• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Misogyny - dislike of females

PoetPhilosopher

Veteran Member
We have a thread on misandry. All things being fair, how about one focused on misogyny and dislike of females?

Misogyny - Wikipedia

One thing I have noticed is that the male response, including from me, to women getting more selective in the dating pool, is men getting more selective as well.

This article may back up my opinion: https://www.washingtonpost.com/busi...icans-not-having-sex-has-reached-record-high/

What I find to be true, however, is that when women ignore men, they may be playing an advanced form of hard to get, whereas when men ignore women, they've most of the time given up, focusing on career, etc.
 

crossfire

LHP Mercuræn Feminist Heretic ☿
Premium Member
What I find to be true, however, is that when women ignore men, they may be playing an advanced form of hard to get,
How would you psychologically interpret the assumption that No means Yes if a woman says it?
 

exchemist

Veteran Member
We have a thread on misandry. All things being fair, how about one focused on misogyny and dislike of females?

Misogyny - Wikipedia

One thing I have noticed is that the male response, including from me, to women getting more selective in the dating pool, is men getting more selective as well.

This article may back up my opinion: https://www.washingtonpost.com/busi...icans-not-having-sex-has-reached-record-high/

What I find to be true, however, is that when women ignore men, they may be playing an advanced form of hard to get, whereas when men ignore women, they've most of the time given up, focusing on career, etc.
What evidence do you have for drawing that distinction?
 

Rival

Si m'ait Dieus
Staff member
Premium Member
What I find to be true, however, is that when women ignore men, they may be playing an advanced form of hard to get,
I think this is bull****. I think men just delude themselves into believing women are playing hard to get since they can't admit a woman they really fancy doesn't want him. What men see as playing hard to get women see as 'please go away.'
 

PoetPhilosopher

Veteran Member
I think this is bull****. I think men just delude themselves into believing women are playing hard to get since they can't admit a woman they really fancy doesn't want him. What men see as playing hard to get women see as 'please go away.'

Perhaps.

I see it more as being in between. Women don't want the man, leaving the man to either let go, or to convince her that she wants him. The second is risky, but sometimes works, if the man actually has something to offer.
 

Rival

Si m'ait Dieus
Staff member
Premium Member
Perhaps.

I see it more as being in between. Women don't want the man, leaving the man to either let go, or to convince her that she wants him. The second is risky, but sometimes works, if the man actually has something to offer.
If I like a bloke I just say it straight up and give him my number. I'm not interested in playing nonsense.
 

Rival

Si m'ait Dieus
Staff member
Premium Member
Like you did the woman at the restaurant?
That's a completely different situation. She is at work and it's rude to do that; for her it would be unprofessional and I'm not looking to damage her career. If I saw her out and about, I would. You don't just start chatting people up at their work; it's creepy.
 

Mock Turtle

Oh my, did I say that!
Premium Member
I think this is bull****. I think men just delude themselves into believing women are playing hard to get since they can't admit a woman they really fancy doesn't want him. What men see as playing hard to get women see as 'please go away.'

Your experiences - and from what I know, men do just the same. One can't necessarily base a whole understanding of human nature on our own experiences. :rolleyes:
 

PoetPhilosopher

Veteran Member
OK, so what is the connection between no sex and misogyny?

Dating has moved a lot toward dating sites, where women control the power dynamic - women get a lot of messages, and make the most reports as well, tending to help shape the rules and the sites and the features.

Since women get a lot of messages and many more messages, they have grown selective.

Men, who don't get nearly as many messages, have gotten selective as well. And since men don't have a fantastic reason for it, they are likely just fed up.
 

Rival

Si m'ait Dieus
Staff member
Premium Member
Your experiences - and from what I know, men do just the same. One can't necessarily base a whole understanding of human nature on our own experiences. :rolleyes:
No, but I know plenty of women who've said the same. Men who think women are playing hard to get just come off as creeps and if the women were really interested, they'd just do something about it.
 

exchemist

Veteran Member
I think this is bull****. I think men just delude themselves into believing women are playing hard to get since they can't admit a woman they really fancy doesn't want him. What men see as playing hard to get women see as 'please go away.'
That is rather what I suspect.

Or, rather, it may be more complicated, along the lines of, "Do I really want to start something, that may prove awkward to get out of, with this person?" Someone who sees it like this may need a lot more persuading than a mere first approach - but may ultimately be persuadable, by a sufficiently appealing person. It is not playing a game of "hard-to-get", just being mature about the thing.

My own experience, as a man who married late, is that after about 35 I started thinking this way. I also started thinking about the feelings of the woman. If I knew she was up for it but was not the sort of person I would want a long-term relationship with, I would leave it, as I had by then had enough experience of dumping people and being dumped not to wish the unpleasantness on someone I liked.

My suspicion is that women are often more likely to think through this kind of thing than men, for whom the little head too often does the thinking for the big head. (And although that may be considered a sexist remark I think it does have a biological basis.;))
 

Rival

Si m'ait Dieus
Staff member
Premium Member
That is rather what I suspect.

Or, rather, it may be more complicated, along the lines of, "Do I really want to start something, that may prove awkward to get out of, with this person?" Someone who sees it like this may need a lot more persuading than a mere first approach - but may ultimately be persuadable, by a sufficiently appealing person. It is not playing a game of "hard-to-get", just being mature about the thing.

My own experience, as a man who married late, is that after about 35 I started thinking this way. I also started thinking about the feelings of the woman. If I knew she was up for it but was not the sort of person I would want a long-term relationship with, I would leave it, as I had by then had enough experience of dumping people and being dumped not to wish the unpleasantness on someone I liked.

My suspicion is that women are often more likely to think through this kind of thing than men, for whom the little head too often does the thinking for the big head. (And although that may be considered a sexist remark I think it does have a biological basis.;))
I also suspect a lot of what many men see as playing hard to get is actually a woman just trying to be friends first and seeing how that works. I've been accused of leading men on when really I was just seeing how we worked as friends. It seemed logical enough to me.

Male and female responses differed on a few key items though. Men were more likely to see sex and romantic potential in an opposite-sex friend as a benefit, while women primarily saw it as a cost. As a result, men were also more likely than women to report that they had sex with an opposite-sex friend (22 percent vs. 11 percent for women). Men were also more likely to report friendship costs of lowered self-worth and giving time to help the friend, while women found their own inability to reciprocate the male's attraction as costly. Therefore, when friendships did not turn sexual or romantic, men were often left feeling rejected and used (i.e., "friend zoned"), while women felt uncomfortable with the unequal attraction. In contrast, when friendships did turn romantic/sexual, some of these men continued to label the women as "just friends"—at about double the rate of women. This leads to the "other" friend zone women more routinely face, the "friends-with-benefits zone," where sex may be shared but commitment is not reciprocated.

 
Last edited:

PoetPhilosopher

Veteran Member
I also suspect a lot of what many men see as playing hard to get is actually a woman just trying to be friends first and seeing how that works. I've been accused of leading men on when really I was just seeing how we worked as friends. It seemed logical enough to me.

Makes sense.

However, I'm the type of person who doesn't take friendship lightly. I consider friendship no less serious than a relationship, referring to anything less than the two as "acquaintances".
 

Mock Turtle

Oh my, did I say that!
Premium Member
No, but I know plenty of women who've said the same. Men who think women are playing hard to get just come off as creeps and if the women were really interested, they'd just do something about it.

Are we going to get into the numbers game? There are plenty on both sides who 'play' to gain what they want.
 

PoetPhilosopher

Veteran Member
I do apologize to the extent of saying "I may have oversimplified complex ideas and behaviors".

But one has to start somewhere. If we sugarcoat every thought, there exists a point where one makes one's self immortal/untouchable to necessary correction.
 
Top