(War on Women) NYC: 10 hours of Harassment or Compliments?

[Rothbardian Girl]

You're wrong, a lot of women like getting that type of attention. That's just how it is, take it up with them. It may be a minority of women, they may not like EVERY guy cat calling them, but that may be their preferred method of pickup from people who they find attractive because it shows initiative, which is something they find attractive.

Sadly, none of what you just typed contradicts my point. I said that the fact that a woman gives out her phone number doesn't necessarily imply that she enjoyed the interaction. The women you are talking about are a subset of a larger group, but again, this doesn't contradict what I have said. My thoughts on this subset are that although I personally don't know anyone who prefers being catcalled to being interacted with in other situations, I am willing to grant for the sake of argument that they exist, but this sort of preference seems sort of illogical, given that there are far more superior ways of interacting with people who find you attractive (that don't involve potential danger, aren't inherently random and aren't potentially bothersome).

[Philhelm]

Nor does giving a phone number, assuming it's not made-up, necessarily mean the woman actually approved of being catcalled - I've given my number out plenty of times and then ignored any texts or calls (not to catcallers, but in analogous situations). This isn't "mixed signals," this is how to get rid of someone bothersome literally without coming off as "too mean" for a woman (see, even I feel the pressure to act based on stereotypes!).

Actually, this seems more like something a jerk would do, male or female.

[Philhelm]

gay guys can be considered Alpha males....

This is true, although obviously there is a different dynamic in the mating ritual.

[Brian4Liberty]

Thanks! I seriously LOLed on that one.

[jmdrake]

Again, you can't just assume that women like it because it works. If a woman gives in as a defense mechanism, that most certainly doesn't mean she likes the tactic. Nor does giving a phone number, assuming it's not made-up, necessarily mean the woman actually approved of being catcalled - I've given my number out plenty of times and then ignored any texts or calls (not to catcallers, but in analogous situations). This isn't "mixed signals," this is how to get rid of someone bothersome literally without coming off as "too mean" for a woman (see, even I feel the pressure to act based on stereotypes!). There's also the completely separate issue of some men drastically misreading intentions in the first place. The fact remains that catcalling specifically has a really low success rate.

By "working" I mean guys end up sleeping with their targets. It might not work all the time, but it works enough of the time for guys to keep trying it. You aren't every woman and you don't know what every woman likes or doesn't like. Again think "Nigerian emails". There's no way in hell that scam should have ever worked let alone still work. And yet....people still fall for it. Here's a homeless guy making cat calls work for him.



Now maybe it's all fake and all these women were actors. Then again...maybe not.

[dannno]

Sadly, none of what you just typed contradicts my point. I said that the fact that a woman gives out her phone number doesn't necessarily imply that she enjoyed the interaction. The women you are talking about are a subset of a larger group, but again, this doesn't contradict what I have said. My thoughts on this subset are that although I personally don't know anyone who prefers being catcalled to being interacted with in other situations, I am willing to grant for the sake of argument that they exist, but this sort of preference seems sort of illogical, given that there are far more superior ways of interacting with people who find you attractive (that don't involve potential danger, aren't inherently random and aren't potentially bothersome).

I said the fact that a woman gives her phone number out is not what I equate to 'success'. Success would be a cat call, followed by a civil conversation, that leads to sex whether a phone number is exchanged or not.

Cat calling in itself is not dangerous, and I don't really care if people are 'bothered' by things, just do what you can to avoid them as best you can. People will always bother other people, and men have the right to talk to women randomly if they want. I think people that judge them for hitting on women that they perceive as more attractive and thus 'above them' are superficial.

[Rothbardian Girl]

Actually, this seems more like something a jerk would do, male or female.

It may be jerky behavior, but it's passive jerky behavior and has the effect of putting off any negative reactions until later. The short-term consequences of refusing to give a phone number out (awkwardness at best, violence at worst) are much more severe to me than not being around to witness someone's disappointment at my lack of further contact. I will say, while I'm in a confessional mood, that I think I can sometimes be an awkward person and so I'm hyper-sensitive to anything that would make me seem weird, such as refusing to give out a number even if I did enjoy any conversation leading up to the request. I chat most of the time to be friendly, not because I'm looking for anything else from that interaction.

[Brian4Liberty]

In fact if you are very attractive (I wouldn't put this actress in the very attractive category), most decent men aren't going to hit on you even if you want them to, and even if the situation is "appropriate".

Very good point. Some people in this thread have claimed that the woman in the video was not really even attractive. That's the point. She was more accessible, more in their league. And from all indications, she had a big booty in tight pants. IIRC, some studies have shown that to be a magnet for that kind of attention, especially if the face isn't super-model.

I was at a tech conference one time where some idiot had hired two models as his "booth bunnies". Far too attractive. Some other booth had a cute, but more average girl with a friendly disposition. Guess which booth had nearly zero people, and which one had a constant crowd?

LOL. As a black man living in Tennessee right after Obama got elected I had white people coming up to me and giving me high fives and saying "We did it!" Not sure what that's supposed to mean.

Did you respond with "What? Did Ron Paul win?!"

[Deborah K]

By "working" I mean guys end up sleeping with their targets. It might not work all the time, but it works enough of the time for guys to keep trying it. You aren't every woman and you don't know what every woman likes or doesn't like. Again think "Nigerian emails". There's no way in hell that scam should have ever worked let alone still work. And yet....people still fall for it. Here's a homeless guy making cat calls work for him.



Now maybe it's all fake and all these women were actors. Then again...maybe not.

He's an addict. That's really sad.

[jmdrake]

Very good point. Some people in this thread have claimed that the woman in the video was not really even attractive. That's the point. She was more accessible, more in their league. And from all indications, she had a big booty in tight pants. IIRC, some studies have shown that to be a magnet for that kind of attention, especially if the face isn't super-model.

I was at a tech conference one time where some idiot had hired two models as his "booth bunnies". Far too attractive. Some other booth had a cute, but more average girl with a friendly disposition. Guess which booth had nearly zero people, and which one had a constant crowd?

Yeah. The one time I went to COMDEX I actually tried to talk to a couple of "booth bunnies" about their products. They were clueless. Oh well.

Did you respond with "What? Did Ron Paul win?!"

LOL. I wish I'd thought of that. Maybe if Rand Paul wins I'll go to the liberal part of town, walk around and hive five white people and say "We did it!"

[jmdrake]

He's an addict. That's really sad.

Yeah. Homelessness is sad all around whatever the reason.

[PaulConventionWV]

Sadly, none of what you just typed contradicts my point. I said that the fact that a woman gives out her phone number doesn't necessarily imply that she enjoyed the interaction. The women you are talking about are a subset of a larger group, but again, this doesn't contradict what I have said. My thoughts on this subset are that although I personally don't know anyone who prefers being catcalled to being interacted with in other situations, I am willing to grant for the sake of argument that they exist, but this sort of preference seems sort of illogical, given that there are far more superior ways of interacting with people who find you attractive (that don't involve potential danger, aren't inherently random and aren't potentially bothersome).

You know, some people actually believe in love at first sight, and cat-calling is really just an extension of that. While it can often be jerkish and rude behavior (construction workers doing it just for kicks), sometimes people just feel the need to catch up with someone and learn more about them before they're lost forever in the endless throng of faces.

[PaulConventionWV]

Yeah. The one time I went to COMDEX I actually tried to talk to a couple of "booth bunnies" about their products. They were clueless. Oh well.




LOL. I wish I'd thought of that. Maybe if Rand Paul wins I'll go to the liberal part of town, walk around and hive five white people and say "We did it!"

Lol. They'll say, "What? Did Hillary win?"

[pessimist]

You are describing $#@!s.

Many embody the "alpha male" archetype.

Granted, sometimes $#@!s can be alpha, but that isn't a requirement.

Most dudes who fancy themselves as "alpha males" likely scare the living $#@! out the average woman. Women are generally not impressed with two roided out freaks smashing each other in the face, or rolling on the ground half naked. Typically that violent homoerotic imagery tends to be way more impressive to men.

It is MEN who tend to be drawn to the alpha male types. It is men who admire the 'physically powerful' male, and often judge other men's bodies.

Those types do get laid a lot though, but they tend to draw low class women; the porn stars, the "aspiring actresses", the women with low self-esteems and low intelligence.

Also, a man does not need to have high physical strength or good looks in order to be alpha, since it's primarily mental, although those traits can certainly help

With all due respect, your constant referring to "good looking, Alpha male studs" and your "intelligent, smart, funny guys are totally beta" seemed to imply something else. It seemed like you were focused more on the physical and primal rather than the mental.

I think it's more of a case in which men who are physically imposing, or are attractive and used to being validated by women's acceptance, naturally tend to be more confident.

I definitely agree that they tend to be more 'confident' but don't you think some of these physically imposing alpha studs can sometimes scare off women, thus having the opposite effect? You know, not all women are impressed by large dominate men. We are not in the jungle anymore.

Also, women want to be dominated (please note: not abused)

You lost me here.

In fact, women constantly test men in order to ensure their fitness as a leader, protector, and provider.

Well, my ex wanted to be the leader and we shared the financial responsibilities, but I guess I was kind of the 'protector'. Anyway, I don't know how accurate this is outside of tribal communities, but I do understand what you're implying here.

This is why women sometimes act like spoiled children or creat conflict seemingly out of nowhere. Failure to pass these tests often results in a dead bedroom situation and/or divorce. A woman does not want to wear the pants.

You know, from my observation, a lot of failed marriages occur because of incompatible personalities. The man is unable to meet the emotional needs/stimulation that his wife requires, and she disregards his physical needs.The results? Infidelity, divorce, and unhappy marriages.

[juleswin]

To the person who gave me a -rep and a very aggressive message, I think you just harassed me. Which professional victim campaigner would take up my cause? I seriously cannot live any longer having to deal with first world problem such as this.


Please this is not me trying to get sympathy reps, the -repper rep power only made a slight dent to my overall rating.

[Carlybee]

http://cheezburger.com/65728513

10 hours of walking in New York as a man

[Philhelm]

Most dudes who fancy themselves as "alpha males" likely scare the living $#@! out the average woman. Women are generally not impressed with two roided out freaks smashing each other in the face, or rolling on the ground half naked. Typically that violent homoerotic imagery tends to be way more impressive to men.

Again, you are describing $#@!s that may or may not be alpha. Judging from your comments and given the two pictures you posted earlier, we are definitely not on the same page. Sure, a gym rat that goes around calling people "brah" could possibly be alpha, but a lack of muscles does not preclude an alpha mindset.

It is MEN who tend to be drawn to the alpha male types. It is men who admire the 'physically powerful' male, and often judge other men's bodies. Those types do get laid a lot though, but they tend to draw low class women; the porn stars, the "aspiring actresses", the women with low self-esteems and low intelligence.

Okay, we're still not on the same page. But even your examples would be more succesful than a limp-wristed Starbucks patron with thick-rimmed glasses and high sensitivity.

With all due respect, your constant referring to "good looking, Alpha male studs" and your "intelligent, smart, funny guys are totally beta" seemed to imply something else. It seemed like you were focused more on the physical and primal rather than the mental.

First, I never stated that being intelligent, smart, or funny are Beta traits. In fact, the most capable Alphas would be highly intelligent. My point is that these traits alone won't get the dripping wet panties dropping; after all, there are plenty of smart and funny men that have bad luck with the ladies. Regarding the physical attributes, being handsome and well-built are Alpha traits, but all men have a combination of Alpha/Beta traits; being handsome and muscular alone does not make a man alpha. They are simply bonuses, although they can sometimes be enough to get laid.

I definitely agree that they tend to be more 'confident' but don't you think some of these physically imposing alpha studs can sometimes scare off women, thus having the opposite effect? You know, not all women are impressed by large dominate men. We are not in the jungle anymore.

This would depend on circumstance and the man's interaction. If a hugely built guy were to follow a woman in a parking lot at midnight without saying a word, then she would probably be a bit scared. But if the same man were to approach her at a party and start gaming her with confidence, her panties might get moist.

You lost me here.

Women want to be dominated. They want the man to lead. In fact, my wife point-blank tells me this sometimes when we discuss something as simple as where we want to go to eat. It took me awhile to realize that she wants me to just decide something and let me lead the way. If a woman is with a man that can't take the lead she loses confidence in him; she may take the lead out of necessity, but she does not want to be in that position. Bossy women are bossy because they think they have to be, since the men that should be leading are weak.

Well, my ex wanted to be the leader and we shared the financial responsibilities, but I guess I was kind of the 'protector'. Anyway, I don't know how accurate this is outside of tribal communities, but I do understand what you're implying here.

Regarding "tribal communities," sexual desire is primal, despite the so-called sophistication of Western society. A woman will intellectually decide to date/marry a Beta if he can be a good provider, but she isn't going to have the same sexual passion with him that she would otherwise have with an Alpah male. I guarantee that your ex did not want to be the leader. In fact, you had stated in another thread that you consider yourself to have feminine traits, so I imagine that you failed to take the lead forcing her to take the reigns. It's no surprise that she is your ex. If you shared financial responsibilies but weren't designated as the leader, you were likely playing the "Beta Bucks" role.

You know, from my observation, a lot of failed marriages occur because of incompatible personalities. The man is unable to meet the emotional needs/stimulation that his wife requires, and she disregards his physical needs.The results? Infidelity, divorce, and unhappy marriages.

Ding! Ding! Ding! Even Alphas can fall into a Beta role. Women will get bored of the man if he can no longer prove that he is the leader, or if he is unable to stimulate her sexual desires. Women are far more likely to leave a marriage than a man (although part of that is due to divorce rape). Being Beta simply does not make a woman's vagina tingle with desire.

[pessimist]

Again, you are describing $#@!s that may or may not be alpha. Judging from your comments and given the two pictures you posted earlier, we are definitely not on the same page. Sure, a gym rat that goes around calling people "brah" could possibly be alpha, but a lack of muscles does not preclude an alpha mindset.

Okay, I obviously have a completely different image in mind, but most of the guys who are self-proclaimed alphas tend to fit that description.

Would you consider a tall good looking guy with a high IQ, who cried during the Notebook, likes romantic dinners, walks on the beach, and cooks his wife breakfast every morning to be alpha?

Okay, we're still not on the same page. But even your examples would be more succesful than a limp-wristed Starbucks patron with thick-rimmed glasses and high sensitivity.

It depends on the type of woman. The nerdy Starbucks patron just might be a Harvard grad with a big bank account, and a well developed sense of humor who can relate to women. In that example, I don't think HE would want the women that would be attracted to the aforementioned "alpha's."

Sex as a conquest usually doesn't interest those types anyway.

First, I never stated that being intelligent, smart, or funny are Beta traits.

Well, you certainly were giving off that impression.

My point is that these traits alone won't get the dripping wet panties dropping;

A hot guy can get a chicks "panties wet" the moment he walks into a room. What the hell does 'alpha' or 'beta' have to do with anything?

after all, there are plenty of smart and funny men that have bad luck with the ladies.

Agreed. But this is true of every type of man out there. A smart and funny guy who is sensitive and listens and communicates will probably be more appealing than the loudmouth, beer-guzzling bro with a roofie in his pocket.

Good looking, physically fit guys can probably get laid at will, but can they all hold a relationship?

Is Bill Gates an alpha in your opinion?

Ding! Ding! Ding! Even Alphas can fall into a Beta role. Women will get bored of the man if he can no longer prove that he is the leader, or if he is unable to stimulate her sexual desires. Women are far more likely to leave a marriage than a man (although part of that is due to divorce rape). Being Beta simply does not make a woman's vagina tingle with desire.

I am not talking about HER sexual needs. I am talking her EMOTIONAL needs. Many wives feel lonely and neglected; there is no communication or mental stimulation or excitement.

So they look elsewhere to get it or lash out at their husbands in other ways to express their frustration. Women are generally more subtle.

Men, unable to adequately provide those type of needs, are rejected from their physical ones (sex) from their wives.

[Philhelm]

Okay, I obviously have a completely different image in mind, but most of the guys who are self-proclaimed alphas tend to fit that description.

A real Alpha won't go around talking about how Alpha he is.

Would you consider a tall good looking guy with a high IQ, who cried during the Notebook, likes romantic dinners, walk on the beaches, and cooks his wife breakfast every morning to be alpha?

If he acts as an emotional tampon for his woman, then he probably leans toward Beta, although as stated before, men can have traits from both spectrums. Also, when it comes to long-term relationships it's actually bad to be too Alpha all the time.

It depends on the type of woman. The nerdy Starbuck patron just might be a Harvard grad, with a big bank account, and a well-developed sense of humor who can relate to women. In that example, I don't think HE would want the women that would be attracted to the aforementioned "alpha's."

Alpha $#@!s/Beta Bucks. Money can attract women to commit to a relationship, but it doesn't get their vaginas tingling. This is where the stereotype of the doctor's wife having an affair with the pool buy comes into the picture.

Sex as a conquest usually doesn't interest those types anyway.

Sex is sex; the "conquest" element is somewhat irrelevant.

A hot guy can get a chicks "panties wet" the moment he walks into a room. What the hell does 'alpha' or 'beta' have to do with anything?

Well sure, but once he opens his mouth and comes across as weak, then he will lose estimation. Remember, even Betas can and do get laid, it's just that the Beta traits limit the number/quality of women that are obtainable. The hot, confident man will be much, much more successful than the hot, unconfident man. Even if the hot unconfident man can make it into the sack with the woman, he will have a hard time keeping her interest for a long-term relationship.

Agreed. But this is true of every type of man out there. A smart and funny guy who is sensitive and listens and communicates will probably be more appealing that the loud-mouth, beer-guzzling bro with a roofie in his pocket.

Dammit man, Alpha doesn't mean loud-mouthed, beer-guzzling bro with a roofie in his pocket. For example, a Liam Neeson character would be a good example of a non-$#@! Alpha, since his characters tend to be confident and have a fatherly authoritative aura, but he does not run around crushing beers on his head.

Good looking, physically fit guys can probably get laid at will, but can they all hold a relationship?

They can hold a relationship if they aren't doormats.

Is Bill Gates an alpha in your opinion?

I've read that his real personality is much different from the geek persona that most people think of him. He supposedly fostered competition and was pretty ruthless, so he may very well be an Alpha.

I am not talking about HER sexual needs. I am talking her EMOTIONAL needs. Many wives feel lonely and neglected; there is no communication or mental stimulation or excitement.

If a woman is simply neglected, even from an Alpha, she won't be happy. An alpha needs to be able to stimulate the woman emotionally, but can't become too sensitive lest he loses respect.[/quote]

[pessimist]

If he acts as an emotional tampon for his woman, then he probably leans toward Beta, although as stated before, men can have traits from both spectrums. Also, when it comes to long-term relationships it's actually bad to be too Alpha all the time.

If you observe long lasting relationships (I am talking 30+ years here)- you will notice that those couples have developed into an almost brother-sister type of relationship. Hell, many of them even start to look alike. They are so comfortable and content and familiar with each other that they have no desire to seek stimulation elsewhere.

This has nothing to do with 'alpha' or 'beta' or any of that nonsense, it has to do with compatibility. The fact is, a lot people discover that they were just in a relationship or married to the wrong person.

Alpha $#@!s/Beta Bucks. Money can attract women to commit to a relationship, but it doesn't get their vaginas tingling. This is where the stereotype of the doctor's wife having an affair with the pool buy comes into the picture.

So what? If the "beta" guy is in a content relationship, and his wife or girlfriend have great chemistry and conversation and connect on an intimate level- who gives a $#@! is she is turned on by hot guys? That is human nature. Hot and sexy people tend to kick the hormones into gear.

That doesn't mean she is going to cheat on him.

Sex is sex; the "conquest" element is somewhat irrelevant.

Sex with intimacy is vastly different from banging some drunk chick in back of your car and bragging to your friends about it.

Well sure, but once he opens his mouth and comes across as weak, then he will lose estimation. Remember, even Betas can and do get laid, it's just that the Beta traits limit the number/quality of women that are obtainable. The hot, confident man will be much, much more successful than the hot, unconfident man. Even if the hot unconfident man can make it into the sack with the woman, he will have a hard time keeping her interest for a long-term relationship.

I think relationships are more about compatibility than anything else. I can't buy into this alpha/beta stuff.

If a woman wants to be "dominated", she'll seek out the guy that will "dominate" her. If a woman wants a partner, she'll seek out a partner, etc. Same goes for the men. We just have a different perception of humanity and relationships.

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

She's rejecting the idle, unemployed, fat, invalid, students, and Haile Selassie? It's obvious she deserves so much more with her attitude.

[jonhowe]

The worst that this guy in the video can be accused of is being impolite and socially awkward.

I told myself I would not come back to this thread. But I did. And I read this.

I regret coming back to this thread.







PaulConventionWV, you and I must live in different worlds, or different times, or different planets; this is not the 1st (or the 2nd/3rd/10th/17th) time we've fundamentally disagreed on an issue. I can't figure it out. But ESPECIALLY on this issue. I know you don't "hate women" or "wage war on women", in fact I can tell you're a decent/nice guy who I'd probably get along with if no serious discussions ever came up.

But yet you CLEARLY do not understand how this phenomenon affects the women it does. It's not an issue in your area; I totally understand that. It was not an issue in rural Western MA where I grew up either. Or in Long Island where I went to school. But it IS an issue here, in New York. It was an issue in Park Slope when I lived there, in the Upper East Side (think: "The Met") where I lived later (and now work), and it is CERTAINLY an issue here in Washington Heights. Partly this comes from "urban living", partly from the melting pot effect, partly because it's a thing New Yorkers traditionally "do"... but mostly because we (men/women/children/other) put up with it! YOU put up with it. You don't even see it as an issue!! You think the guy was "just walking". PLEASE tell me you're just playing dense and don't actually think that; I know you arent stupid! But if you STILL think that, YOU ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM!

[PRB]

She's rejecting the idle, unemployed, fat, invalid, students, and Haile Selassie? It's obvious she deserves so much more with her attitude.

ok, now I have to watch the video again.

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

ok, now I have to watch the video again.

"Hey, looky there. I just found a thousand dollars."


I don't know who was funnier. Mister purple or the guy who thought he was ugly.

[acptulsa]

My thoughts on this subset are that although I personally don't know anyone who prefers being catcalled to being interacted with in other situations, I am willing to grant for the sake of argument that they exist, but this sort of preference seems sort of illogical, given that there are far more superior ways of interacting with people who find you attractive (that don't involve potential danger, aren't inherently random and aren't potentially bothersome).

And I still say this 'war on women' isn't being waged by men. It's women who encourage a certain type of behavior being subjected to massive, highly organized peer pressure by other women.

With all due respect, your constant referring to "good looking, Alpha male studs" and your "intelligent, smart, funny guys are totally beta" seemed to imply something else. It seemed like you were focused more on the physical and primal rather than the mental.

I definitely agree that they tend to be more 'confident' but don't you think some of these physically imposing alpha studs can sometimes scare off women, thus having the opposite effect? You know, not all women are impressed by large dominate men. We are not in the jungle anymore.

With all due respect, you're focusing on the physical, too.

Not long ago, I saw a guy at a convenience store. He had no shirt on, yelled 'Fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuck!' four or five times, and was accosting people for a gas can and/or a ride because he had stupidly run himself out of gas. He went into the store with no shirt; I was back out by then and don't know if they kicked him back out or took his gas money just to get rid of him. But I do know that a cute little petite thing was smiling at him and laughing at his Tourettes outbursts, and when he asked her for a ride she gave him one.

I don't know what happened to her, but I assume it wasn't anything she didn't want to happen.

'Alpha' can mean knows no fear, or it can mean covers fear up well. Alphas do something even if its wrong, and shrug off--or pretend to--all criticism. It has nothing to do with their appearance at all. And every woman responds to that at least to some degree.

I guess in an overly safe, idiotproof world, that sort of psychosis stands in for the true courage that we never seem to get a chance to display any more. It seems we can take humans out of the jungle, but it's a bit more difficult to take the jungle out of humans--especially when it comes to purely instinctual things like sex appeal. Leave it to progressives and liberals to try to change something like that.

I'm glad I'm a libertarian and not honor bound to engage in such windmill tilting. And liberals called Ron Paul 'quixotic'. If it takes one to know one, they're much more expert than even Ron Paul is...

[jmdrake]

I really don't feel the need to go around "policing" other men. The worst that this guy in the video can be accused of is being impolite and socially awkward.

I told myself I would not come back to this thread. But I did. And I read this.

I regret coming back to this thread.

PaulConventionWV, you and I must live in different worlds, or different times, or different planets; this is not the 1st (or the 2nd/3rd/10th/17th) time we've fundamentally disagreed on an issue. I can't figure it out. But ESPECIALLY on this issue. I know you don't "hate women" or "wage war on women", in fact I can tell you're a decent/nice guy who I'd probably get along with if no serious discussions ever came up.

But yet you CLEARLY do not understand how this phenomenon affects the women it does. It's not an issue in your area; I totally understand that. It was not an issue in rural Western MA where I grew up either. Or in Long Island where I went to school. But it IS an issue here, in New York. It was an issue in Park Slope when I lived there, in the Upper East Side (think: "The Met") where I lived later (and now work), and it is CERTAINLY an issue here in Washington Heights. Partly this comes from "urban living", partly from the melting pot effect, partly because it's a thing New Yorkers traditionally "do"... but mostly because we (men/women/children/other) put up with it! YOU put up with it. You don't even see it as an issue!! You think the guy was "just walking". PLEASE tell me you're just playing dense and don't actually think that; I know you arent stupid! But if you STILL think that, YOU ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM!

And your "solution" to this supposed "problem" is what exactly? Really there's no point in talking about a "problem" unless you have a solution. PaulConventionWV said you don't have anything to accuse this guy of. He's right. No crime was committed in that video. [b]Nothing I would want criminalized happened in that video[b]! Were some of the actions rude? Yes. Rude is another word for "impolite". Some of the actions that the drama queen wannabe actress who is the star of the video deemed "harassment" and "cat calling" were actually men being polite. Some men said "Good evening". Oh wow! How terrible of them! But let's take the dude walking beside her for 5 minutes. Rude? Yes. Socially unacceptable? Yes. Criminal? No. Violation of NAP? Debatable.

But back to the solution. I assume you have the common sense not to want any of the behavior depicted in the video criminalized. So...tell guys don't do that? Okay. I doubt any of your audience here at RPF would do that. The guys who would do that don't give a crap what you think. And why do they not give a crap? Because sometimes "cat calling" actually works. Maybe not the"follow the woman for 5 minutes" strategy, but throwing out a "My you look good" compliment to some woman on the street you've never met sometimes ends up with you and that woman in bed together. And as long as that happens, guys will keep trying it even if most of their attempts are miserable failures. In fact all of their own personal attempts might be failures. They just need to know of some other guy that it's worked for to be motivated to try it. Like this homeless pick up artist for instance.

[PaulConventionWV]

I told myself I would not come back to this thread. But I did. And I read this.

I regret coming back to this thread.







PaulConventionWV, you and I must live in different worlds, or different times, or different planets; this is not the 1st (or the 2nd/3rd/10th/17th) time we've fundamentally disagreed on an issue. I can't figure it out. But ESPECIALLY on this issue. I know you don't "hate women" or "wage war on women", in fact I can tell you're a decent/nice guy who I'd probably get along with if no serious discussions ever came up.

But yet you CLEARLY do not understand how this phenomenon affects the women it does. It's not an issue in your area; I totally understand that. It was not an issue in rural Western MA where I grew up either. Or in Long Island where I went to school. But it IS an issue here, in New York. It was an issue in Park Slope when I lived there, in the Upper East Side (think: "The Met") where I lived later (and now work), and it is CERTAINLY an issue here in Washington Heights. Partly this comes from "urban living", partly from the melting pot effect, partly because it's a thing New Yorkers traditionally "do"... but mostly because we (men/women/children/other) put up with it! YOU put up with it. You don't even see it as an issue!! You think the guy was "just walking". PLEASE tell me you're just playing dense and don't actually think that; I know you arent stupid! But if you STILL think that, YOU ARE PART OF THE PROBLEM!

Look, I am only concerned with two things in this discussion. The woman was not acting like a normal woman would. I don't think that is up for debate. Secondly, what are we supposed to do about it?

Those are the two main things I am concerned with about this whole thing. Since the woman did not act normally, that means the video did not represent what normally happens to women while walking in the city. Also, since you seem so intent on changing my mind, what is it you want me to do about this issue that I don't already do? Tell friends, talk about it, etc... yeah, but if I already do those things, what more do you want me to do?

[PaulConventionWV]

And your "solution" to this supposed "problem" is what exactly? Really there's no point in talking about a "problem" unless you have a solution. PaulConventionWV said you don't have anything to accuse this guy of. He's right. No crime was committed in that video. [b]Nothing I would want criminalized happened in that video[b]! Were some of the actions rude? Yes. Rude is another word for "impolite". Some of the actions that the drama queen wannabe actress who is the star of the video deemed "harassment" and "cat calling" were actually men being polite. Some men said "Good evening". Oh wow! How terrible of them! But let's take the dude walking beside her for 5 minutes. Rude? Yes. Socially unacceptable? Yes. Criminal? No. Violation of NAP? Debatable.

But back to the solution. I assume you have the common sense not to want any of the behavior depicted in the video criminalized. So...tell guys don't do that? Okay. I doubt any of your audience here at RPF would do that. The guys who would do that don't give a crap what you think. And why do they not give a crap? Because sometimes "cat calling" actually works. Maybe not the"follow the woman for 5 minutes" strategy, but throwing out a "My you look good" compliment to some woman on the street you've never met sometimes ends up with you and that woman in bed together. And as long as that happens, guys will keep trying it even if most of their attempts are miserable failures. In fact all of their own personal attempts might be failures. They just need to know of some other guy that it's worked for to be motivated to try it. Like this homeless pick up artist for instance.

I wouldn't even say walking beside her being a violation of the NAP is debatable. It is NOT a violation of the NAP. It would have been IF she told him that she didn't want him there. Literally any other woman would have done that in a normal situation, but since she didn't say anything, that means this video does not represent a normal situation. It represents something else, so we can't pass judgment on the dude's behavior because the woman was an actor and she was ACTING, but he wasn't. So how can you compare interactions where one person is acting and the other isn't to a normal situation? It's NOT NORMAL.

Just so you know, though, I agree with everything else you said except that one minor point.

[PaulConventionWV]

The problem seems to be that nobody can offer a tangible solution to this problem. I have asked several times for a solution, and nobody has anything except "start a dialogue."

Okay, done. Dialogue exists. We are talking about it. Now what?

[Acala]

Okay, I obviously have a completely different image in mind, but most of the guys who are self-proclaimed alphas tend to fit that description.

Would you consider a tall good looking guy with a high IQ, who cried during the Notebook, likes romantic dinners, walks on the beach, and cooks his wife breakfast every morning to be alpha?



It depends on the type of woman. The nerdy Starbucks patron just might be a Harvard grad with a big bank account, and a well developed sense of humor who can relate to women. In that example, I don't think HE would want the women that would be attracted to the aforementioned "alpha's."

Sex as a conquest usually doesn't interest those types anyway.



Well, you certainly were giving off that impression.



A hot guy can get a chicks "panties wet" the moment he walks into a room. What the hell does 'alpha' or 'beta' have to do with anything?



Agreed. But this is true of every type of man out there. A smart and funny guy who is sensitive and listens and communicates will probably be more appealing than the loudmouth, beer-guzzling bro with a roofie in his pocket.

Good looking, physically fit guys can probably get laid at will, but can they all hold a relationship?

Is Bill Gates an alpha in your opinion?




I am not talking about HER sexual needs. I am talking her EMOTIONAL needs. Many wives feel lonely and neglected; there is no communication or mental stimulation or excitement.

So they look elsewhere to get it or lash out at their husbands in other ways to express their frustration. Women are generally more subtle.

Men, unable to adequately provide those type of needs, are rejected from their physical ones (sex) from their wives.

Philhelm is trying to give you some really good advice. Women respond to confidence. There are evolutionary reasons for this but we will skip it for now. It has nothing to do with looks or strength or "macho" behavior or any of the other things you would like to connect it with. It is all about attitude. And not the attitude of the braggart. Rather, it is the attitude of the man who is captain of his own ship, content with his own life as it is (with or without the woman in question), and who is unwilling to change his course to try to "win" the woman. Women don't really want you to accommodate them. They want you to be in charge of your own life. And because they know you are in charge and do not feel that they can control you, when you show concern for their needs and feelings, it means ten times MORE to them. Bring a woman flowers every day and within two weeks she will be disgusted. Bring her flowers when she does not expect it and you will make her day. Or week.

When a woman feels that you will accommodate her every whim because you think that will win her affection, welcome to the friend zone. On the other hand, when a woman thinks you could just as easily walk out the door and never look back, but instead you stay and concern yourself with her happiness, THAT is the win. For BOTH of you.

The key is to really know, deep down, that you don't need acceptance or approval or affection from any woman and that you would rather live your life alone than tolerate any disrespect or have to jump through hoops. Be confident that just being with you and having your attention is enough for any woman worth having. If you have this down for real, then you can be the nice guy you really want to be. Being a nice guy without this attitude is slow death.

Somewhere in the archives there is a long thread on this.