Hey guys, a recent experience made me think about that, the story in short:

Met a girl in a club, made out with her, she didn't want to go home with me but agreed to meet up a few days later. On the date, we ended up at my place and at first she didn't want to sleep with me. I told her that I just broke up and didn't want a relationship now anyway, and then we ended up having sex.

The interesting thing was that, when I asked her, she explained her reasons:
She didn't have sex with me the first night we met because I look like the relationship type of guy (she said I have a 'nice face') and seemed to her fairly intelligent, and therefore qualified as 'boyfriend material' (the old story of withholding sex to get a guy to commit). I asked her if she had slept with me if I was stupid, and she said yes (because if she had found me just physically attractive, there would have been no other 'use' for me than having a ONS)

So, the questions for me:
If I'm just interested in sex, should I seriously pretend to be stupid and uncaring, or what?
If women always put me in the relationship category, what can I do to change that?
Or can't I change that because its about whether my face looks soft or masculine?

I think you may be over-analyzing this. I definitely think there's something to "provider" type attraction and "bad boy" type attraction. But it sounds like this is just how this particular girl thinks about things and thought about you. There could be 100 girls out there who see you completely differently.

I don't know. But I think, from a evolutionary standpoint of view, the 'nice face' story shows that women put men into a provider OR sex category: the uncontrollable square-jawed guys (higher testorsteron level!) provide a higher replication value, the controllable 'nice face' guys provide a higher survival value.

(04-17-2011 04:19 AM)saito Wrote:  I don't know. But I think, from a evolutionary standpoint of view, the 'nice face' story shows that women put men into a provider OR sex category: the uncontrollable square-jawed guys (higher testorsteron level!) provide a higher replication value, the controllable 'nice face' guys provide a higher survival value.

Again, I think there's something to this, but I think it's a spectrum. It's not an either/or type thing. And that spectrum shifts not only by how you look and behave, but by her mood, what she's looking for, what time of the month it is, etc.

excellent anecdote and case study.

"But it sounds like this is just how this particular girl thinks about things and thought about you. There could be 100 girls out there who see you completely differently."

mark, i think you make some sense but bottom line, cobrastyle's instinct is correct. i would say most girls think this way now -- either a fling option, or boyfriend potential.

i have learned that it is very important to give off a sexual vibe, and to escalate as much as possible. first you hook her, then you fuck her, and then you see if you want to date her.

she needs to understand that she is auditioning for a role in YOUR life, not the other way around.

cobrastyle sounds like he did great. i just want to say how important it is to give off a masculine, sexual vibe from the beginning, so you don't get put on the wrong ladder.

i say this because that used to ALWAYS happen to me.

(04-17-2011 02:10 AM)cobrastyle Wrote:  Hey guys, a recent experience made me think about that, the story in short:

Met a girl in a club, made out with her, she didn't want to go home with me but agreed to meet up a few days later. On the date, we ended up at my place and at first she didn't want to sleep with me. I told her that I just broke up and didn't want a relationship now anyway, and then we ended up having sex.

The interesting thing was that, when I asked her, she explained her reasons:
She didn't have sex with me the first night we met because I look like the relationship type of guy (she said I have a 'nice face') and seemed to her fairly intelligent, and therefore qualified as 'boyfriend material' (the old story of withholding sex to get a guy to commit). I asked her if she had slept with me if I was stupid, and she said yes (because if she had found me just physically attractive, there would have been no other 'use' for me than having a ONS)

So, the questions for me:
If I'm just interested in sex, should I seriously pretend to be stupid and uncaring, or what?
If women always put me in the relationship category, what can I do to change that?
Or can't I change that because its about whether my face looks soft or masculine?

So she basically says this:
- You are hot and smart, I want you as my boyfriend.
- If you were just hot and stupid, she would have just fucked you.

I wouldn't take this so personal. Maybe she was just looking for a boyfriend at that time. In the end, I think women are ALWAYS going to value relationships and commit a lot more then men.

(04-17-2011 04:22 AM)Mark Wrote:  Again, I think there's something to this, but I think it's a spectrum. It's not an either/or type thing. And that spectrum shifts not only by how you look and behave, but by her mood, what she's looking for, what time of the month it is, etc.

Thinking about how I view girls, its actually the same: there are girls I just find hot and girls I can imagine having a relationship with. But it really is a spectrum and not categories.

The difference to how girls view it (or at least this particular girl did) is that I would want to have sex first in any case.

I think there's an easy logical pitfall to fall into here as well.

When you're not as experienced, it's easy to take feedback from one girl and try to extrapolate from that how all women think.

I mean, scientifically, if you interviewed one girl on how she perceived something, that's not a complete study. You have to interview hundreds and average out their responses. I think lesser experienced guys, if you've only been with like 6 girls, then if one tells you something significant, it's easy to assume that a LOT of women think that way. But if you've been with 150 girls, and one says something significant, but you've had 10 others in the past say the opposite, and 10 others say something totally different, then you figure it's just her opinion and how she sees things.

Hopefully, that helps explain where I'm coming from.

One of my biggest pet peeves with this industry is to try to put people/women into black/white categories about this stuff. Humans are incredibly complex... not to mention women are VERY complex. She may say that one week and two weeks later say the complete opposite and absolutely mean it both times.

"it's easy to take feedback from one girl and try to extrapolate from that how all women think."

however, in this case it is mostly true.

1. most girls either immediately put you as potential fuck material, or friendly only material. the ladder theory is not a joke, it is true.

it's easy to take feedback from one girl and try to extrapolate from that how all women think.

2. even with the potential fuck category, most girls will either label you as a fling option if you are "dangerous", or as boyfriend material if you are "kind".

Rivelino: I'm not saying the fuck/friend material, or the sex/relationship material categories don't exist in some form. I'm only saying that it's often not a black and white thing (well, with fuck/friend is, but we're talking about sex/relationship). The sex/relationship thing is going to have as much to do with her preferences and where she is emotionally as it is with how you're presenting yourself. Like I said, I do think there's something to be said about "provider" type attraction and "lover" type attraction, but generally, it's not an all or nothing thing. Generally, there's going to some of both going on.

I was just telling him that just because one girl says, "I saw you as relationship material at first," doesn't mean every girl sees him that way. And to not get too worried about it.