Not sure I have ever dated a quality woman

[LARaiders85]

The women I've dated all into at least one of these categories. Some are specific to an individual person and some are broad. In no circumstances am I referring to just how they were with me, but how they behaved before and after me as well.

1. Daddy issues including but not limited to cluster B (obvious, many of these)
2. Loves the game and doesnt attach usually(sometimes does), doesnt seem to value LTRs at all, rejects solid men (I would put at the highest quality i've dated but risky for a LTR due to not seeming oriented that way.)
3. Schizophrenia in family (second highest quality but Im not taking chances)
4. Avoidant attachment issues, chronically single well into their late 30s. They did often have LTRs or marriages early on.
5. Strippers/former strippers
6. Bad personality/judgmental/objectively boring, cause of each is undiagnosed and irrelevant because even initial chemistry can't be established. They tend to be chronically single as well, so its not just me
7. Extreme promiscuity in past, turns into an extreme flirt/cheater when drinking
8. Chronic greener grass/monkey brancher
9. Anxious attachment or caretaker type personality: prefers low value men

Meanwhile, there does not seem to be a huge shortage of quality women, which I would define as:

1. Pair bonding ability
2. Solid personality
3. LTR oriented

They are a minority, but I know plenty of them. They are, of course, in relationships already. I usually have really good chemistry with them to the point where we probably would have dated if I had met them before their current partner (with the caveat that taken women are never friendlier than when they're taken, so its somewhat of a false positive).

Can anyone related to this? It just seems so bizarre.

The obvious answer is that quality is taken off the market early, but that can't ALWAYS be the case can it?

Looking back, I can think of a few opportunities I lost, but none were a sure thing and they often would have involved stepping on the toes or worse of male friends who were likewise interested.

 

[BillyPilgrim]

I know this seems like a lame joke, and it partly is, but when I think of women who are Raiders fans, they do kind of fit the description you list. If you live in Vegas now and are from Socal (iirc), maybe try other parts of the country, like you hinted at in your "Southern Game" thread? South, Midwest, flyover country, etc.

 

[Chocolate Muffin]

If you don't filter properly, you have much greater chances of dating freaks. They are always on the market since nobody wants them.

Can you write the height of each woman? I'm curious, for scientific purposes.

 

[Jake_Gyllenhaal69]

Are you one of those guys that boast pump and dump lol?

 

[LARaiders85]

If you don't filter properly, you have much greater chances of dating freaks. They are always on the market since nobody wants them.

Can you write the height of each woman? I'm curious, for scientific purposes.

varies but perhaps mostly short

I do filter, heavily, but I also take what is available at a certain point. Often I find out much later what is really going on.

 

[LARaiders85]

Are you one of those guys that boast pump and dump lol?

nope. I party but its not my ideal.

 

[LARaiders85]

I know this seems like a lame joke, and it partly is, but when I think of women who are Raiders fans, they do kind of fit the description you list. If you live in Vegas now and are from Socal (iirc), maybe try other parts of the country, like you hinted at in your "Southern Game" thread? South, Midwest, flyover country, etc.

I am hoping for the best but I am seeing even more obvious flags in the South than elsewhere. Hoping it isnt as pervasive as it looks. Often what you gain in culture you lose in poverty.

 

[Borknagar]

The women I've dated all into at least one of these categories. Some are specific to an individual person and some are broad. In no circumstances am I referring to just how they were with me, but how they behaved before and after me as well.

1. Daddy issues including but not limited to cluster B (obvious, many of these)
2. Loves the game and doesnt attach usually(sometimes does), doesnt seem to value LTRs at all, rejects solid men (I would put at the highest quality i've dated)
3. Schizophrenia in family (second highest quality but Im not taking chances)
4. Avoidant attachment issues, chronically single well into their late 30s. They did often have LTRs or marriages early on.
5. Strippers/former strippers
6. Bad personality/judgmental/objectively boring, cause of each is undiagnosed and irrelevant because even initial chemistry can't be established. They tend to be chronically single as well, so its not just me
7. Extreme promiscuity in past, turns into an extreme flirt/cheater when drinking
8. Chronic greener grass/monkey brancher
9. Anxious attachment or caretaker type personality: prefers low value men

Meanwhile, there does not seem to be a huge shortage of quality women, which I would define as:

1. Pair bonding ability
2. Solid personality
3. LTR oriented

They are a minority, but I know plenty of them. They are, of course, in relationships already. I usually have really good chemistry with them to the point where we probably would have dated if I had met them before their current partner (with the caveat that taken women are never friendlier than when they're taken, so its somewhat of a false positive).

Can anyone related to this? It just seems so bizarre.

The obvious answer is that quality is taken off the market early, but that can't ALWAYS be the case can it?

Looking back, I can think of a few opportunities I lost, but none were a sure thing and they often would have involved stepping on the toes or worse of male friends who were likewise interested.

You pretty much summarized every women out there that isn't fugly or fat. Real women are married by a certain age. If you are like me, 43, you won't ever meet a quality women.

 

[Gamisch]

Obviously most men can relate to this. Just ask J. Depp Will Smith and M B Jordan. There is a reason they are in the situation they are in today. Although women ( and men) in relationships tend to start of with the good qualities you describe, when the honeymoon phase is over you start to see someone's true colors.

Goes both ways , both men and women will tell you this. Nobody's perfect and people can switch from good to less good to bad. ("Where are all the good men at?")

It's easy nowadays to compare your partner and to replace them. NRE is a real thing. You simply never know 100 % how somebody really thinks and feels. It takes a significant amount of time to figure that out. And let's not forget what your role in the way women respond to you. What issue do you have?

I also think a big part of this has to do with SMV .Could you date somebody with those 3 good qualities but less SMV?

 

[LARaiders85]

I also think a big part of this has to do with SMV .Could you date somebody with those 3 good qualities but less SMV?

in my experience they get too insecure and start sabotaging. I am trying though.

 

[Chocolate Muffin]

varies but perhaps mostly short

I do filter, heavily, but I also take what is available at a certain point. Often I find out much later what is really going on.

Short women should be avoided. Being small means that they didn't have proper nutrition and have a deformed body, and the probability of them being lower class is much greater. Women that you have sex with should be at least 160cm. Read my guide here on how to filter women : https://www.sosuave.net/forum/threa...hms-of-tinder-bumble-hinge-new-method.274242/

 

[SW15]

Can anyone relate to this?

Yes, I can relate to this. It's possible to be in the mating environment now for 20+ years and not deal with quality. @LARaiders85 -- you are an older Millennial and have spent the past 20 years dealing with Millennial women. That's bad. On the whole, Millennial women have been lower quality than previous generations. Gen Z is also unlikely to be a substantial improvement over Millennials, and could actually be worse. Additionally, you've been dating mainly in big USA metro areas, which are cesspools.

2. Loves the game and doesnt attach usually(sometimes does), doesnt seem to value LTRs at all, rejects solid men (I would put at the highest quality i've dated but risky for a LTR due to not seeming oriented that way.)

4. Avoidant attachment issues, chronically single well into their late 30s. They did often have LTRs or marriages early on.

6. Bad personality/judgmental/objectively boring, cause of each is undiagnosed and irrelevant because even initial chemistry can't be established. They tend to be chronically single as well, so its not just me

These 3 categories are the most common categorizations I've seen in my post-college, big city dating during the last 17 years.

Women in these categories love all the attention that they get on swipe apps or social media. They have way too many options and can flake on anything. Women in these 3 categories are most likely to...

• Agree to a date from either a tech-assisted method or some real world approach, then flake on the date prior to it happening
• Go on a "one date, no sex" date as a result of either a tech-assisted method or a real world approach, then flake prior to the 2nd date.

Real world approaching is likely to get a man better outcomes than swiping, but a lot of women still treat the men who cold approach them in a rather subpar manner.

 

[Kotaix]

I think most of it really is just that quality is never on the market for long. You're not going to find a quality woman who is single for any length of time, so when you do meet one, you have to take a gamble on whether she's worth it in the long run.

In my opinion, quality women are the ones that still have joy in their smile and haven't been ruined by life.

 

[Pierce.Manhammer]

Can anyone related to this? It just seems so bizarre.

ABSOLUTELY. Solid post-A+++, I could generate a very similar list. Still, I won't - I've posted enough personally identifiable material here that anyone looking into my posts who suspects I may be here would instantly know it's me...

But yes man, RIGHT ON THE HEAD, you nailed it. Bravo.

p.s. the trick is to catch them RIGHT out of the last relationship, remain friendly but not needy, so you can pounce when the time comes, and eventually it does, unfortunately. It's like owning an exotic pet frankly (I'm sure I read that somewhere, at some point), very specific care, feeding and environment required, and while you can maintain it for a while, eventually, unfortunately, it's a failure. Sucks.

 

[catsmeow]

Meanwhile, there does not seem to be a huge shortage of quality women, which I would define as:

1. Pair bonding ability
2. Solid personality
3. LTR oriented

Just curious but are you able to pair bond and do you want a LTR?

Not an accusation, simply a question.

Reason I ask is cause many of these threads, not yours specifically but others, allude to men not wanting an exclusive long term serious relationship but nevertheless desiring a high quality woman who does, and then HE decides.

In the meantime, he keeps it casual and plates spinning.

Speaking as a woman who is relationship oriented (in one now) and capable of pair bonding, I do not do casual and a man exuding that energy won't last long, despite his words to the contrary in order to pull me. IOW lying which some men here advocate doing so as to pull high quality.

Not suggesting you do this, just reiterating what I've read on this forum.

Like attract like as they say; whatever energy you're projecting, you will receive that same energy back from women.

 

[2Rocky]

You know in Skiing how they tell you to watch where you want to go and not the obstacles? If you focus on the trees you will sure as hell run into one....
That's how you have to be in meeting quality women. Focus on what you want and not what you don't. Women will gravitate to you when you put those values into your daily life. Even more so when you exude those qualities yourself.

Ski the gaps, not the trees

 

[2Rocky]

@catsmeow... you hit enter faster than I did...

 

[Pierce.Manhammer]

Women qualify themselves for my commitment, period.

The vast majority of women, in committed, monogamous LTRs have a few Klingons in reserve, I’m not claiming they are having sex with them, I’m talking about the one or two guys they have on minimal life support. And as has been stated here (by you @catsmeow ) you’re not monogamous until you have “The Talk”. And I whole heartedly agree.

But answer this: if I’m dating and one woman I’ve started seeing more frequently signals she’s only seeing me, but I’m not ready to reciprocate - SHOULD I FORCE HER TO SEE OTHER MEN? HTF no! That would be stupid. But it’s not disingenuous as your tone would seem suggest.

Are you going to tell me none of the text threads on your phone are from men you’ve either had sex with and you are “friends” with now or guys who you think are qualified for the job should your LTR should fall through? Seriously.

If the gal I’m dating qualifies herself for the role and takes herself off the market by her own resolve that shows initiative and it is rewarded, sometimes with what she has signaled she wants from me : commitment.

Its a very simple equation.

Let’s put the virtue signaling and righteous indignation aside and have a real discussion, eh?

 

[catsmeow]

And as has been stated here (by you @catsmeow ) you’re not monogamous until you have “The Talk”. And I whole heartedly agree.

Thanks for agreeing but that's not actually what I said. What I said was we both keep options open until it's mutually agreed we're exclusive. Meaning we are free to date and sleep with other people, but speaking for myself, I do NOT. I choose to be monogamous.

It's not in my nature to sleep with more than one man at a time, and also I simply have no desire to. Sex is emotional for me, a bonding, and when I feel those emotions for a man, such that I am desirous of having sex with him, I have no desire to have sex with anyone else.

I don't share that with him until we talk about exclusive, it's something I keep to myself.

As for him, I have no idea what he's doing, it does not concern me. When there is a strong connection (and I would not be dating/sleeping with him if there weren't), I have enough faith and trust in that connection that I don't feel threatened by other women. That's not say I don't feel twinges of anxiety sometimes, but I work through that myself.

I posted all this before in the other thread, I understand how some things may have been missed though so repeating for clarification.

are you going to tell me none of the text threads on your phone are from men you’ve either had sex with and you are “friends” with now or guys who you think are qualified for the job should your LTR should fall through? Seriously.

No seriously, I don't. 100% truth. I am not a multi-dater, never was and never will be, I am a "one at a time" girl and once a relationship with a man is done, short term or long term, I absolutely do not keep him on my radar nor do I keep them as "friends," "orbiters," or "backups" in case my current RL does not work out.

That is absolutely not my style at all.

When a RL ends, I have no problem meeting new men, my mindset is that of abundance even if I don't act on that until I am free and single again. It has never taken me long to meet a new man I am able to connect with. I am actually quite discretionary in that regard, so it may be short term, but my nature is open so it all comes pretty easily to me.

 

[LARaiders85]

Just curious but are you able to pair bond and do you want a LTR?

Not an accusation, simply a question.

Yes. Now what, anything?