The Only Guys Who Will Commit Before Sex Are The Ones You Reject

Somebody asked me recently why dating advice is so inconsistent. I told them that it was because most dating advice lacks objectivity. I’ve said this funny-online-dating-experiencebefore.

Today this popped up in my Twitter stream. Now, I’ve spoken of my regard for Evan in the past. He’s got more passion and authenticity than most folks in the dating advice niche. But this piece ruffled my feathers.

It affirms everything that I’ve ever written about sex and gender in a very logical, concrete manner. In short, women teach men how to treat them. And if, due to equality, birth-control, libido, societal acceptance, and insecurity, many women are willing to have sex with men who don’t call, pay, commit, or make an effort, then those women are essentially teaching men that they do not have to behave well to procure sex.

You want to find out if a man is serious about you? Wait to have sex with him. If you don’t – because you’re a liberated woman who can have sex whenever you damn well please – don’t be too surprised if a decent percentage of those men never call again. Again, I’m not remotely judgmental of those who have sex without commitment; I will only point out as a dating coach that it tends to lead to sub-optimal results from men because they didn’t have to do anything special to get into bed with you.

Note: there will be no comments about slut-shaming, since no one is shaming anyone, nor calling anyone a slut. Nor will there be comments about how you slept with your boyfriend on the first date and he became your husband. The many exceptions don’t disprove the rule that giving men sex without demanding better treatment is not the best idea.

 

Well, yeah. If a guy does absolutely nothing in the way of effort, he’s never going to commit and doesn’t value you in any capacity. But the signs that he isn’t going to stick around are there. The sex isn’t why he’s not committing. He was never going to commit.

Here’s the tricky part about this sort of instruction. The men who will commit without having sex are typically the men that women regularly reject. There’s another caveat to this advice and it never, ever gets included when people dole this particular wisdom out. That would be that women should plan on demonstrating interest in another way, including paying for dates, if they are going to hold off on having sex. The way most of this advice is structured, women are led to believe that they can do nothing and still get what she wants. The onus is put on the man to prove himself.  This is why so many women take this advice and come up empty handed.

Dating advice panders to the audience. Often the message is, “You’re the prize, ladies. Make him earn it.” Rarely does it consider or offer both sides. Nobody tells women that they’ll probably have to lower their standards if they hold off having sex until commitment is offered. Nobody tells women they’ll probably have to extend themselves beyond their comfort zone in any way to get that more desirable guy to commit. All that is said to them is that there’s this unicorn of a man who will wait for them.

Maybe if these women are 25 or 30 they’ll have an easier time if they employ this approach. But 35, 40, 45 and older? Come on. Most of the men that women ages 35+ are pursuing have already been married or have their kids or have multiple options. Or they’ve never married by choice.  They are in demand. These men need to see something really special in a woman to make them want to give all that up. Especially if sex isn’t on the table. Women don’t have to sleep with these men, but they do have to their own hoop jumping to do.

But nobody ever tells them that.

 

 

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...
Share
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

103 Responses to “The Only Guys Who Will Commit Before Sex Are The Ones You Reject”

  1. LuluVuitton Says:

    I disagree with this. I’m older than most of your readers, I’m 61. I have to tell you that being older, and realistic, is not a deterrent. I joined an over-50 dating site because I believe I can realistically compete with women who are 50. But not 40…

    But I expect the men that I meet to have children and grandchildren, and to have been married before. If they are single at this age, I see this as a red flag. Also, any man who lists his preferred age range as being 45+, I just delete.

    I just need to say that if you are 40 or 45, don’t think that you have to settle any more than you did in your 20’s. That is absolutely false! Now it might be that you believed that you had more options in your 20’s and 30’s, but the truth is that it has ALWAYS been hard and competitive.

    It’s true that men who are 45 might want to date/marry a woman in her 20’s. But when you were in your 20’s, didn’t you think that men in their 40’s were kind of creepy and had too much baggage?

    And as for these guys who quote Roosh, etc., they are just bitter because they can’t land a girl that they adore. They hate women because they are rejected by women who believe that a man with an STD is gross. Their advice is ridiculous for women who want a more traditional life with family, and values and substance.

    Anyway, no worries. At 61, I am doing just fine on the dating scene.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 130 Thumb down 73

    Reply

    • ATWYSingle Says:

      You’re 61 and think you can “compete” with women in their 50’s, which mean your preferred age range is, what, 50+? But if a man your age says his preferred age range is 45+, that’s a red flag and is a bad sign. What? So if a 65 year old man wants a 45 year old, he’s a letch. But if you want a 45-50 year old, you’re not?

      The premise of the article is about withholding sex until commitment. I don’t know that men in their sixties place the same kind of importance on sex as men in their thirties and forties due to various sexual issues that come along with aging like a decline in sex drive, erectile issues, etc.

      Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 71 Thumb down 28

      Reply

    • LostSailor Says:

      Have to agree with Moxie. I’m in my early 50s and, frankly Lulu, no, you can’t realistically compete with women in their 50s. And after reading this–that it’s okay for you to prefer men up to 11 years your junior, a man who professes a preference for the same age range and prefers 45+ are out–it’s probably a good thing.

      Sorry, dear, you’re not even on my radar. Women over 60 might have too much baggage.

      If they are single at this age, I see this as a red flag.

      Um, unless you are a homewrecker dating married men, by definition the men you are looking to date are “single at this age.”

      I just need to say that if you are 40 or 45, don’t think that you have to settle any more than you did in your 20′s. That is absolutely false!

      Not this again. At least it proves that delusion can persist to almost any age. Again, by definition, if you are in a relationship with someone, you have “settled” because you aren’t out dating anymore. QED. Of course, with this attitude, I can see why Lulu is single at 61.

      Attitudes like this are inherently unattractive…

      Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 54 Thumb down 49

      Reply

      • Lisa Says:

        Lulu didn’t say she wants men who are 50. She says she can compete w/ women who are 50…who who would be attracting men of various ages, including, but not limited to, 60somethings.

        Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 57 Thumb down 15

        Reply

        • mindstar Says:

          Just because she thinks she can compete with younger women doesn’t make it so.

          Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 30 Thumb down 26

          Reply

          • Lisa Says:

            That’s not the point. She stated her opinion and ppl were twisting her words and misquoting her. That’s all.

            Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 46 Thumb down 13

            Reply

        • LostSailor Says:

          She joined an “over-50″ dating site because she thinks she can compete with women in their 50s.

          Just who do you think women in their 50s are looking to date that Lulu is competing for? Are women in their 50s competing with Lulu for men in their 60s? Yeah, right.

          No one was twisting her words…

          Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 18 Thumb down 14

          Reply

          • Lisa Says:

            Yes, it could be men in their 60s. Isn’t the belief around here men want to go 5-10 yrs younger? So maybe a spry, youthful Lulu gets a 60 yr old instead of the 65 or 70 yr old she would normally…relegate to.

            Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 14 Thumb down 9

            Reply

          • LostSailor Says:

            I suppose it could be she’s competing with women in their 50s for men in their 60s. I’m not a woman in her 50s, so I suppose I’ll have to rely on some of those women to tell us that they’re going after the over-60 crowd. I kinda doubt it, but maybe they consider retirement benefits sexy…

            Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 12 Thumb down 6

            Reply

      • C Says:

        “If they are single at this age, I see this as a red flag.

        Um, unless you are a homewrecker dating married men, by definition the men you are looking to date are “single at this age.”

        ——————
        Come now. You know what she means. She considers having never been married by later middle age a red flag. Some folks do.

        “I just need to say that if you are 40 or 45, don’t think that you have to settle any more than you did in your 20′s. That is absolutely false!

        Again, by definition, if you are in a relationship with someone, you have “settled” because you aren’t out dating anymore. QED.

        ———————-
        I hope this is just a play on simantics because you didnt like Lulu’s general tone, and you dont really consider yourself as “settling for” the girl you are in a relationship with. Maybe its just me, but is dating really all that magical for other folks that they want to do it forever? Sitting across from one stranger after another thinking, “No. Next!” “No. Next!” “No. Next!” Or in turn having them say, “No. Next!” to me. Blah.

        Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 23 Thumb down 6

        Reply

        • LostSailor Says:

          Nope, completely serious about the “No Settling!!” mentality. It’s not that people want to date “forever.” It’s just an application of opportunity cost.

          The idea that in your 40s you don’t “have to settle any more than you did in your 20s” is why people are still single in their 40s (or 30s). People who have the “no settling” mentality are unwilling to accept opportunity cost. Even if they do get into a relationship, they are poor bets for a partner because in the back of their mind they’ll still be thinking that they’ve “settled” and there still might be someone better out there.

          If a person really wants a solid relationship, they must be willing to pay the opportunity cost and accept that while there might be someone “better” out there, they’re going to be “settling” for something that might just be damn good.

          So, yes, by getting into a relationship one is by definition settling. It’s not about accepting some schlub because he’s there, it’s about giving up the fantasy “perfect partner” that lives in your head…

          Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 62 Thumb down 7

          Reply

          • C Says:

            Ah gotcha. That makes sense.

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1

            Reply

          • Lola Says:

            Right in target !!!! We all have this “fantasy” person in our heads who is just perfect in all ways that matter. While this person is alive and well (in our heads, of course)… We will be single

            Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 1

            Reply

    • Sexcapades Says:

      I agree with you Girl! Age makes no difference! But should you still make a man commit before having sex with him? We’re thinking…. no way! Party on!

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 6

      Reply

  2. Speed Says:

    I can’t see how “commitment before sex” would work, at least in the Western world. For me (a relationship-oriented guy), if a woman wants to delay sex, I assume she’s (A) just not interested me (B) trying to tame/manage/ control me (C) has a sexual hangup or dislikes sex (D) something else. Anyway, if nothing’s happening beyond 3-4 dates (and I think that is being generous, frankly), I move on.

    I couldn’t commit to a woman until I know we have at least some sexual compatibility. And that’s probably just an excuse because, frankly, like all guys, I just like sex in itself. I don’t want it to be grudgingly rationed out to me after I say some magic words like “I want to be your boyfriend.” WTF?

    I’m not sure how “commitment before sex” even fends off players or flakes or weirdos It’s very easy for a guy to see “I love you, I want to be with you, I want to be your boyfriend” and not really mean it or to change his mind a few days/weeks later when he gets bored, gets to know the woman better, circumstances change, guy sobers up, etc. I know because I’ve done it myself. I’m guessing every guy has.

    If the woman is “totally hot,” a guy (relationship-oriented, player, flake or whatever) can agree to delay sex, but only because he anticipates the sex will be off the charts when he gets it. But even then, it doesn’t mean he’s committed. He’s just jumping through the hoops because he wants the shiny toy at the end. When he gets it, he may or may not stay, depending on many factors. I’ve done that too. Maybe every guy has.

    Also, “stopping at third base” doesn’t cut it, since we’re all over 21. If I’m thrown out rounding third, then that’s usually the end of the dating. Well, once is okay. Not two or three times. Like I said, we’re not in high school.

    Now, I can see where women don’t want to be sleeping with every guy she meets on date 1-2, and I don’t really have a solution for them. Maybe choose guys carefully.

    Okay, okay, flame away!

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 75 Thumb down 48

    Reply

    • Nicole Says:

      “I’m not sure how “commitment before sex” even fends off players or flakes or weirdos It’s very easy for a guy to see “I love you, I want to be with you, I want to be your boyfriend” and not really mean it or to change his mind a few days/weeks later when he gets bored, gets to know the woman better, circumstances change, guy sobers up, etc.”

      This is exactly what I was thinking, and you said it really well. Evan’s standard advice is to tell men that you don’t have sex outside of a committed relationship. I’m sure there are some honest guys who will hear this and agree to wait if they’re not ready to be exclusive. But there are also plenty who realize that all they have to do to get sex is say “of course I’m not seeing anyone else!” A commitment given in that situation doesn’t mean much.

      I do agree with his advice (and Moxie’s) to look at the effort and interest a man shows. Actions speak louder than words. The guy who never plans a fun date and only texts last minute is probably not interested in more than casual sex. The guy who takes time out of his day several times a week just to meet you for ice cream and a kiss is a better bet.

      Also, I just really hate the whole idea of sex being something women use as a bargaining chip to get a boyfriend. Don’t women want sex too? If I’ve been on 3 or 4 dates with a guy, I’m either dying to get him in bed, or I’ve realized there’s no physical chemistry and there’s never going to be.

      Now, there have been times when the attraction was off the charts but I sensed that the guy wasn’t ready for anything serious with me. But in that situation, I knew my choice was to bail or to move forward and sleep with him even though he might never be my boyfriend. The whole “see if I can make him call me his girlfriend” thing is silly. I’d much rather have a man commit later when he wants too and is ready, than do it sooner just to get laid.

      Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 60 Thumb down 10

      Reply

      • fuzzilla Says:

        **Also, I just really hate the whole idea of sex being something women use as a bargaining chip to get a boyfriend. Don’t women want sex too? If I’ve been on 3 or 4 dates with a guy, I’m either dying to get him in bed, or I’ve realized there’s no physical chemistry and there’s never going to be.

        Now, there have been times when the attraction was off the charts but I sensed that the guy wasn’t ready for anything serious with me. But in that situation, I knew my choice was to bail or to move forward and sleep with him even though he might never be my boyfriend. The whole “see if I can make him call me his girlfriend” thing is silly. I’d much rather have a man commit later when he wants too and is ready, than do it sooner just to get laid.**

        Yep yep yep. I remember walking away from an off the charts attraction when I could’ve kept him around for sex but knew he didn’t want a girlfriend. Not sure if was this site leaving its fingerprints on me, but that was huge for me.

        Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 36 Thumb down 7

        Reply

        • Noquay Says:

          Yep, women want some x too. While I am not exactly the sort to put out on the first few dates, I too want to know what I am getting into under the sheets before I commit.

          Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 27 Thumb down 7

          Reply

        • Goldie Says:

          Re: **Also, I just really hate the whole idea of sex being something women use as a bargaining chip to get a boyfriend. Don’t women want sex too?

          There’s a big oxytocin theory going on over on that site. Specifically, that men and women are biologically different, in that a man can pump and dump it and forget all about it an hour later, but a woman will get mysteriously attached to the guy immediately after having sex with him. Therefore, she needs to be careful who she has sex with, since that will be the man she attaches to. Kinda like a newborn chick will attach to the first animal it sees, thinking it’s his mommy.

          As you can tell, I’m not a big supporter of this theory. I have yet to meet a woman who operates that way. Yet we’re being told that this is biology, this is how we’re wired to work, and, if we deny that, we’re right up there with the Dark Ages inquisition. Ugh, pet peeve.

          Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 31 Thumb down 9

          Reply

          • C Says:

            Someone here posted an article link that discusses how unscientific the oxytoxin theory is and that in fact the scientific community itself says nothing of the sort. Attachment and “love” are far more complicated. Theres no magic powers in the penis that automatically casts a spell on any vagina it touches.

            That said, I dont see tons of questions on this blog and elsewhere saying “I have this FWB for the last year. I’m in love. Why doesnt she want to be my girlfriend?”

            I’m not suggesting that men dont get deeply attached and women cant be calous and indifferent. The high numbers of women filing for divorce in this country suggest that women arent all that overcome by sex. It just seems like women are more likely to get attached in short term sexual relationships then men. Just my theory, but seems like men on average tend to be more devastated by the end of a marriage then women.

            Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 38 Thumb down 2

            Reply

          • Goldie Says:

            Anecdotal evidence, of course, but I’ve seen men get attached after sex. It really depends on the person IMO.

            ***Theres no magic powers in the penis that automatically casts a spell on any vagina it touches.

            This is awesome *chuckle*

            Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 1

            Reply

      • D. Says:

        There can be other explanations for why many (but not all) women get more attached after sex, aside from biology. The oxytocin thing doesn’t have to be true for the phenomenon of post-coital attachment to be real. Hell, a lot of it could be about how our culture deals with women as sexual beings. Like, an unspoken assumption that it’s “ok” to have sex within a relationship, but it’s not “ok” to do so outside of one — if you’re a woman.

        Articles like the one Moxie mentions are tricky. On the one hand, I think it’s wise to advise women not to sleep with a guy IF they are worried he’s gonna bolt on them afterwards AND if they know they’ll be bothered by that. I don’t think “commitment” is the right word, so much as “some sense that it’s going somewhere” rather than the obverse. On the other, I think advocating “No sex before commitment” is foolish for the reasons Moxie and others have said. Moreover, it can easily reinforce the notion that women “should” be pairing up with guys and are “supposed” to get attached after sex, even when you strip out the biological stuff. And that’s just bullshit.

        I know plenty of women who’ve expressed being perfectly comfortable having casual sex under the right circumstances. Even in the context of dating. The letters you see about getting attached to a FWB come from people who have tried to bullshit themselves into believing that they’re fine with a given scenario where they aren’t. Or people who don’t know when to walk away from a situation before they get hurt.

        Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 30 Thumb down 2

        Reply

        • Goldie Says:

          ***The letters you see about getting attached to a FWB come from people who have tried to bullshit themselves into believing that they’re fine with a given scenario where they aren’t. ***

          Or people who had initially agreed to the arrangement secretly hoping that the FWB will see the light and become her boyfriend or husband…

          Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 1

          Reply

    • Goldie Says:

      ***Also, “stopping at third base” doesn’t cut it, since we’re all over 21. If I’m thrown out rounding third, then that’s usually the end of the dating. Well, once is okay. Not two or three times. Like I said, we’re not in high school.

      Yea, I could never get that one. I’d read about it and say to myself, wow this is interesting, but don’t think I will try it anytime soon, just because, to me, it defies logic.

      Good news though, for those willing to follow that tactic – when the guys you date are in their 50s, then most of the time the “no sex after third base” happens naturally, as the poor dude cannot get it up. Like magic! Can’t say that it improves commitment on either side, though.

      Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 11 Thumb down 3

      Reply

      • LostSailor Says:

        Good news though, for those willing to follow that tactic

        Bad news for those who try to follow that tactic: men over 50 who have no problem getting it up won’t stand for it. So if your idea of a good time is “no sex after third base” better start trolling for out-of-shape men with ED. Good luck…

        Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 7 Thumb down 9

        Reply

        • Goldie Says:

          Oh absolutely. Heavy drinkers would be your best bet. heh heh
          Yea I didn’t mean the above comment as a slam to all men over 50. I can confirm from experience that a good number of them are in great physical shape, in every way. The ones that spent most of their lives living like they’re the frat boys from Animal House, those are another story.

          Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 9 Thumb down 1

          Reply

  3. Dean Says:

    ” The onus is put on the man to prove himself. This is why so many women take this advice and come up empty handed”

    It is in Evan’s best financial interest for these women to come up empty handed. That’s why his dating advice is so ridiculous.

    The past year, his blogs have stated that women:
    – should not text or call the guy the next day after a date to thank him because its incumbent on him to court her.
    – should want the guy to pick them up at their house for a first online date
    – should not have sex with a guy for 6 weeks to prove his commitment worthiness

    Do you think any woman following this advice will be successful? Of course not. There is a conflict of interest between his advice and how he feeds his family.

    I have to admit though, for a snake oil salesman, he sure is slick.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 29 Thumb down 9

    Reply

    • Goldie Says:

      Well, I’ve been reading Evan on and off for almost four years. His advice helped me a lot when I was dating in 2010 and 2011. I chose the man who became my boyfriend based on Evan’s advice, and, while the relationship ended after two years, there were some good times. Lately, I’ve disagreed with him more often than not (including on the “picking a woman up on a first date” post). I’m getting the feeling that he’s been trending towards the super-traditional, borderline-Rules-girl approach to dating lately more than he used to in the years past. However, I admit that I’ve been following his advice that you quoted above that, about waiting for the man to thank me first. It’s just been my impression that, if I send a thank-you text or email first after a first date, it skews my feedback. I mostly end up dating people that self-identify as nice guys. What if the guy didn’t like me enough to want a second date, or isn’t sure that he wants one? He may not have planned on replying to me, but now that I sent him a sweet nice thank-you text, he feels like he has to (being the proverbial nice guy), then I have to reply to that, and next thing we know, we’re scheduling a second date he isn’t even sure he wants. Waste of his time and mine. Best to nip it in the bud if he’s not interested.

      Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 24 Thumb down 6

      Reply

      • LostSailor Says:

        However, I admit that I’ve been following his advice that you quoted above that, about waiting for the man to thank me first. It’s just been my impression that, if I send a thank-you text or email first after a first date, it skews my feedback.

        Oh, it’s likely definitely skewing your “feedback,” just not in the way you presume.

        If I initiate contact, ask you out, plan the date, and especially pay for the date–whether it’s coffee, drinks, or more–and don’t get a brief “thanks, had a nice time” text or email soon after I assume one of two things: you’re a rude, entitled bitch or you’re just not interested. Either way, I move on. If you can’t make that minimal effort, you’re not worth my time.

        So, yes, your “feedback” is being skewed by this tactic because men who might have been interested in a second date or more have blown you off…

        Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 19 Thumb down 13

        Reply

        • Goldie Says:

          I used to send the first texts, though. Just because I’m all about getting things done, doing what you need to do and getting it out of the way etc. As a result, I got a lot of no-replies and some second dates from people who didn’t seem like they’d originally wanted one. But OK I’ll give it a shot next time I’m out dating again… see what happens.

          What about when I am really and truly not interested and do not want to see that guy again? Should I still send the first text? Won’t that confuse the guy? This is an honest question, I really want to know a man’s opinion on this. Thanks.

          Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0

          Reply

          • LostSailor Says:

            The polite thing to do would be to text/email “thanks, had a nice time, but not feeling the connection. good luck.” But I realize that this might invite an unwanted response by some of the more clueless men.

            So, here I don’t find the Fade inappropriate. Others may vary about that, but if you’ve dated any length of time, you’ve probably already experienced this. As a guy I certainly have, and while it was irritating the first couple of times, I’ve gotten over it and interpret no further contact after a first date as a lack of interest, and I move on.

            And just to be clear, if a woman organizes a date, such as making dinner, I’m the first to send the thank you text. It’s only polite. And if I’m not interested after a couple of dates, I’ll be direct about it: had a nice time, but no sparks. While I’ve occasionally gotten a quasi-nasty or pleading reply, most women have expressed thanks for letting them know (chances are they weren’t feeling it either) rather than just fading.

            Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 2

            Reply

          • DrivingMeNutes Says:

            If I were not interested in a second date, I would not send a thank you email. It’s still “rude” of course from a manners perspective but, under those circumstances, it’s fine to be rude because you don’t want to see the person again.

            Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 12 Thumb down 9

            Reply

        • Zaire Says:

          Does the same apply if the woman acts interested and is engaging during the date, and at the end of the night give a genuine thank you? Example: “Thank you. It was great meeting you and I look forward to doing this again!” Then wait for him to reach out in the following days. I ask because I used to send the next day text then stopped doing it after reading else where that it’s doesn’t make a big difference if they guy is attracted. I’ve even heard some say it can come off as over eager and even desperate(which seems like an extreme judgment IMO but whatever). When I stopped sending the next day text I would still get guys asking for more dates. OTOH, I have sent that text and either had it ignored/not lead to another date/ lead to a second date with someone who is lukewarm. IME, it’s a draw but I think it’s the gracious thing to do. It can only win you points with people you like, and any who sees if as a negative you probably didn’t have a fair chance with anyways.

          Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0

          Reply

          • D. Says:

            From my perspective, no, it doesn’t matter. What matters is what happens on the date. If I get serious positive feedback on the date itself (eg, nice kiss goodnight, genuine “thank you, had a wonderful time, looking forward to it again,”) then that’s fine. I know she’s interested enough to warrant asking her out again, at least. It would probably just confuse me if she seemed sort of disinterested on the date, and I got a “Thanks! Had a great time!” text the next day. But usually, if I was interested in a woman, (A) it was because she seemed interested in me already, and (B) I didn’t bother waiting for her to give me the “Go-ahead” by texting her appreciation.

            I don’t buy into the notion of hard-and-fast “rules” about a fair amount of dating etiquette. You can set them aside IF you’re getting the right signals some other way. “No sex by date 4? I’m done.” Well, I’m not, as long as she’s showing she’s definitely interested, and I see a scenario in which I’m willing to wait. “Didn’t text me after? Fuck her. I’m done.” Well, if she showed me she was appreciative and interested on the date itself, that seems like needless adherence to some arbitrary rule, and a pretty goofy reason to disqualify someone if everything else is going fine.

            A lot of times, I think these kinds of rules — for men and women — are things that work in those borderline cases (which do occupy a LOT of dating, to be fair). When it’s really working, though, this stuff is pointless. You KNOW it’s working, assuming your judgment is actually sound. Rules are a double-edged sword. Sure, they can help you avoid getting into a crappy situation with someone who’s not that into you, but they can also get in the way of establishing something good with someone who IS into you if you blindly adhere to them.

            Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 29 Thumb down 0

            Reply

          • manwich Says:

            Being “over eager/ desperate” doesn’t matter if a guy is interested. It’s cute and feminine for a girl to seem interested. Guys won’t dump you for being “too nice”, unless they were just using you. Playing hard to get doesn’t work on male psychology. Men are suckers for flattery. When a girl beats me to the punch with the morning after Email, I like her more for liking me.

            “over eager/ desperate” is the kiss of death for men. We can’t go there, so it’s charming when a woman gives us the positive emotional feedback we have to suppress.

            Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 28 Thumb down 3

            Reply

    • DrivingMeNutes Says:

      Wow, does he really advise this? Don’t say “thank you,” huh. I’d like to see the evidence supporting this. Or, better yet, a modicum of logical reasoning.

      Oh, I see because guys are such special magical creatures that need to chase, and shouldn’t be treated like human beings? You know what? Trust me. Free advice. Say thanks.

      Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 29 Thumb down 2

      Reply

      • Goldie Says:

        He says don’t say thank you *first*. Someone has to be the first to say thanks. He just says to let it be the guy.

        I have no problem with that particular one.

        Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 7 Thumb down 10

        Reply

        • DrivingMeNutes Says:

          “Thank for you letting me travel to your house, pick you up, take you to drinks, feed you a meal, take you home, and allowing me to have the pleasure of your company, while you sit there and take it in. Thank you thank you thank you!!”

          Rude.

          Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 31 Thumb down 6

          Reply

          • Goldie Says:

            Nah, more like “thanks, I had a good time, would you like to do it again sometime this week?” or “thanks, I had fun, bye”. Also, I can only speak for myself and I don’t make a man do all those things on first date. Normally we’d meet for coffee and a chat after work. Couple times the guy was late and I bought my own coffee. So by your token, I should be the first with “thank you for sitting with me and talking at me while I was drinking the coffee I’d bought for myself. Thank you thank you thank you!!” Lol no, normally my reply is more like “Oh thanks, I enjoyed meeting you too” plus an optional “sure, let’s do this again soon, what dates did you have in mind?”

            Like I said, only reason why I don’t like contacting a man first after a date, is that in my opinion this looks like me chasing him and trying to wrangle a second date out of him. “Thank you for taking me out tonight, I had a great time, wink wink nudge nudge”. If I thought I could produce a first thank-you message that didn’t give off that vibe, I might do it.

            Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 4

            Reply

          • Goldie Says:

            Thought I might need to add, all of this is only in reference to a written thank-you via email or text that one sends after the date, either when they get home or the next day. Not a verbal thank-you. I don’t agree with Evan on everything he says, but never did he ever advise a woman to not thank the man verbally for the date at the end of that date. Any dating coach giving that kind of advice, would be out of business.

            Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 0

            Reply

          • DrivingMeNutes Says:

            More free advice: Send a written thank you.

            Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 4 Thumb down 8

            Reply

      • Yvonne Says:

        I always thank a man during and at the end of any date. I’ve never had to text a man after a date to make sure he’ll ask me out again. Almost always, men who are interested will talk about getting together again at the end of the first date. Most interested, proactive men (the kind I want to go out with), are not sitting around waiting for my post-date response. They’re too busy making their interest known right away. If I feel the same, I’ll express an enthusiastic response. In my experience, questions about the day-after text tend to come up when the guy isn’t that into me anyway.

        Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 2

        Reply

    • Eliza Says:

      Dean–OK,similar to how many of these dating sites are designed to not necessarily match-up people…otherwise, they would be “out of business”! First of all, I don’t need a complete stranger (I could care less how cute and/or intrigued I am by him initially) – to know exactly where I live and pick me up. I will meet this person in a public place that is mutually convenient for both of us. 2) if I am genuinely interested–I will and HAVE called, not texted, to personally thank them for a fun night out (no harm in that)–and any man that reads into that — as desperate behavior has a lot of growing up to do; 3) I will choose to get intimate if and WHEN I feel I am ready to take that step–whether it be 6 week, or 6 dates…it should be a decision based purely individually and without coercion, pressure or stupid societal and/or gender expectations. That simple. Actually, a so-called “smooth talking player” can court a woman (all while courting other women) – with much discretion, and be getting “bootie action” on the side–wait the 6-week period or even longer, while going on simple, non-expensive dates too–and then once he seals the deal in his book, can decide to never dial her digits again! Ladies – there are NO guarantees. You can only go on your intuition, and proceed based on chemistry, mutual interest and because you want to share a part of you with somebody and are ready to do so, without having to dangle that carrot. It doesn’t work–at age 20, 30, 40, 50 or 70! There are no guarantees. If a guy is interested, he will remain interested afterwards. Hey, if the sex is mutually great–both parties will remain interested!! :) lol.

      Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 34 Thumb down 0

      Reply

  4. Tinker Says:

    Evan offers advice to women who want to land a guy just like him. Which is great, I’m sure he’s a nice person, but he runs off the rails when he then proclaims that all ‘good guys’ operate the way he does so take heed. Btw, if your dating experiences don’t jive with his studies you are an ‘exception to the rule’ and no one cares.
    Except people DO care when they fall outside of his ‘rule’ because a great deal of people do- more than he seems to care to admit. Admitting that other dating experiences are valid and effective and not some aberration just seems to be something he can’t do and that is annoying.

    I don’t think the goal should be for women to get men to commit before sex, because how does she know she wants what she’s committing to? Sexual compatibility is a real consideration for both men and women.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 3

    Reply

    • ATWYSingle Says:

      I called him on the fact that his disclaimer at the bottom of the post basically said, “Don’t comment if you disagree with me. You’re experiences that disrupt my narrative don’t count.” Except..they do.

      Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 28 Thumb down 2

      Reply

      • Goldie Says:

        Yes, I just re-read it and it boggles my mind. “The many exceptions don’t disprove the rule”? Um, if there are *that* many of them, then they’re not exceptions anymore.

        Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 1

        Reply

  5. Goldie Says:

    Here’s the thing. None of us know what this commitment, that Evan speaks of, entails. I agree that, sex or no sex, there’s no such thing as serious commitment in the first few weeks, or months even. We’re still feeling each other out, getting to know each other, and, based on what we find out about each other, we may decide to stop seeing one another at any moment, so what kind of commitment is that anyway? I’m guessing he means exclusive sex. I haven’t done this myself, but I figure it can be done. As in, the two people involved can stop having sex with others for a week, or two, or three, and concentrate on one another exclusively. If they like what they’re getting out of this relationship(?) then they continue in this same vein; if not, they go their separate ways and the “commitment” deal is off. I guess it’s calling this arrangement “commitment” that makes it sound more permanent and serious than it needs to be.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 3

    Reply

    • Selena Says:

      ” If they like what they’re getting out of this relationship(?) then they continue in this same vein; if not, they go their separate ways and the “commitment” deal is off. I guess it’s calling this arrangement “commitment” that makes it sound more permanent and serious than it needs to be.”

      Exactly.

      Agreeing to sleep with one person and see how things develop is not making a serious/permanent commitment. Commitment comes with time and deepening feelings on both sides. No one knows where a ‘relationship’ will go after only a few weeks.Commitment is not a word that should be applied in such a brief time span.

      Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 1

      Reply

      • Goldie Says:

        Aw but “we’re in an committed relationship” sounds so much better than “we’re not sleeping with any other people for now”! Even though in this case, they mean essentially the same thing :)

        Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 0

        Reply

    • C Says:

      Yes, thats it exactly. Its a “commitment of exclusivity” not a marriage proposal.

      Personally, I’ve never had concurrent multiple sexual partners and I dont like dating multi-daters once the relationship turns sexual. Some guys feel similarly when pursuing a relationship and some guys dont. This is just another point of dating compatibility. Not everyone dates the same.

      Honestly, I think a guy who prefers to focus on one lover at a time is more “relationship minded” then the guy who dates around, but I have no numbers to back my theory.

      Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 23 Thumb down 0

      Reply

      • Selena Says:

        Some people prefer dating one person a time. A “commitment of exclusivity” is a pretty weighty term for what many think of as a simple dating pattern. :)

        Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0

        Reply

        • C Says:

          Hahaha. True. Oh no! I’m going to turn down a bunch of bad dates so I can focus on one person for 5 minutes! What if Justin Biebers tour bus rolls through town and I miss my chance?!

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2

          Reply

  6. G Says:

    Really great article. And well balanced…

    You’re exactly right. Often when you read articles from a womans point of view.. it’s as you said.. women should hold out for this “unicorn of a man” (who doesn’t exist) and from the mans side it’s usually about taking her to bed quickly and making her chase you.

    This just struck the right balance which is great to read for once. If a woman decides to “withhold sex” then a man *with options* has little reason to stick around for too long. I don’t think that makes him a bad person but often it’s thought otherwise. The problem being? Well, he has options, and being intimate with someone will send him in that direction while the other girl fades into memory. Yet, if sex IS off the table, what else can a woman do to maintain his interest otherwise? Lot’s in fact… but having the “I am the prize.. now impress me” thing only goes so far before I guy begins to wonder why he’s jumping through hoops and will it even be worth it when he DOES go to bed with her?

    Will the sex be the same? Is she holding out because he has the earn the incredible sex and intimacy she offers? Or will the “I’m here… now impress me” thing carry over into the bed room? Thus, not very appealing to the guy, even if he DOES wait it out.

    And also hit the nail on the head. Men who jump through these hoops are men with no options and these are the men who are rejected by most women. He is not your unicorn.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 4

    Reply

  7. John Says:

    I always get a kick when Evan describes his coaching clients as “smart, successful, sophisticated women”. The thing I want to ask him is how smart, successful and sophisticated can they be if they have to pay thousands of dollars for something most people can accomplish for free? I mean I understand reading books, blogs, getting help on a profile. What can that add up to- maybe a couple hundred bucks? But to pay thousands of dollars for advice on something that people have been doing since the beginning of time means those clients of his are dysfunctional.

    So all his silly advice, including this one about waiting 6 weeks for sex, is aimed at his paying dysfunctional clients. They eat this shit up. And will pay him handsomely to do so.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 22 Thumb down 8

    Reply

    • Yvonne Says:

      “Smart, successful, sophisticated” people sometimes go to therapists when they have a problem. Does that mean they are more deeply flawed than a person who muddles along on his or her own? His clients pay because they are well-off and can afford it. He’s definitely catering to a higher echelon market, not, as you imply, an inherently screwed-up one.

      Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 10 Thumb down 5

      Reply

      • John Says:

        “Smart, successful, sophisticated” people sometimes go to therapists when they have a problem. ”

        Agreed. But Evan is not a therapist. He is a dating coach. A difference of about 8-12 years in education.

        Normal people pay copayments to a therapist to get to the root of their current issue which they think is an obstacle to finding love. Usually face to face interaction.

        Dysfunctional people pay thousands of dollars to talk to a dating coach about why they cant find a guy. And via phone or Skype.

        See the difference?

        Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 14 Thumb down 7

        Reply

        • Yvonne Says:

          My point is simply that looking for help, whether it be from a dating coach or a therapist, isn’t necessarily a sign of gross disfunction, as you assume. And people who are looking for help in the dating world don’t necessarily need a therapist since they are looking for an approach that is targeted to dating. Hence the market for dating coaches. But you do need money.

          Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 8 Thumb down 3

          Reply

        • Goldie Says:

          Based on a conversation I had recently with a real, live dating coach, I would imagine people who need a dating coach would likely fall into one of the two groups: one, those coming out of a long marriage, with no clue how to date in their age group in the 2010s. A coach would give them a quick tour around the modern-day dating scene, so they can navigate it with minimal damage. (Unlike those of us who choose to learn for free from our own mistakes, cough cough.) And group two, people who feel they need a relationship and cannot be without one, but at the same time need a quality one. A coach would help them manage their expectations, and avoid saying or doing anything that could be misinterpreted and could scare a potential partner away. Personally, I decided I’m okay with being single indefinitely at this point in my life, so wouldn’t need a dating coach.

          I’m more on John’s side of this, in that it looks to me like people use a dating coach to patch the symptoms of whatever stands in their way of finding the partner they want; while a therapist is more about resolving the root cause of that same issue.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1

          Reply

          • C Says:

            “I’m more on John’s side of this, in that it looks to me like people use a dating coach to patch the symptoms of whatever stands in their way of finding the partner they want; while a therapist is more about resolving the root cause of that same issue.”

            I’ve used a dating coach. It was exactly as you suggest, I wasnt finding the partner that I wanted, but not because I needed a “cure” for any “symptoms”. I didnt have “a problem” in the clinical sense. I am perfectly capable of dating and have had several happy, long term relationships.

            I saw hiring a dating coach as no different from hiring a personal trainer when I wasnt getting the results I wanted at the gym. I wanted him to take a look at what I was doing and then improve my performance. Simple as that.

            After I came out of my last long term relationship, I wanted to improve the quality of the men I was attracting. So I gave myself 6 months to become a dating superstar. I read books, blogs, asked everyone for advise, and yes, hired a dating coach.

            Massive improvement in the quality of men I was dating. Holy crap! I’ve never dated hotter guys! Turned out my shiness came across as disinterest. I guess I could have spent 5 years lying on an office couch, digging deep into why I’m shy…but as far as I’m concerned, thats a waste of time. Knowing why I’m shy wont teach me how to behave “not shy”. Thats where a dating coach is useful! He changed my perception of both myself and men, and totally changed the way I present myself.

            Exactly 12 months later, I’m now living with a great guy I’d been friends with for 4 years and had been pining for all of that time. Turned out he was attracted to me all along but thought I friend-zoned him.

            Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 1

            Reply

        • C Says:

          I’m sorry guy but you dont need a medical degree to tell someone their fashion sense is crap, or the best approach for chatting up a girl/girl in a bar.

          Poor presentation and/or dating specific social skills are not a medically treatable condition.

          I dont understand the logic that says its healthy to buy books and read blogs but hiring a professional coach means you are dysfunctional. If all you can afford to spend on self-improvement is $200 per year and the next person can afford $2000 or $20000, thats a statement about your financial limitations not the level of someone elses dysfunction.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 3

          Reply

  8. Ben Iyyar Says:

    I’m older so I could be wrong but I am fairly sure that the principle of “commitment before sex” went out of fashion in the late 1960’s and to my knowledge has not come back into practice since then. Indeed, in my experience the guiding principle since then has been sex as a natural part of dating whether commitment follows or not. I know for myself that if I am dating a woman and we have not slept together after a few dates, then I am moving on and I feel that most women likely feel the same way.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 10 Thumb down 8

    Reply

  9. BostonRobin Says:

    I think Evan has explained elsewhere in his blog that by “commitment” in this context, ie, in the early stages of dating, he means an understanding that the two people are not going to be dating anyone else. I’m sure he’ll be stopping by to comment soon enough, or perhaps address this post in his blog!

    Personally? I’m at the point where I have the “what are we doing?” talk before sex, not after. I don’t juggle anymore (already learned it does not work for me) and I don’t date jugglers either.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1

    Reply

    • Goldie Says:

      How do you know you don’t date jugglers? Isn’t it a don’t ask, don’t tell thing?

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1

      Reply

      • BostonRobin Says:

        More like “show, don’t tell.” I show my interest and availability and expect the same in return. Jugglers simply can’t keep up.

        Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 10 Thumb down 2

        Reply

    • Nicole Says:

      “Personally? I’m at the point where I have the “what are we doing?” talk before sex, not after. I don’t juggle anymore (already learned it does not work for me) and I don’t date jugglers either.”

      I hated trying to juggle multiple guys, too. Never again. But I don’t bring up the “what are we doing?” stuff until after sex.

      I had one truly awful experience of agreeing after 3 dates to be exclusive with a really great guy – and then we had sex on the fourth date and it was terrible. Not first-time awkward, TERRIBLE. And it was blatantly obvious that was why I called things off soon afterward. “I want to be your girlfriend. Oops you and I are no good in bed. Ummm changed my mind about the girlfriend thing sorry!” Most awkward convo ever. Not that the sex would have been better if we hadn’t had the exclusivity talk – but I could have at least pulled off some “I’m not interested in a relationship right now” excuse.

      So now it’s a conversation for shortly after we start having sex. Before sex, I just judge his interest in a LTR by his actions and availability. I guess I’d rather risk accidentally sleeping with a “juggler” than committing to an exclusive relationship with no sexual connection. I’d basically be making that promise with an implied “unless the sex sucks, in which case all bets are off”… What’s the point?

      Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 25 Thumb down 0

      Reply

      • BostonRobin Says:

        Yeah, I made that mistake before too, dreadful sex after a premature “talk.” It has to play out organically–different with everyone. But since my main focus is on a relationship, sex is not my first stop on the way to that goal. Compatibility comes first.

        Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 0

        Reply

      • Goldie Says:

        I had that too – great guy, smart, funny, easy on the eyes, treated me right… then we had sex on 5th date and it was, completely unexpectedly, dreadful. Like, worst I ever had. Never saw that coming. I’m so glad he and I didn’t “commit” before having sex. We actually had a talk instead where we both agreed that, even after sex, it’d be too early for either of us to decide if we’re a couple, and that neither of us is going to attach, or expect attachment from the other. Made it so much easier to move on.

        Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 0

        Reply

      • fuzzilla Says:

        I was really tired when I read these comments. I thought, “You’ll know you’re dating a Juggalo by the clown makeup” – oh, wait… :P

        **I guess I’d rather risk accidentally sleeping with a “juggler” than committing to an exclusive relationship with no sexual connection.**

        Yeah, I’m with you there. On the other side of the coin, if the sex is off-the-hook amazeballs, you can imagine there’s a lot more connection and compatibility than is actually there…

        Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 10 Thumb down 1

        Reply

      • C Says:

        Dont women like sex too? Sure! Dont men like relationships too?

        If women “witholds sex”, men withold relationships. There are plenty of men on this board who have said essentially that any woman who wants a 4th date with him has to put out on date #3, and if she wants a relationship with him, she will need to sleep with him for several months while he multi-dates and makes up his mind who he likes best. Isnt that just the other side of the coin?

        In fairness, I dont think most people are that calculating and just do what feels right at the moment. Some people take longer to get comfortable with a person or a relationship then others.

        I dont think its fair to say that men who are willing to commit sooner invariably do so because they have no options any more then saying women with options will always date the rich guy. Some men like being in a relationship, and some women like starving artists. Different strokes for different folks.

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 1

        Reply

  10. Selena Says:

    I see sex as part of getting to know someone. Finding out if the two of you are compatible in that area as well as compatible in personality and lifestyle. The only way to do that is to spend time together. Waiting 5-6 weeks to have sex may be reasonable if the people are only seeing each other once a week for a couple hours. But if they are seeing each other several times a week? I think one would be more comfortable and desirous to do it sooner.

    Do people after a certain age really want to “round the bases”? 2nd. and 3rd. are FOREPLAY. The intent is to create arousal. If people are going to deliberately arouse each other, why would they want to stop there? Frustrating.

    Some of this type of advice seems to have a subtext that intercourse should be delayed, but oral sex is okay in the meantime. Some people find oral as intimate, maybe even more intimate than intercourse – so what are they supposed to do?

    I agree very much with Moxie:
    “But the signs that he isn’t going to stick around are there. The sex isn’t why he’s not committing. He was never going to commit.”

    Pay attention to the signs rather than an arbitrary timetable.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 0

    Reply

  11. Howard Says:

    Dating is a simple economics; laws of supply and demand do apply. Guys with options are the ones women want, and these are not as easily available.

    While I don’t believe one has to resort to throwing oneself at one of these guys to get one, I also reject the golden vagina mindset. There is a middle ground where things flow and happen spontaneously, and all parties are respected and valued. But most importantly, both people enjoy themselves are glad things went the way they did. That last sentence is really important. Too many women do regret.

    If a woman or man makes herself or himself a commodity, that’s how the other gender will respond to him or her. Any complaints after the fact are merely hollow. It’s like the girl on the train with the short tight dress who is upset about guys looking at her derriere. Some women insist on a guy wining and dining them before he gets any, then complain about him taking a walk after he had sex with them. Or by the same token, the older guy who buys his trophy woman, only to find out she has another guy on the side.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2

    Reply

  12. LostSailor Says:

    I absolutely agree with Moxie, since I’ve said it myself in many comments: If a woman want to continue dating while “waiting” to have sex, she has to show her level of interest in other very concrete ways. She has to go the extra mile to maintain his interest. But that’s not the message that most women get.

    Instead they get cheerleading pablum: “You’re worth it, make him work for it,” “you deserve his attention without the sex,” “if he really cares, he’ll be glad to wait.” Uh, no. The quality men women want most–successful, charming, good-looking–aren’t going to fall for this. The men with fewer options might, but then the message becomes “don’t settle, you ‘deserve’ better.”

    Unfortunately, from many “letters” on dating and relationship blogs, the women who want to “wait” are probably late-20s to mid-30s who have already gone the route of not “waiting” for sex and who have been burned. Now they want the men to “wait.” Okay, fair enough. But let’s get over the idea that such women are going to land the quality guy they want who will wait for sex just because she “deserves” it. To echo Moxie, no, ladies, you’re going to have to work for it, not the other way around.

    But I also want to address Katz’s post, because while the video may “affirm everything that [he’s] ever written about sex and gender” he completely misses the main points. The video is a “no duh” kind of video. Of it, Katz says In short, women teach men how to treat them and advises “women” to stop offering easy sex if they want commitment. Which, while a generally true statement, misses the point completely.

    As the video points out, men seek out sex without commitment because they can. But in the sexual/relationship marketplace, women are competitors, not allies. So while Katz advises individual women to adopt a commitment-before-sex strategy he fails to see that this would only be successful as long as a lot–a vast majority–of women agree to adopt the strategy. And because women are competitors, they’re not going to do this.

    Katz tells women that you must have men make a greater investment in you as individuals before having sex. Aside from the lapse in not also suggesting that she should make more of an investment in him before sex, he fails to note that men don’t have to make such investment because there’s always another woman out that that won’t demand it. And until society changes, that won’t change. Actions by a small number of individual women aren’t going to cut it.

    Sex is a part of finding out if a couple is compatible. Katz wants to make it a transaction: invest in me and you’ll get sex. Sorry, I call bullshit on these “rules” he promulgates. There are no hard-and-fast rules that are going to work.

    The bottom line is when dating, have sex when you’re comfortable having sex. If that means waiting, accept that even some great men may not wait. If that means sex early on, accept that some men aren’t going to call back or commit.

    Frankly, all this emphasis and angst over “when should we have sex” ignore other perhaps more important aspects of relationship building: are your personalities compatible, do you have fun and laugh a lot together, are you compatible in your “dating styles” (can you enjoy just hanging out or are fancy dates a must)?

    Sex is just one factor on a continuum of factors that go into building a relationship; if the other parts aren’t there, sex isn’t going to be a magic bullet. If the other parts are there, then sex is just a natural part of being together.

    There are no guarantees…

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 22 Thumb down 2

    Reply

    • Lisa Says:

      There was a famous ancient Greek play called “Lysistrata” where all the women of Athens agreed to withhold sex from their men as a way of controlling their behavior and achieving a certain political goal. And it worked!

      Women need not be competitors! Women can be allies. At least in a play.

      Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 7 Thumb down 12

      Reply

      • LostSailor Says:

        Yeah, but Lysistrata was fiction. Today, women might agree that it’s a good idea to withhold sex to get guys to commit, but the next words will be “you go first”…

        Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 10 Thumb down 1

        Reply

    • Selena Says:

      Amen LS. Great post.

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0

      Reply

    • Selena Says:

      LS,

      This comment of yours was copied and pasted on EMK’s blog under the username Sally. If you aren’t “Sally” I thought you might be interested to know you’ve been plagarized. :)

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0

      Reply

  13. Eliza Says:

    I’m thinking that today, commitment without sex is quite absurd–since the sexual revolution has impacted both genders…and basically–if you do have chemistry and like someone you are dating/getting to know–yes, a compatible sexual connection will pretty much solidify things, or NOT. That is, sexuality/intimacy involves the mutual ability and trust to be vulnerable, the ability for both parties to feel comfortable communicating their likes and dislikes…that in itself says a lot in terms of what direction that relationship will go towards. For a large percentage of men AND women, having sexual compatibility is a must in order to feel fulfilled and be able to express oneself. So-yes, prior to verbalizing any level of commitment, both people need to know they connect intimately–as well as outside the bedroom. What woman would commitment without knowing they are compatible with their to-be partner? Unless she was asexual or had an extremely low libido and didn’t place much emphasis on being intimate.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 9 Thumb down 2

    Reply

  14. manwich Says:

    I can respect the 3rd date rule. If a guy can put some time, effort, and money into planning three nonsexual excuses to hang out and get to know each other, then he may have good intentions. If he can’t keep it zipped for three dates, he is probably using you.

    Guys however have to watch out for the 5th date rule. If it takes a girl longer than 5 dates to figure out if she wants sex, she is probably a waste of time. She may have issues, low sex drive, or she just likes the attention of being chased. Beautiful women have lured me into breaking this rule, and I have been burned every time.

    Just because a guy has sex with you doesn’t mean he’s interested. Duh.

    Just because a girl lets you buy dinner doesn’t mean she’s interested.

    If a woman has consistent, and clearly defined values, that’s different. If a woman is up front about the fact that she doesn’t have sex outside of marriage, then I respect her for not wasting either of our time. Best of luck to her. I hope she meets a nice guy at church.
    If a woman has any kind of consistent, objective, clearly defined boundary, I’d at least know what to expect. Tell me on the first date that you have a 10th date rule, and I can decide if it’s worth breaking my 5th date rule.

    What I watch out for is inconsistency, mixed messages, and moving goal posts. As a man, it is preposterous for me to imagine not knowing if you want to have sex with someone. I wouldn’t go on a second date unless I wanted sex. If you can’t figure that out, you have issues.

    Guys know it is wrong to use a woman for sex. Everyone hates a guy who does that.

    Women can be willfully in denial of the ways they use men. They like the attention. Ever notice that guys don’t put women in the friend box. We either want sex, a relationship, or nothing. We don’t string insecure women along because it is fun to have a girlfriend without benefits. I have female friends, but I don’t pseudo-date them. I’m clear about my intentions. Women think their friendship is a worthy consolation prize after 20 expensive dates. Dating is an expenditure of a man’s limited resources. Men need to ration their assets just like women.

    This is why EMK’s advice is silly and unrealistic for anyone not wearing a promise ring. Dates without sex makes a guy feel used, just like sex without dates makes a girl feel used.

    If a woman wants to follow this advice, she should;
    #1 be honest and up front about it.
    #2 She should claim it as her personal boundary, not a challenge that “all men are jerks, so you have to prove yourself”,
    #3 She should make it clear that this boundary is consistent for all men. Don’t imply that you used to have wild sex, but now you want to become a frigid housewife. That scares us.
    #4 she should initiate and pay for half the dates, and make sure he has fun doing awesome stuff that guys like.
    #5 she should lower her standards and find a shy, introverted guy who has no internet connection, otherwise, 6 weeks is long enough to date and have sex with 4 other women. Guys are good at math.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 23 Thumb down 13

    Reply

    • Eliza Says:

      This timetable is completely absurd – 3 date rule – or on the 5th date – this or that should happen. Very silly.

      Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 5

      Reply

      • manwich Says:

        It’s more of a guideline than a rule.

        It depends on what you are looking for. If a rock star gives you a back stage pass, don’t wait for a third date.

        If a woman wants a relationship, and doesn’t want to get used, I think she should be suspicious of a guy who’s first date plan is “hey, wanna come over”. If a guy really likes you, he’ll avoid that misconception by planing a couple dates worth of activities. He’ll want to get to know you.

        I don’t blame a girl for playing coy about her availability on the first few dates, but as it drags into date 5, indecisiveness is a red flag. 6 weeks is outlandish. Outside the Amish community, people know if they like sex.

        Rules/guidelines are handy for making decisions when we are biased by emotions.

        Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 3

        Reply

        • C Says:

          “I wouldn’t go on a second date unless I wanted sex. If you can’t figure that out, you have issues.”

          Well, yay for you. Not everyone looks for the same qualities in a partner and not everyone can determine if you have those qualities in 2 hours.

          ” Tell me on the first date that you have a 10th date rule, and I can decide if it’s worth breaking my 5th date rule.”

          I wonder how that conversation would go down….
          “Thanks for the coffee. I really hope we can do this again some time. Oh and just so you know up front, I’m not going to have sex with you until the 10th date. Making out on my doorstep is fine starting with the 3rd date. On date number 6, we will go to a dark movie theater and engage in some light petting, clothes on, above the waist only so I can tell if you have a light yet sensual touch. Ok? Thanks! Have your lawyer call my lawyer.”

          Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 4

          Reply

          • K Says:

            You got that right. I’m not sure why everyone is so worked up unless it’s just plain out right not working for them. Also FYI, Evan’s message generally is don’t sleep with them right away if you are going to freak out if it doesn’t turn into anything. I can’t speak for him, but I assume he thinks any woman who can roll with the punches should just do as she pleases. I think he’s speaking to the countless women who write in to him (and on this blog) who freak out if a guy sleeps with them in the first few dates and never calls. I don’t have any personal rules beyond I feel comfortable, I think he’s into me outside of just sex, and I’d be okay if I never hear from him again. For me that never happens usually before about 5 dates. Maybe everyone here has 5 nighttime drinks/dinner dates and it quickly becomes awkward? When I meet someone new and I’m not used to having a regular date, I have lots of other plans. Be it visiting my parents/grandparents, vacations, work travel etc. (he’s usually in the same boat). As such, several of the first few dates have end up being daytime (brunch, film festivals, hikes, museums, hanging out on a nice day at the park). I don’t even think of taking a guy home at 11am after those dates, but they go a long way in me getting to know them w/sex off the table. I’m sure I’ve lost a few guys who expected sex earlier than I did. I know a few of them socially and they haven’t had a relationship of any sort in half a decade. Maybe they are getting plenty of ass and I don’t begrudge them for it. I’ve had several relationships during those times and it was with guys who were okay to wait a bit while we got to know each other more (and during that time I’m not asking them to stop doing anything, so if they so desire they could screw everyone in town). I haven’t always asked for a “commitment”, but when I raised the topic, I just meant can we take a break from dating and see if there is something here? It’s rare that I meet someone I connect with (most of my male friends feel this way, from the alpha to the shy guys) and I don’t mind putting my dating life on hold a few weeks. I haven’t had that horrible sex experience some have talked about. If I did perhaps I’d change my tone. Anyhow I don’t know any of my guy friends who are okay if the gal is sleeping with several other guys at the same time. So in summary if you are comfortable with sleeping with someone sooner, do it! If you can’t take a short break to evaluate someone who thinks you are worthy of the same, don’t.

            Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 0

            Reply

          • The D-man Says:

            Nonsense. All she has to say is something like “just so you know, it takes me more than a couple dates to feel comfortable being intimate with someone.”

            Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 10 Thumb down 2

            Reply

          • Goldie Says:

            ***Anyhow I don’t know any of my guy friends who are okay if the gal is sleeping with several other guys at the same time. ***

            Didn’t ask my guy friends in these exact words, but a few of them are okay with *themselves* sleeping with several women at the same time, and smart enough to understand that it goes both ways.

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0

            Reply

          • C Says:

            D-Man – I promise that women with options dont like to wait too long for a new relationship to become exclusive either.

            When was the last time you told a new date, “Just so you know, it takes me more then a couple of months to get comfortable enough to date exclusively”?

            Do you as John suggests give your date and exact number of weeks or months to wait to become exclusive (i.e. 4 months) so she can decide if you are worth the investment? No? A little tacky maybe?

            I agree with Moxie that women who chose to wait to have sex do exactly that – wait. They dont advertise. The typical way to communicate that you dont have sex in the first couple of dates is to not have sex in the first couple of dates. Women who advertise their arbitrary rules about 10 dates this and 3 months that have an agenda or are a little socially clueless. The underlying message is that “I’m a bigger prize then all of those sluts”. Its as cheeseball of a thing to verbalize as “I’m an honest and ethical person”.

            Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 0

            Reply

    • JulesP Says:

      K I hear you…

      A couple of weeks back a man contacted me via the online dating site I’m a member of, we spoke, texted a little and made a date to meet within 3 days of our initial contact. Great date (drink in a local bar), great end to date .. making out a little.. good chemistry :-)

      He calls the next day and we make a plan for the weekend (last Saturday evening to be precise). We spoke during that week, texted a little and met up on Saturday eve. This time I offered to pay half (small eats, a drink). His response was “if you want to, it’s fine”, so I did.

      The chemistry (physical and mental) was good, holding hands, touching, some making out again… he did ask me to come back home with him, my response was how about the next date we do that (yes.. I’m one of those women who – as much as I try and convince myself otherwise .. that freaks after having given of myself physically to a man so early on only not to hear from him again..)

      I texted him on Sunday to let him know I’m thinking of him, would love to see him – received text back saying pretty much the same and
      … nothing… nada

      So, on the one hand yes, I feel that I did right by me by not hopping straight into bed and by also offering to pay my way on our 2nd date.

      Not actually sure if there’s another hand! Were he that interested, I would have heard from him.

      Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 0

      Reply

      • John Says:

        JulesP,
        Sounds to me that you did everything right. Sometimes it isn’t you, its just the other person. Maybe he was involved with someone else already and just looking for side action. There isn’t much you can do about that. But if I was truly looking for a relationship, and it went down the way you said it did, then I would stick around for sure.

        K says
        ” I think he’s (EvanKatz) speaking to the countless women who write in to him (and on this blog) who freak out if a guy sleeps with them in the first few dates and never calls”

        Here is my problem with Evan and his countless women that read his blog. When I offer an opinion why this happens, they completely disregard it. I have mentioned in his blog a few times that if a guy sleeps with you on the early dates and then doesn’t call you, it may not have anything to do with the sex itself. It could be the guy felt he was being used because she never paid. So he took it as far as he could and then bailed. He probably would have bailed anyway at that point regardless if he got sex. But the women attribute it to the sex.

        I also offered it could be that the guy felt he had to chase too much. If I was dating a girl and she never initiated a phone call or a text (even to say thank you for the date the guy paid for), it would be a turn off. Then once again, the guy would disappear regardless if he got sex or not.

        But Evan and his readers say things like “the guy is supposed to always initiate in the beginning” and so that rationale for the guy bailing after sex must be bogus. Evan and his readers refuse to accept that their actions are the reason why guys bail after sex many times. Not all the time. But often enough to give it consideration. At that point they are just trying to get a return on their investment.

        As many guys on here have explained, when a girl doesn’t offer to pay, doesn’t call or text the next day to say thank you, follows silly advice to “mirror” and let the guy take the lead on everything, its a turnoff. Single guys in the dating trenches say it on his blog also and yet it is met with shame and resistance. The only ones who agree with Evans “mirroring” techniques are women and Evan himself because he has books to sell. But oddly enough, the guys that are in the dating field that these women are trying to meet, completely reject that mindset.

        Hence, Evan is snake oil salesman trying to sell his book because the marketplace for that behavior (single guys) are rejecting it and yet Evan and his readers say that just cant be possible.

        Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 10 Thumb down 4

        Reply

        • ATWYSingle Says:

          It could be the guy felt he was being used because she never paid.

          If she was having sex with him, she was contributing. Most guys, if not 95% of them, would recognize that. Any guy who whines that the woman he’s sleeping with regularly hasn’t paid on the first few dates is an idiot and deserves to be single.

          Moving on…

          Women attribute the fade to the sex because they’re constantly being told that that is the case.

          Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 1

          Reply

  15. Goldie Says:

    I have to throw something out here, just to warn people that it does exist. The assumption between all comments on this thread (including mine) is that a man will want sex, the sooner the better, the more casual the better. On one occasion in my dating history, though, I had a man invite me over, then tell me in the same breath that he had to warn me – he couldn’t do casual. It took me completely off guard. I was actually okay with casual. But he was asking for the same exact thing that Evan advises his female clients to ask – that, if he and I did have sex, that I’d drop everyone else I was seeing at the time, and become exclusive with him. I had never expected a man to ask me for this, and had no idea what to say. I ended up asking him to move our next date to someplace public instead of his house, and dating him for another month, with no sex involved, until I was sure I preferred being exclusive with this man to being exclusive with other people I was seeing at the time. He was perfectly okay with that situation. In the end, I dropped everyone else, became exclusive with him, stayed together for two years, good times.

    Just sayin. These guys do exist.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 0

    Reply

    • Selena Says:

      I’ll venture there are many men who aren’t comfortable sleeping with women who are sleeping with other men.

      We are a very territorial species.

      Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 1

      Reply

    • ATWYSingle Says:

      Just sayin. These guys do exist.

      You mean guys with no options who tell women things like “I don’t do casual” so she’ll sleep with them, then when she calls his bluff he sticks it out because he has no options? Yes, those guys do exist.

      Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 9 Thumb down 13

      Reply

    • Damien Says:

      I once dated someone who looked like a beauty pageant contestant and the sex was awesome. She was also a Catholic school teacher, but that didn’t stop her from having “exclusive” serial physical relationships, as many as 2 or 3 a year (for the last 12 years) while searching for her right guy. The problem was, she expects the man to do all the “chivalrous things” like paying for everything. She never lifted a finger when the bill came for dinners or anything else we did. That started to get on my nerves, which led to our break-up. She even said: if I am not happy with that, there are many other guys that are waiting in line. Fine. But still, knowing what I know now, if I had to do it all over again, I’d still get into a relationship with her. She was that hot, the sex was that good, and she wasn’t that bad a person despite being entitled.

      My point is, awesome sex is something that one can offer to a relationship, so why hold it back.

      Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 9 Thumb down 5

      Reply

  16. Kurt Says:

    Moxie raises a good point, particularly if the man has some dating experience. Few men are going to jump through hoops for a woman they just met, especially if it was online, unless they are getting something physical in return. It doesn’t necessarily have to be sex, as heavy make-outs could be sufficient.

    This is a purely rational response because every man who has dated has probably been burned at some point by putting forth lots of effort paying for dates, etc., only to have things go nowhere with a woman who just wasn’t interested. Men are conditioned to all but assume that a woman isn’t that interested if she isn’t engaged in some type of physical activity after a number of dates.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3

    Reply

  17. james Says:

    test cooment

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

    Reply

  18. Tara Says:

    Well, I’m a Christian in my 40’s and met this man who turned out to be a religious fanatic in his early 50’s. He tried to get me to marry him without seeing how the sex was. Well, I told him that I didn’t want to wait. Eventually, we had sex and he blamed me for it. It turns out that he was limp and couldn’t get or keep a hard-on without Viagra. That relationship is over.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 3

    Reply

  19. Sexcapades Says:

    We’re into the idea of no commitments thats for sure! #sexcapades #webseries #onlinedatingadventure

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2

    Reply

  20. Stephy Says:

    Sheesh! After reading through these comments (which seem so many, but thankfully are just a drop in the bucket of the globe), no wonder dangerous STD’s like HPV strain 16 & 18 are on the rise! The joy of that STD men can’t be tested. It can lead to deadly cervical cancer, and deadly throat cancer in men. Which means it can also be passed through deep kissing. Who the hell really thinks it’s okay to expect a lady to have sex after a few dates? And what the hell kind of lady is stupid enough to put out something that special after a few dates? None of you seem to give a flip about your health, or the health of the future person you will love and marry.

    I am 50 next month, and was married for 25 years (he passed away). Married a 2nd time at age 47 to a man who came all the way from England for me. We met on Facebook of all places! I dated two men after my husband’s death, and neither pushed me for sex. Even the one from England who spent a hell of a lot more $$ flying out to see me, than on paying for a meal. He flew out to the USA every 3-4 months to court me for a few weeks. In fact, they both said they’d wait for as long as it took me to feel ready, and made it very clear they were looking at me for marriage. Both had their long-time monogamous exes (20+years) tested for HPV, and gave the results to me, just because they cared. Their exes were very sweet an mature providing that too. Plus they cleared for all the other STD’s early in the game, so neither of us wasted our time investing too much emotional energy into a relationship that had no chance of progressing. To me this is the healthy approach mentally, physically, and emotionally!! If you want sex for fun, get a friend with benefits! If you are out there dating, you are assumed to be looking for a lifetime mate! Ladies and gents ……be selective. Be careful. Don’t play games.

    For the record. I love Feffing, and my deceased got it any time any where. My husband now, every night. So it’s not that I am prude, or don’t like sex. I am smart. This thread had to be one of the most depressing ones I have read in months. So sad.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0

    Reply

  21. Keri Says:

    It is unbelievable to me that anyone believes that just bc you are older you shouldn’t have the same standards as when you were younger. I didn’t sleep with men quickly when I was younger and I don’t do it now. The entire point of dating is determine if you are compatible, yes sex should come into play at some point and that is an individual decision. I’m recently divorced and I met an outstanding man, I’m 41 and he’s 35. We’ve both been married before. He is seriously my unicorn, he’s attractive as hell, makes me laugh and makes me unbelievably happy. We have spent hours, talking, playing board games and kissing and hugging. We have kissed for hours and it is full on amazing. We agreed at the beginning of this relationship, that we wanted to do this right. Both of us prefer to have an emotional bond prior to having sex. He and I have discussed the 5 languages of love and are trying to form a solid level of communication and understanding of each other’s needs. We make each other better people. Why rush into sex which just clouds your judgement. No one should sell themselves short at any age, if you are the right fit then each of you will be willing to wait for sex, bc each of you is offering each other more than sex.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1

    Reply

Leave a Reply to LostSailor

© 2013-2017 And That's Why You're Single All Rights Reserved