SHARE THIS PAGE View Viral Dashboard ›
    • UglyShirts

      riefer:  Not in every case. “Wearing someone down” rarely results in anything good happening, maybe. But being patient, correctly reading signals, and investing the time to communicate? Yes. That can, and has.  MrCtheAmazing:  Good for you. But those who don’t have your proclaimed standards or your luck sometimes have to invest a bit more effort.  Siouxsy:  No. A question was asked, and answered truthfully. Just because you don’t like the answer doesn’t mean I don’t have a right to address the question. Do you enjoy being silenced by people who disagree with you? I’m guessing no. erulastiel91:  Actually, I’ve been in a relationship for two-plus years with a woman who approached me. I didn’t say it never happens, just that it’s rare. But, by all means…Keep on making assumptions regarding situations about which you know literally nothing. Clearly, that works out great. jetgirljen:  Do you enjoy it when a MAN rolls his eyes and condescends when you’re expressing yourself? Dismisses your opinios? Makes light of or mocks your expression, especially when you do it politely, respectfully, and directly? No? Then check your own sexism. Think of how it feels when that happens to you, and realize It’s no more acceptable just because it’s a woman doing it.

      bmo:  Sure. Because making a patient case for yourself NEVER works out. Romantic comedy movies are even less-plausible than sci-fi like that.

    • UglyShirts

      You asked a direct, honest question. As such, It deserves a direct, honest answer. And I’m going to answer honestly, even if it means I’ll risk being labeled as “part of the problem,” or accused of “mansplaining.” First up, guys who hector, badger or harass after you’ve made it clear that you’re not interested are jerks. That’s true. Full stop.  But.  Sometimes, guys have to risk being labeled jerks if we ever want to date *at all.* Despite advances in gender equality, the onus is still OVERWHELMINGLY on men to make the “first move” in social situations. If we don’t put ourselves out there to people to whom we’re attracted or interested by, we will die celibate and alone. It’s not that women making social overtures NEVER happens, but most men can count on fewer than one hand’s worth of fingers the number of times they’ve been approached by women with romantic interest. It’s exceedingly uncommon. So, if we ever want to date, find relationships, connect, be intimate, or what-have-you, we’d better be ready to approach women. And not just approach women, but approach women in a way that is simultaneously non-threatening, charming, engaging, funny, and vulnerable. To approach them in the specific way they would prefer to be approached at that place, in that moment. Because we know they’re not going to approach us.  And sometimes that’s awkward. Sometimes it’s ugly. Sometimes it’s problematic. But once in awhile, it’s not. Sometimes, it works, and we make a connection. And since every woman is different, and sometimes even either receptive or not depending on the day, it’s always a crapshoot.  But all of that is just context. You asked why “no” isn’t enough. Especially when it should be from your perspective.  Sometimes, it’s not enough because men have been conditioned to expect that women will rarely be receptive to our interest *INITIALLY*. There’s a sense that we need “game;” or the right combination of persuasive tricks and methodology to overcome your defenses, so that maybe we can find a way to connect. The counterpart to this is that women have plenty of reason to shut down men who approach them. So, your “no” is often seen as simply the first line of resistance. And then begins the elaborate courtship dance; no different than so many mating rituals other animals perform.  Every guy - EVERY GUY - has had the experience where an initial “no” actually meant “not yet,” “not right now,” or “I’m not in the mood in general, it has nothing to do with you personally.” And I don’t mean in a sexual sense where no ALWAYS means no. I’m talking about the initial expression of interest. We’ve ALL had good relationships that began with a “no,” progressed to a “maybe” and ultimately culminated in a “yes, please.” And it’s because of this that we sometimes persist even if we’re met with initial resistance - Because we’re never sure (again, in a social context) if no is a “hard no,” or no in a “not right now but maybe some other time.” Because it can often go either way in the long run.  Look - Women get annoyed when they’re approached by people they have no interest in. It’s a rough thing to have to deal with. But every dude you’ve had to deal with rejecting has had to deal with just as many rejections. And that’s rough to deal with, too. It stinks on both sides.  Bottom line - Should no always mean no? Yes. And - again - in a sex context, it does. Different ballgame entirely. But does no always mean no in a courtship context? Let’s really be honest, here. We’ve all had relationships that STARTED with resistance or defense that was eventually circumvented, ultimately resulting in a connection.  Women navigate a minefield of creeps, pushy f**kbois and risk of assault. They have the far more raw deal, no question. But men don’t get off scot-free. Men have a less-dangerous but still-daunting minefield of their own; one filled with mixed signals, confusing, inconsistent rules of engagement, and even straight-up manipulation. So, yes…Women have it WAY harder. But it’s still up to men to put themselves out there and try, try again any way they can if they ever want to connect with anyone. It’s a bad system across-the-board, but it’s the one we’ve got.  I hope that at least helps a little in seeing things from over here. :)

    • UglyShirts

      I’m sorry…But this managed to piss me off in about the first 15 seconds. The sentiment is absolutely correct…But the way it’s delivered is infuriating. First off, I don’t believe in “reverse” racism. The term itself is racist. It implies that only one group can practice “regular” racism, and when someone else does it, it’s somehow “different.” And double standards like that are at the center of ALL discrimination. Racism is racism, and it’s always wrong. Period.  Second: Imagine the correct and justifiable backlash if a white person created a similar video. Opening with a group of black people talking in an exaggerated dialect, spouting off traditional African-American stereotypes. Fried chicken instead of kale chips. Complaining about BET repeats. And over it all is a condescending white person mocking them for how tough their struggle only seemed to be, with the obvious subtext that they needed to shut up about their issues. Already, there is derisive bigotry. Such a video would IMMEDIATELY be shouted down as racist, and rightly so. And then, after the introduction, imagine the video went on to lecture black people - from a white perspective, mind you - about how to be better black people. Namely, by being more deferential to whites. Telling them they need to know their place. Shaming their behavior. Look, I get it. White people can be assholes. Historically, as well as now. We have a lot to answer for, and much to make up for. But the answer to that is dialogue, not alpha-dogging with dog-whistle language. Not stooping to the very same bigotry and talking-down we’ve all too often been guilty of ourselves. That’s two wrongs not making a right, and it serves nobody.

Load More