Jul 4 Roma commented on Savage Love Letter of the Day: Man 4 Woman Annoyed @ Men 4 Men.
“if you don’t ask you don’t get.”

So women never get to go out on dates if they don't ask men?
Jul 4 Roma commented on Savage Love Letter of the Day: Man 4 Woman Annoyed @ Men 4 Men.
76/futurecatlady, thanks for your comment.

I initially responded to BiDanFan's comment @ 58: I honestly doubt [a dating site that only allowed women to contact men and not vice versa] would last very long since many women inexplicably prefer to be contacted than to do the contacting.

So she was talking about a site where only one-way contact was allowed. I don't know much about the mechanics of Tinder, but your your explanation makes sense for the way that app works.

Jul 4 Roma commented on Savage Love Letter of the Day: Man 4 Woman Annoyed @ Men 4 Men.
74/Alison, there's no inherent "gender" bias. The same thing applies to any situation where there's a person who makes a proposal and a person who decides whether or not to accept the proposal. The person making the proposal could be a buyer (as in the case of someone making an offer on a house) or a seller (as in the case of a salesman offering to sell a product or service.) The only reason there's a "gender" bias is because, traditionally, men have been the ones making the proposal.

The person making the proposal can do things to influence the outcome, but they can't control the outcome. The person considering the proposal decides what the outcome will be. (And, let me stress again, this is the initial outcome. A home seller could decide to accept a buyer's offer and then the buyer could decide they don't want the house after all.)

*

75/chi_type, I'm sure it sucks to be hit on by people you find to be creepy and/or unattractive. That's the downside, of course, of the traditional man-approaches-woman arrangement for women. With women (supposedly) now doing more of the initiating, I'm sure there are now men who get hit on by women they find to be creepy and/or unattractive and they don't like that either.
More...
Jul 4 Roma commented on Savage Love Letter of the Day: Man 4 Woman Annoyed @ Men 4 Men.
70/BiDanFan, I'm one of the few human beings in the Western world who doesn't possess -- and is mesmerized by -- a smart phone so I have no experience with Tumblr or other such dating/hookup apps. But, even without that experience, I can imagine that women get a lot of horrific (or creepy) messages from guys.

I'm not saying there's not a cost to women to waiting to be contacted. There is. It's not all benefit. But what matters is the overall cost vs. overall benefit. And I maintain that those women who don't contact men do that because, to them the cost of rejection is greater than the benefit-less-cost of waiting to be contacted.

Women who are not as risk-averse, who are more capable of handling rejection, are likely more willing to contact men,

Women in the 21st century know that we have options. If a woman isn't willing to utilise those options, then she really has no one to blame but herself if she has no luck with dating online.

I completely agree with you there. You reminded of a dating article in the Seattle Times about ten years ago. It was about women complaining that men in Seattle were "too wimpy" to ask them out. Most of the men who commented said that, instead of being passive and complaining, the women might consider being active and ask men out (the author of the article, a woman, had actually addressed this in the article but did so in an ludicrously-biased way.)

Roma @69: And a WOMAN'S desired outcome is guaranteed?

No...and yes. In my statement above, I was referring to the initial outcome.

A woman's eventual outcome is not guaranteed. Once a relationship has begun -- or even once there's been a first date -- then either party is open to being rejected. And, even before that, if a woman agrees to give a guy her phone number or agrees to go out with him, there's no guarantee he'll call her or ask her out. However, she does have complete control over the initial outcome: whether or not the guy gets her phone number or consent to go out with him. That's the outcome that's guaranteed. For the guy, it's not. He makes a proposal and hopes it's accepted. For him, the outcome is never guaranteed (although if he's tall and very good-looking, it's probably pretty close to being guaranteed.)
More...
Jul 4 Roma commented on Savage Love Letter of the Day: Man 4 Woman Annoyed @ Men 4 Men.
64/Alison, the "man proposes/woman disposes" saying I heard/read decades ago fits perfectly with that. "A man can make all the plans and preparation he wants; he can work and sweat to get a date with (or a phone number from) a woman; but his desired outcome is never guaranteed."
Jul 4 Roma commented on Savage Love Letter of the Day: Man 4 Woman Annoyed @ Men 4 Men.
66/BiDanFan, I heard (or read) that saying decades ago. I think there were sufficient decades to make it avant links.

OK, I can see that you see "outdated gender roles" as inexplicable. We obviously differ on that. When a particular "outdated" role works to the benefit** of one gender or another, then I don't see it as inexplicable that the gender continues to embrace it. I see it as perfectly reasonable.

** to be more specific, in the case of women -- as you put it above -- "prefer to be contacted than to do the contacting", it's a cost/benefit calculation. They would certainly benefit by discarding the "outdated" gender role -- they'd increase their potential pool of dates by contacting men as well as waiting to be contacted -- but there's also a cost to this: the risk of rejection, and they don't incur this risk by only waiting to be contacted. So the "outdated" role, on cost/benefit balance, works for them.
Jul 3 Roma commented on Savage Love Letter of the Day: Man 4 Woman Annoyed @ Men 4 Men.
58/BiDanFan: And I remember hearing about a dating site that only allowed women to contact men and not vice versa, though I can't remember its name, and I honestly doubt it would last very long since many women inexplicably prefer to be contacted than to do the contacting.

BDF, it's not inexplicable to me. You know that old saying "man proposes, woman disposes"? Well, many women are just fine with that arrangement. They don't want to propose and risk being disposed of. They want to do all the disposing.

I do think that women are more likely to initiate things online than in other ways because being rejected for an online "proposal" isn't as bad as being rejected in person.

Jul 2 Roma commented on Savage Love Letter of the Day: Man 4 Woman Annoyed @ Men 4 Men.
Out of frustration, I've started replying, asking why they think it's okay to respond to my ad,

P.S. when you get a response you don't like, for whatever reason, don't engage with that person. You're not going to accomplish anything by doing that.
Jul 2 Roma commented on Savage Love Letter of the Day: Man 4 Woman Annoyed @ Men 4 Men.
And it seems that whenever I post a m4w ad, 80% of responses are spam, 5% are from actual women, and the remaining 15% are from men.

Due to his use of "m4w", I'm sure he's using the m4w option in the "Casual Encounters" section because the "Men Seeking Women" section doesn't have a "m4w" option. And that would explain the percentages, especially the 80% spam and 5% from actual women (I'm surprised the percentage of actual women responding to a m4w ad in "Casual Encounters" is that high. I would think it would be more like 1%.)

I used the "Men Seeking Women" section about ten years ago. Being a (sometimes) contrarian, I used it precisely because people said that Craiglist was a terrible place to try to meet someone. My spam percentage there was very low and I don't recall getting any emails from guys. (After meeting numerous women, I finally met a woman I really fell for but, alas, she didn't feel the same way about me.)

Never used the "Casual Encounters" section. Not because I wasn't interested in one but because I assumed actual women seldom, if ever, reply to them. (One the other hand, I'm sure any woman posting a w4m ad in that section gets flooded with responses from men.)

Also never considered responding to a w4w ad. Sure, maybe guys who do that get lucky in one out of one hundred tries but why annoy the other ninety-nine women?
More...
Jul 1 Roma commented on I, Anonymous.
26/Pencil man: My comment was on the ugly and unfortunate but time honored practice of ascribing the acts of a few loathsome individuals to a larger identified group sharing ethnic, age, gender, class characteristics, and painting them all with collective guilt.

I do that with pit bulls.

I know that only a small percentage are like the ISIS members of the canine world but it's enough to make me take a dim view of all of them (although, I don't think i'd feel that way if they didn't all look like thugs** to me, even the nice ones.)

** For contrast, a dog I find adorable -- totally un-thug-like -- is the Basset (but some people probably find them hideous and pit bulls attractive.)