  99. Boxer says:

    Dear Feminist Hater:

    You can be a bit self-righteous sometimes

    You’re kidding, right? I’ve never passed judgment on what you do for fun. Post proof otherwise if you feel I’m mistaken.

    but no one is banging hoes, least of all me. He stated he spends 80 dollars on a dinner because he uses it as a status symbol, like driving an expensive car. That’s his own words. In the end, those still in the game and I don’t count myself amongst them, want a wife, not a whore. If that’s all he wants, he need not spend 80 dollars to get it.

    He has two choices, in your false dichotomy:

    1. He can invite sexy Sheila to his house immediately. She’d probably be down for that if she gave him the eye.

    2. He can decline having sex with her at all.

    The first option is poor security. Bitches be crazy, and all that. It makes sense to meet in some public place, first, at least for half an hour, to see how she acts.

    The second option means he has to live a celibate life. Maybe some men can do that. Most of us can’t (or at least we don’t want to).

    Once again, it’s not the 80 dollars, that’s merely a figure he used, it’s the principle. Using money to buy chicks.

    Even if he spent 5 dollars, buying her a coffee, and scoping her out that way, you’d still call him nasty names. Hell, even if he spent no money, you’d call him a “pussy beggar” or something. Your arguments are strikingly similar to those I read on Omega Virgin Revolt. It’s needlessly being angry because someone else is having fun.

    Best,

    Boxer

  100. Kgaard says:

    All right maybe I ought to refine my thinking on this as I admit it’s a bit sloppy. First point is that I’m probably a lot older than you guys — middle aged let’s say — and like to date women 15 years my junior. (Though I will say that the reality in recent years has been mostly dating women pretty much exactly my age.)

    Now … it’s a valid point that paying for dinner is kinda beta. I have to agree with that. But it’s also kinda alpha. More to the point, anything else would just be ludicrous because I have so much more money than the women I date. This is just a reality of being middle aged and reasonably successful: Men pile up money, most women don’t. I agree that the dynamics are going to be different if you are early 20s, but I’m twice that age. Some women age well and are still reasonably attractive in their 40s. Some don’t. But either way you are dealing with a more sensitive psyche and weaker wallet when it comes to older women. A lot of these women are broke and living in fear of the loneliness ahead of them. It’s a lot different for a woman to be 40 than 25. Maybe they made bad decisions or maybe they were led down the wrong road by the evil globalist elites.

    Anyway I think building romantic excitement happens more via other things, like going to the beach or something. Some activity that doesn’t involve money at all.

  101. feministhater says:

    Even if he spent 5 dollars, buying her a coffee, and scoping her out that way, you’d still call him nasty names. Hell, even if he spent no money, you’d call him a “pussy beggar” or something……. It’s needlessly being angry because someone else is having fun.

    Actually, if he spent five dollars and was able to scope out what he needed, I would laugh. That would be money well spent.

    I have no issues with him having fun, that’s his own life. His first statement on this thread says he has no problem with spending money on the date.

    Well, I don’t have a problem paying for dinner with a woman. I think it’s just part of the deal: Men pay because men are producers. Women are distributors. The issue is not haggling over meat from the deer you just shot — it is reasonable for a man to spread that around to the weaker members of the tribe. The problem comes in when women demand a call option on FUTURE deer you haven’t shot yet, and/or hold out sex in demand of more deer meat, and/or hold out access to children in demand of deer meat. Those things are unacceptable. But laying out 80 bucks for dinner for two? Yeah so what? It’s signaling that there is more where that came from (which there is).

    It’s ‘part of the deal’, it’s about ‘spreading it around’ and signaling about more wealth. Those are his words, nothing about fun; those are the thoughts of a Traditional Conservative. The old ‘man must pay because he is the one with the resources’. That is the only reason I called him a cuck.

  102. Kgaard says:

    Fem-hater … I would make a distinction between laying out a bit of money now and signing up for an ass-reaming to come later. To me it’s different worlds. I am not a trad-con … am under no illusions about marriage. Like I said above, I didn’t phrase my original email that well. Could be that anything that looks like signaling of wealth is weak. I don’t know … gotta think about that. I kinda see it both ways. But in middle age, you really have to present yourself well and be on your game or women are going to think you are an aging loser. There are a lot of people who go off the rails in their 40s and 50s. LOT of them. Fortunately I haven’t — but I could have (through accidents and injuries, mainly). I want to make clear to women I am interested in that I have my act together. Offering to split the check at my age would just come across as pathetic, it seems to me.

  103. Boxer says:

    Dear Fellas:

    It’s ‘part of the deal’, it’s about ‘spreading it around’ and signaling about more wealth. Those are his words, nothing about fun; those are the thoughts of a Traditional Conservative. The old ‘man must pay because he is the one with the resources’. That is the only reason I called him a cuck.

    It’s funny how we read his original message through our different lenses. I interpreted it as a religious trad-con who rationalizes running with the ho’s by telling himself he’s just trying to find a wife. I think a lot of Dalrock dudes (Christian single bros who like women) probably do this. The expensive dinner is, in psychological terms, often a sort of purchased indulgence, giving the buyer the ability to rationalize no strings action with a ho’. Of course that’s just speculation.

    I want to make clear to women I am interested in that I have my act together. Offering to split the check at my age would just come across as pathetic, it seems to me.

    A woman who wants to get down with you won’t care. That’s been my experience.

    Be that as it may, if you invite someone out (no matter who your guest is) you should pay. My father’s a multimillionaire, and I’m a broke ass nigga. He’s also my dad, and I’m his son. If I invite him to dinner, I get to pick the restaurant, and I get to pay the check. That’s not chivalry, it’s just part of being a normal human being with good manners.

    Best,

    Boxer

  104. Anonymous Reader says:

    Earl
    Well yeah, but we are talking about the confusing subject about who pays for dates here…not about what a hookup app is for.

    The OP had to do with “who pays for dates that are arranged via Tindr”. The “who pays” was embedded in a larger issue, the modern relationship marketplace. Looks to me that you are evading that.

    My question to you, Earl, since you’ve been around here a while: when was the last time you approached a woman and asked her out for a coffee or something similar? You know how it works.
    The only way to do it, is to get to it.

  105. Snowy says:

    Anonymous Reader says, “The only way to do it, is to get to it.”

    Yep. I met my latest love interest through her daughter, who is a new neighbour of mine. I’ve also met some prospective women at some pubs and clubs while enjoying a night out on the town. Some time ago I did join an online dating site here in Australia called “Christian Connection”. It was worthwhile, and I met a number of prospective women, each with their own unique experiences and life situations. I’ve started going to Church again recently, and I’ve met several prospects there, mainly at the megachurches. Number one priority with me at Church, is God, which the megachurches lack. So I’ve started attending a small Presbyterian Church, where women prospects are lower (but not nonexistent), but God worship is much deeper and more truthful. I’d never sink to the lows of Tindr and the like, but yeah…you have to get to it first.

  106. Spike says:

    In her book “Backlash – The Undeclared War Against Women”, feminist author Susan Faludi writes in dismay that the only lasting institution that feminism produced post-revolution was the Dutch Treat. And that was in the introduction.
    Since Faludi wrote this in the 1990s, Tinesha is going to perpetually have problems since Faludi, with all of her academic resources, could not produce a synthesis where modern feminism and traditional family units – required to bring up children healthily – would practically work.
    Tinesha can of course keep dating into her 40s….

  107. feeriker says:

    Tinesha can of course keep dating into her 40s….

    “SO … with a name like ‘Tinesha,’ how is it that you’ve managed to not produce at least one bastard child? In the whie communitty that’s the rarity equivalent of being a virgin!”

  108. Acksiom says:

    If I’m paying and she isn’t, I’m the adult and she’s the child, and the child does what the adult says.

    If she’s wearing too much makeup, she goes back in the house and removes most of it, because I’m paying. If I don’t like her clothes, she goes back in the house and puts on something closer to my tastes, because I’m paying.

    She turns off her phone, because I’m paying. We go to places I like full of people I like where we do things I like, because I’m paying. I give her permission to order for herself because that gives me useful information about her, but I could order for her if I preferred to, because I’m paying.

    And so on.

    If I’m paying and she isn’t, I’m the adult and she’s the child.

    And the child does what the adult says.

  109. Anchorman says:

    There are, in my experience, women who are way better insurance risks than their peers, though.

    My red flags:

    1) Non-ankle tattoos and gratuitous piercings
    2) Unsecured debt (credit card debt)
    3) Mental health issues
    4) More than three notches on her bedpost
    5) No positive relationship with her father

    You can work with one flag, date two flags, but three or more…you’re insane if you take her seriously as a prospect.

  110. Boxer says:

    Anchorman:

    That’s an excellent list, that corresponds somewhat with mine.

    https://v5k2c2.wordpress.com/2017/03/01/for-the-single-bros/

    Funny to note that I’m not as forgiving about tattoos. (One of my recent acquaintances had an ankle tattoo that was a flaming two-digit numeral, usually denoting a perverse act. lol)

    It’s also difficult to discern points two and four before the wedding. I guess you can ask for bank statements and a detailed sexual history, but I doubt you’ll get the whole unvarnished truth, if you know what I mean.

    Boxer

  111. feministhater says:

    It’s funny how we read his original message through our different lenses. I interpreted it as a religious trad-con who rationalizes running with the ho’s by telling himself he’s just trying to find a wife. I think a lot of Dalrock dudes (Christian single bros who like women) probably do this. The expensive dinner is, in psychological terms, often a sort of purchased indulgence, giving the buyer the ability to rationalize no strings action with a ho’. Of course that’s just speculation.

    Well I can understand that. I would hope a more important step would be to try and separate the ho from the wife without having to spend my hard earned money.

    I got off on the wrong foot with Kgaard so I offer my apology for calling him a cuck. In the greater scheme of things we all have to do what we think is right.

  112. Boxer says:

    I got off on the wrong foot with Kgaard so I offer my apology for calling him a cuck. In the greater scheme of things we all have to do what we think is right.

    “Iron sharpeneth iron; so a man sharpeneth the countenance of his friend,” &c. 🙂

  113. Emperor Constantine says:

    @Boxer said:
    “Iron sharpeneth iron; so a man sharpeneth the countenance of his friend,” &c. 🙂

    Along those lines you mentioned earlier the Christian bros running with ho’s and justifying it… thanks for putting it that way. That is going to require some reflection and internal candor on my part.

  114. PokeSalad says:

    It’s also difficult to discern points two and four before the wedding. I guess you can ask for bank statements and a detailed sexual history, but I doubt you’ll get the whole unvarnished truth, if you know what I mean.

    There have been some recent “relationship” articles about that remark on the coming trend to ask for a credit report prior to dating.

  115. craig says:

    The red-flag value of tattoos and piercings is proportional to the inverse square of their distance from any erogenous zone. That’s why ankles are the least offensive. I still don’t like them.

    Debt and notch count are both hard to elicit in conversation but there are ‘tells’. If she has traveled overnight with another man (i.e., not as part of a group). If she has traveled overnight with girlfriends to a let-it-all-hang-out destination (Cancun, Las Vegas, etc.). If her visible spending / wardrobe / lifestyle trappings appear out of proportion to her income (and this can be a ‘tell’ for either debt or notch count).

  116. Gunner Q says:

    PokeSalad @ 12:08 pm:
    “There have been some recent “relationship” articles about that remark on the coming trend to ask for a credit report prior to dating.”

    HER credit report?

  117. anonymous_ng says:

    @Gunner, not quite what PokeSalad said, but it’s the one I remember from last year though the article is 7 years old.

  118. Original Laura says:

    @Boxer: Couples who attend mandatory pre-marital counseling through the church that will host the wedding ceremony generally have to disclose all of their debts, reveal their income, and create a joint budget for their upcoming married life together.

    @Pokesalad: A “bad credit” report tells you plenty, but a “good” credit report would just tell you that they pay their bills on time, not that they spend money wisely. My ex husband was inordinately proud of the sky-high credit rating he had while we were married. He beamed with pride when a store clerk told him that he had never seen a credit rating come back that high. But he spent money very impulsively, he was always in debt, and any money that I managed to save out of my own earnings was sooner or later taken away to pay down the credit cards. (“How can you be so STUPID??? Can’t you understand that it makes no sense to keep money in the credit union at 8% when the debt on the credit cards is 24%???) At the time that he divorced me, he had run up credit card debt that was equal to about 150% of what he had been earning per year for the past several years. And there were car payments, etc. on top of that.

    His parents were very “normal” with money — they had a very nice lifestyle but lived well within their means, so it would have been difficult for anyone to predict his overspending, eventual bankruptcies, etc. At the time we married, he had some credit card debt and other debts, but he was earning a very good income and the debt was well within his ability to manage, and he could have cleared his debts within a year if he had been so inclined. But instead of becoming more prudent as he aged, he became completely irresponsible — secret credit cards, etc.

    Don’t assume that because the woman you are dating comes from a financially stable family that she herself is sensible with money. Also, she may be relatively sensible while SHE is the person responsible for paying off the debts, but then become less responsible when she can tell herself that any debt that she incurs can be shifted partially or entirely onto her husband’s shoulders.

  119. earl says:

    ‘My question to you, Earl, since you’ve been around here a while: when was the last time you approached a woman and asked her out for a coffee or something similar?’

    3 mo. ago.

  120. Micha Elyi says:

    Google “Jessica Sporty”. She was a singleton in NY whose salary wasn’t meeting her lifestyle expectations so supplemented it by going out on dinner dates with guys from Match (or whatever) so she could eat nice dinners on their tab. Thus the “date” was a disingenuous pretext…
    Mistral

    Hah. There’s nothing new under the sun. The now-deceased Helen Gurley Brown, author of Sex and the Single Girl and long-time editor of Cosmo, was doing that seven decades ago.

  121. Anonymous Reader says:

    Earl
    3 mo. ago.

    Why not make that once per month? Or even once per fortnight? You’re not asking them to marry you, just share some time and conversation.

    Because you won’t find a marriageble Catholic woman without at least talking to marriageble Catholic women. The more at ease you are, the easier your search for a mate will be. There’s plenty of bachelors, Earl, we don’t really need more.

  122. W.B.Kotter says:

    Caldo, “A personal anecdote: I have the opportunity to observe a large number of “dates”, and I have observed that young black men almost never pay; regardless of the skin tone of their dates.”

    Many of them have high confidence in this country because of their reputation amongst women.

Please see the comment policy linked from the top menu.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s