So, Men Can Be Assholes But Women Can’t? Gotcha.

Evan Marc Katz had an..interesting post today that I wanted to discuss here.gender

First, let me be clear. I think Evan has some very good things to say. I think he’s passionate about what he does. I agree with a lot of what he says. Take this for example:

This was the starting point of one of my more popular blog posts, “Why Men Don’t Like Smart, Strong, Successful Women.” It’s not that men don’t like smart, strong, successful women. We do. We don’t, however, like the negative qualities that often come with those positive traits. In that post, I used myself as an example of a smart, strong, successful guy who inadvertently alienated people with his honesty, his arrogance, his sarcasm, his impatience, etc. I simply posited what would seem to be empirically undeniable:

a) Just because you’re smart, strong, and successful doesn’t make you a great catch for everyone.

b) Good qualities often come with bad qualities.

c) What men value in a partner is often different from what women value in a partner.

I agree with all of this. I’ve said as much over and over again.

I also agree that a lot of single women – which is Evan’s primary demographic, which is why I’m using that as an example – aren’t crazy about being told that they might be doing something wrong when it comes to dating. I happen to think Evan gets away with it because he’s a man. See, a man – especially a married one – has quite a bit of sway over many women because of the importance many women place on male approval. Which means he can say things to them and get away with it. Things like this:

My happiest clients – doctors, lawyers, CEOs, etc – came to terms with the idea that dominant, assertive, difficult, “masculine” energy is not appealing to traditionally masculine men, and if they wanted to continue to always get their way at home, they’d be better off choosing an easygoing guy who will not fight with them. He may not make as much money. He may not be as charismatic. But he will be the one guy who lets everything roll off his back. Easygoing is one of most valuable and underrated traits in a partner (not just according to me, but according to studies on marriage). Who is a better long-term partner – the one who fights you, tooth and nail, on everything? Or the one whose default setting is “Yes”?

What I hear in this passage is, “If you want to be a bitch, find a pushover. Settle.” I don’t necessarily disagree with this advice. I’m just pointing out that he gets to say stuff like that because he’s a man.   I don’t think Evan is aware of the fact that, just by being a man, he can pretty much tell these women anything and they’ll do it. I’ve argued with Evan plenty of times over the fact that, just by being a guy and by being married, he automatically has more cache with his audience. He always staunchly denied this, which told me he was missing out on something very crucial when it came to his target audience. That being  that women are conditioned to please and he’s using that to his advantage. He brushes off the idea that some of his clients have been brainwashed, but there’s truth to that accusation, whether he realizes it or not.

These women read the same stuff that you read, but instead of assuming that I want to subjugate women (which couldn’t be further from the truth), they were open to the idea that they weren’t very effective in their dating and relationship decisions. Did any of them change their personalities? Not one bit. They are the exact same women they were when they came to me. All that changed was their choice in men.

Oh. So they settled? Okay. Thanks. Make no mistake about what he is saying here: he got them to settle. Again, I don’t necessarily disagree with what he’s saying. It’s that he’s dancing around just how these women found partners that bothers me. He did brainwash them to some degree. He may not have put them in a trance, but he did manage to use his influence as a man to change how they thought. He just isn’t admitting it, either because he’s not aware of it or because he knows how it will make him look .

I question if Evan is capable of telling the difference between a woman who is assertive and dominant and a woman who is abrasive and aggressive. To me, he seems to lump them both together and offers the two groups the same advice. As I have reassured people over and over, I  happen to believe that most men aren’t intimidated by strong, assertive, successful, outspoken women. If that were the case, then there are a ton of men and women who are shit out of luck these days. In which case, maybe tailor the advice to each segment rather than conflating them, which is what it sounds like Evan is doing.

But here’s the real kicker to Evan’s post:

My wife is beautiful. My wife is smart. My wife is funny. My wife is kind and selfless and an incredible mom. But the reason I married her is because I can be myself around her. There are no lies in our relationship. She doesn’t take offense at things that aren’t inherently offensive. Let’s be honest here – not everyone is equal at all things. I am argumentative. I am short-tempered. I have a low sex drive. I like to talk about myself a lot.  So if my wife were to say to me that she’s dated men who were less argumentative, more easygoing, had a higher sex drive, and were better listeners, is that an insult to me? Or is it simply a fact? And if we’ve been happily married for six years now, should that fact undermine our relationship? Should I pick a fight with her to tell her that she SHOULD think that I’m the best guy she’s ever met in every category? Or would it make more sense to assume that if she chose me over all other men, has borne me two children, and spends every waking moment making my life better that she probably loves me and respects me, even if she thinks I’m less than perfect?

All men want is to be accepted for who they are.

Oh. So basically Evan’s kind of like a lot of those assertive, dominant, insufferable women he advises to tone down their personalities or find somebody “easy going”?? Am I interpreting that correctly? Am I the only one who is reading between the lines of what he’s saying and taking “easy going” to mean “doesn’t challenge you and let’s you be an asshole”?

Am I also incorrect when I infer from Evan’s article that men can be overbearing and arrogant and self-absorbed, but women can’t?  And that “masculine energy” (read=asshole) is acceptable in men, but frowned upon in women?

Finally, is Evan saying that men want to be accepted for who they are, and shouldn’t be expected to change, but women don’t have that luxury?

Mind you, I’m not disagreeing with the advice to tone down certain things or to seek more compliant partners. I’m criticizing the fact that that direction only seems to be given to women and that Evan appears completely unaware of the influence he holds over his female clients just by being  a man.

Thoughts?

 FEATURED POST:

www.evanmarckatz.com/blog/favorites/is-evan-marc-katz-a-sexist-who-tells-women-to-settle-and-looks-down-on-his-wife

 

 

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

94 Responses to “So, Men Can Be Assholes But Women Can’t? Gotcha.”

  1. Kay Says:

    You may be missing the point. I think he advocates for men and women and is simply saying tone it down or find someone more compliant.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 31 Thumb down 4

  2. bbdawg Says:

    Moxie, I read his website sometimes and I enjoy reading his points. I have to say that the reason people take him seriously (I assume we all take opinions with a grain of salt) is that he is married. He sells the package that he himself bought. No one is that naive to believe in anything 100%, but his advice is valid. it’s not “edgy”… but it’s something to consider. I like how radical some of his advice is (anti-casual sex if you’re after commitment; a relationship must show a progression/steps to commitment, etc..). I assume we all take that with a grain of salt.

    The difference between you giving advice and him, from that perspective, is that you are not interested in marriage/children/family and you view that with suspicion and borderline sarcasm. There is a level of cynicism in some of your articles that makes it clear that you don’t see “love” and commitment as a real possibility, not in the way he does. It becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy, because the minute you start being cynical you close yourself off to experiences.

    M. Katz closed the deal. He got married. In that regard, he speaks from experience. You HAVE to take experience into consideration if you are reading someone’s advice. If he were a single guy who dates women for 3-6 months max I would read his advice about marriage/commitment differently. I don’t think he “brainwashed” his clients, he showed results and marketed them well, and people will buy an idea/product if they feel said idea/product shows results.

    Your column is about early-stages dating and it pretty much ends there. There are very few letters about anything that has lasted more than 6 months. Whereas I think most women want to get away from dating and just be in a relationship. Most women want companionship in a relationship. And you only really get that in a marriage/serious LTR type of scenario.

    His points are valid. Being a go-getter CEO-type female is not attractive to most men. Going after men does not work. Attempting to have sex like men does not work. These aren’t the absolute “truth”, these are ideas that appear to be truthful after hearing from people’s experiences and preferences.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 53 Thumb down 7

    • ATWYSingle Says:

      You buy into what he says because he confirms biases you already have.

      I am not suspicious or cynical about marriage or love. I value both very highly. That’s why I’m always side-eying people rushing into things, because marriage and commitment – to me – are a very big deal and not something to be taken lightly.

      Yes, Evan “closed the deal” as you put it. But you do realize that anybody can do that, right? That getting married isn’t the accomplishment and that staying married is?

      All of his advice is tailored to getting women to do one thing: find someone willing to put up with them aka settle. Like I said, I don’t necessarily disagree with that, but even if he weren’t married, women would still buy what he’s selling. He wasn’t always married. He was single for years and coaching.

      He seems rather proud of the fact that he’s difficult to deal with and that he found someone willing to tolerate him. So, if that’s what you’d like, go for it. That sounds horrible to me.

      Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 26 Thumb down 36

      • BrooklynRoyal Says:

        It seems to me that if you want to get married or bee in a real LTR, you have to settle… And there is nothing wrong with that. No one is perfect, therefore you will never find the ideal that you have in your head. Anyone who marries you would be settling too. No one will ever appear who checks off every box on your wish list. That is why I think he is right.

        Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 35 Thumb down 3

      • chillybeans Says:

        It is horrible. My ex used to actually say in couples counseling “its my way or the highway.” and “I make more $$$ so I make the decisions”.

        His second wife is a doormat who hangs onto his every word like its gospel.
        IMHO they deserve each other.

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

  3. Tinker Says:

    Evan found something that worked for him (he stopped ‘chasing chemistry’, sought general compatibility instead and found someone he liked enough to marry) and now believes it should work for everyone. I’m glad for him, and surely it will work for some people, but the assumption that his way is the best or real way and everyone else is foolish or missing it or in denial completely rubs me the wrong way.

    He also has a penchant for saying ‘this was in a study so it’s true’. I mean… anyone can find a study to fit their opinion. The fact that he is aware of the confirmation bias phenomenon but thinks it somehow applies to everyone except him is also offputting. I believe he means well but his delivery can easily overshadow his good intentions.

    His audience listens to him though because he has always claimed to want the same things they want- marriage, 2 kids, white picket fence- and he got it. He was successful in getting what was most important to him and that carries weight. I don’t think they listen to him just because he is a man.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 27 Thumb down 2

    • ATWYSingle Says:

      (he stopped ‘chasing chemistry’, sought general compatibility instead and found someone he liked enough to marry)

      I wonder if that has anything to do with his low sex drive. Or were we not supposed to connect that dot? When sex isn’t that important to you, it’s much easier to make attraction and “chemistry” less of a priority. But of course nobody picked up on that.

      His advice is very simple. He’s telling women either they need to change or they need to settle. But when he’s called on it, he says that he’s not telling women to change, he’s telling them “to be more effective.” He knows what he’s saying. He’s just being intentionally obtuse when he’s called on it.

      Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 27 Thumb down 13

      • Tinker Says:

        I couldn’t agree with you more on the no sex drive thing. I’d never read that before today, but it makes perfect sense.

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

      • mgm531 Says:

        I don’t agree that his advice is as simplistic as you say it is. Yes, he is advising women to change their perspective or type of man they pursue, but is that necessarilly a bad thing? If the majority of his clients are miserable because they are dating a**holes that they happen to be attracted to then wouldn’t it be prudent advice to tell them to stop dating a**holes? So Evan advises his clients to either change or find someone more suitable to compliment their respective personality. I suppose the alternative is to keep on dating a**holes in the hopes that you’ll find that one in a million that changes his ways, but what’s the likelyhood of that happening? As Evan advises you either change your behaviour, or you change whom you date. You may call that ‘settling’ but I call it a reality check. It’s either that or keep on dating a**holes.

        Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 28 Thumb down 1

  4. Maria Says:

    Moxie’s right. Evan’s got double standards. Some patriarchal outdated crap

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 18 Thumb down 31

    • mgm531 Says:

      No I don’t think he has a double standard. If you read his post he specifically states that he changed the type of woman he pursued. He starting dating women that better complimented his personality. In other words, he ‘settled’. This is the same advice he gives to his clients.

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

  5. Nicole Says:

    I don’t read Evan’s blog very often – I’m not really his Type A target audience, and I need advice that doesn’t sound like the things my Southern Baptist mom and aunts instilled in me from preschool. Having said that, I think he has a good point about finding someone whose energy complements your own.

    Being an abrasive asshole is not attractive in men or women. Being take-charge, dominant, ambitious, and opinionated can be attractive in either gender – but those qualities are likely to work better in a long term relationship with someone who is a little more laid back. If both people have to Have things done their way every time, there’s going to be a lot of fighting and resentment. If both members of the couple make their career their number one priority, there’s not going to be much energy or time left to nurture the relationship. I think telling driven, ambitious women to date stop dating the male version of themselves is good advice.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 37 Thumb down 0

    • ATWYSingle Says:

      I think telling driven, ambitious women to date stop dating the male version of themselves is good advice.

      His points are valid. Being a go-getter CEO-type female is not attractive to most men.

      I’m sorry, what? So, being driven and ambitious and a “go-getter” is now unattractive? Do you hear yourselves? Aren’t these the very qualities most women say they want in a man?

      Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 11 Thumb down 26

      • bbdawg Says:

        Moxie that is EXACTLY what he is saying: what we women find attractive in men is not what men find attractive/desirable in women. Yes, that is politically incorrect, but generally speaking, that seems to be true.

        Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 35 Thumb down 2

        • ATWYSingle Says:

          Yes, and I’m telling you that that’s not true. Most confident men are not turned off by ambitious or driven women. You’re conflating ambitious and driven with arrogant and aggressive.

          Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 14 Thumb down 22

          • John Says:

            Have to agree with Moxie on men liking driven women. My last 2 LTRs were with women who were accomplished. One had her own practice in the medical field and the other was nurse manager of an ICU unit.

            Both were high quality women and I was fascinated with their fields of choice and loved listening to and giving my opinions of the challenges they faced. Both of them had Masters degrees.

            I find it super sexy when a woman “outdegrees” me.

            Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 12 Thumb down 10

            • mindstar Says:

              And that’s your choice and valid for you. That does not mean it is equally valid for everyone else.

              I’ll hazard a guess that those women found you more easygoing and laidback than the driven Type A personalities there were surrounded with every day.

              We are most compatible with people we can get along with. You can’t build a lasting relationship where you’re always in conflict wuith your partner.

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

          • AG Says:

            You’re confusing confident and driven with nice and being a good female partner. Sure, confident and driven men like the same in a woman, they’ll date them, bang them, but they will almost always choose the sweet girl who treats him like a king over the whipsmart alpha female. It’s very simple and that you don’t understand that is probably why you’re still single.

            Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 4

          • PGH_Gal Says:

            I don’t think you should be surprised that you’re getting so much resistance on this. It’s fascinating that a blog that has a such a strong feminist (and P.S. feminism is about equality, not female supremacy) writer attracts SO MANY readers who are either pure misogynists or support patriarchal/misogynistic ideals.

            So no, Moxie. Women who are ambitious, smart and tenacious are not attractive. Let’s get some real pushovers with no opinions and now you’re talking!

            Flame away.

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2

      • Nicole Says:

        ATWYSingle Says:
        “I’m sorry, what? So, being driven and ambitious and a “go-getter” is now unattractive? Do you hear yourselves? Aren’t these the very qualities most women say they want in a man?”

        Not what I’m saying at all. I think many men are attracted to driven and successful women – that’s why I said it was attractive in either gender.

        I tend to believe in that to some degree opposites attract in this case – or at least work better over the long run. Two highly driven, focused people might have a strong chemistry – but what happens when their goals don’t align and neither will give? If my dream job requires me to move to New York and my boyfriends job requires him to stay in Dallas, one of us has to give – or we face a lifetime of plane rides and barely seeing each other.

        I don’t think it matters at all whether the man or the woman is the bigger “compromiser” in the relationship. In an ideal situation, both people give a little. But if you’re a CEO or a military officer or in any other high stress, high pressure career, you can’t always meet somebody halfway. And you might be happier with a partner who’s happy supporting your goals, even sometimes at the expense of their own.

        His advice – find a partner who complements you, not the most successful or richest person you can snag – applies equally to men and women. Men are just frequently already doing that.

        Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 27 Thumb down 1

      • The D-man Says:

        “Do you hear yourselves? Aren’t these the very qualities most women say they want in a man?”

        Is this a joke? Women also like guys who are muscular and bigger than they are. Should men want the same thing from women? I like dating women who are feminine. If I wanted someone masculine I’d date my best friend.

        Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 24 Thumb down 1

  6. Fyodor Says:

    This is a weird, counterintuitive interpretation. I don’t see how you got what he’s saying from that.

    “My happiest clients – doctors, lawyers, CEOs, etc – came to terms with the idea that dominant, assertive, difficult, “masculine” energy is not appealing to traditionally masculine men, and if they wanted to continue to always get their way at home, they’d be better off choosing an easygoing guy who will not fight with them. He may not make as much money. He may not be as charismatic. But he will be the one guy who lets everything roll off his back. Easygoing is one of most valuable and underrated traits in a partner (not just according to me, but according to studies on marriage). Who is a better long-term partner – the one who fights you, tooth and nail, on everything? Or the one whose default setting is “Yes”?

    “Did any of them change their personalities? Not one bit. They are the exact same women they were when they came to me. All that changed was their choice in men.”

    He specifically advises them to shoot for easygoing men with whom they can be their aggressive selves rather than CEO types with whom they will clash. Just as he has found someone with whom he can be himself.

    In terms of whether he gets away with more as a dating advisor, I don’t know that he does.

    I greatly enjoy this site and your advice. I don’t know you as a person so I can’t say whether you’re an asshole. I will say that Evan goes to a lot more trouble to be gentle with the people he is advising.

    It seems that whenever someone is getting “above” their market value you try rather gleefully to put them in their place. And that’s part of your shtick-that’s what a lot of people come here to read, both your commenting audience and probably letter writers. Half your articles involve telling the letter writer that they are having bad experiences because they are dating people who are too attractive for them.

    Contrast with something like this.

    http://www.evanmarckatz.com/blog/dating-tips-advice/im-too-unique-to-find-a-husband-so-please-tell-me-i-dont-have-to-change/

    He tries really hard to explain why she is limiting herself.

    I find you much more entertaining to read, but it’s not right that he somehow gets away with being an asshole. If anything he is much more careful to avoid offending his audience and client base.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 43 Thumb down 0

  7. DMN the Wise Says:

    “What men value in a partner is often different from what women value in a partner.”

    Well, if you agree with this axiom (and it seems you do) then the natural consequence is that there is going to be a so-called “double standard.” Because, by definition, men and women don’t want the same qualities in a partner.

    In fewer words, women in general want an ambitious and driven guy even if he’s an asshole, and men in general don’t give a shit if she’s ambitious or driven as long as she’s not an asshole.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 37 Thumb down 1

  8. C Says:

    “Oh. So basically Evan’s kind of like a lot of those assertive, dominant, insufferable women he advises to tone down their personalities or find somebody “easy going”?? ”

    Sounds to me like he did the later and found himself an “easy going” (read “passive woman”).

    As for the advise, ehhhh, I’ve heard the same thing from my mother. At some point she sat me down and delivered this speech about “masculine energy” attracting “feminine energy” so if I want to be “the dude” in the relationship, I’d better be ready to live with the effeminate men my behavior was attracting.

    Unfortunately, it was true and doesnt necessarily have anything to do with being a bitch. You can be masculine and not be a bitch (i.e. Ellen Degeneres, Christiane Amanpour, military women). It sems to me that very masculine women like very masculine men, but often not vice versa.

    You could just as easily give the same advise to effeminate men. He can either “man up” or accept the fact that the fact that he will be attractive to a masculine woman who will call all the shots in the relationship.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 27 Thumb down 0

  9. KarmaQueen Says:

    I agree with what everyone said, but have to throw in my 2 cents. First of all, the reason Evan’s advice is for women is that he’s a coach for women. I would think his advice for men would be the same though, like C says.

    Second of all, why are you assuming he’s an asshole to his wife? Do you have some inside knowledge of their marriage? Can you not see the difference between a guy who is opinionated and impossible?

    Third, did it occur to you that the reason you get upset at his advice is because it may apply to you?

    Last, changing your mind about what kind of guy is good for you is not settling. Settling is holding out for crumbs from some alpha male douchebag, not appreciating a good guy. Sounds like Evan is telling women to do exactly what he did – and from his tone, it doesn’t sound like he’s settling at all.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 36 Thumb down 0

  10. Noquay Says:

    I am sort of a type A woman. Not abraisive and domineering but more of a peacemaker. However, I did raise myself up out of poverty, worked hard to get an education so I would never be anything like my alcoholic, high school dropout family. Yep, I’ve led the front lines in many an environmental protest started many community projects to help the less fortunate. Evan probably would(actually he does) consider me too outspoken and questioning of society. Evan is also in a very different place where choosing a wife to support him, raise his kids are top priority. A very different place than many older, accomplished women. I just let go of yet another very beta male. Guess what; changing ones goals, deliberately trying to be “less” in order to please a less ambitious man just plain doesn’t work. Also when one is far more ambitious than ones partner, that person winds up doing most of the work of the relationship, the home, bringing home most of the paycheck. You wind up not just emotionally/intellectually starved, but also exhausted. I think most of us do want our complement, someone we are on the same level with, someone who pulls her/his weight in a rship. In short, an equal.

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

    • Greg Figueroa Says:

      The point is not to go for extremes, but find someone who fits better for you. I read the lack of respect you have for that “very beta male.” Yeah, it sucks to do the majority of the work, so you dumped his unfair ass.

      Some beta males can be assholes too.

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

      • Noquay Says:

        Greg
        It’s that I don’t have respect for him, it’s that he, in his 60s, does not want to take the needed steps to deal with his issues, support himself in the future, put in the effort necessary and that ain’t my job. When I am in financial/emotional deep doo doo to the point that it affects my ability to function emotionally/physically in a rship, I deal with my issues myself, not blame my partner. He’s not intentionally an a$$hole, he just isn’t in a place where he should’ve been seeking a committed rship.

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1

  11. BostonRobin Says:

    EMK quite often advises women (and even the occasional man who writes) to “dump” someone who isn’t treating them right. That doesn’t sound like settling to me–he prefers the term “compromise.”

    His advice seems to focus on how you can’t change people, so you might as well change your choice in people. Also, and here’s the tricky part, you can’t change who you’re attracted to, but you can choose to walk away from that person who treats you badly. (Still working on that!)

    Some of us have “broken pickers” and just need a different perspective on how dating and relationships are supposed to work, what’s normal, how much you’re supposed to put up with.

    I find his advice useful, also Moxie’s. Any dating advice, imo, is about keeping your sanity so you don’t burn out. It’s really helpful to know that other people are going through the same things.

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

    • bbdawg Says:

      Yeah at first I thought he was abrasive, but the advice about “dumping” is very interesting. It’s a very black-and-white world for him: either the relationship is constructive and shows signs of progression towards marriage or you dump the guy.

      Most advice/talk that bills itself as progressive has to do with women acting a bit more like men, and “accepting” that men aren’t into relationships, that marriage is outdated, that casual sex is the way of the world, etc…

      EMK’s advice is interesting because it is so conservative and in the end it’s about results. If anyone could prove that “progressive” attitudes towards dating lead to marriage, then you bet women would take that seriously. He shows that by being flexible with the man you attract (accept betas, let go of alphas) but being inflexible with the kind of relationship that you seek (drop FWBs/men who aren’t interested in relationships/men who don’t actively show interest) is the way for women to accomplish the goal of getting out of dating and being in a monogamous, committed relationship.

      Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 0

  12. Holly Says:

    Evan has a lot of good things to say but he treats women as though they are a monolith. His advice never varies by situation and is always the same.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 11 Thumb down 7

    • Greg Figueroa Says:

      A lot of people tend to have a lot of the same problems with varying circumstances.

      Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 8 Thumb down 2

  13. Selena Says:

    As a long time reader of EMK’s blog and comment section, I have the impression there are many women out there who are “drivers”. Nothing wrong with this. These women say they want either an equal partner (meaning someone who is as educated, successful, driven as they are), or a *traditional/alpha* partner (meaning someone who is MORE educated, successful, driven than they are). And some women either aren’t attracting the type of men they say they want, or they attract them, but the men don’t stick around. I think if a woman wants a man to do the driving, or share it, she has to be willing to relinquish the wheel. And many women are unwilling (unable?) to do this despite what they say/think they want.

    To me much of EMK’s advice is geared to these women. He tells them they can either change – by staying the driver in their careers, but sharing/giving up the wheel in their relationship – or, they can decide they would be happy with a man who’s content to let them do the driving. OR, they can keep on doing what they’ve been doing…holding out for another “driver” without ever be willing to let go of the wheel themselves.

    Countless times in the commment section I’ve seen woman get irate at EMK for suggesting women might want to change something. It’s MEN who should change! they write. And I’ve seen women seemingly almost insulted by the idea they may be better off with a different type of man than the kind they think they want. No “settling” for a beta!

    Brainwashing? I think many of us may have been brainwashed by the entertainment industry going back to Brother’s Grimm. We’re told we can get the rich, handsome prince. Unfortunately though, there’s only one of him. The rest of us are going to end up with average looking farmers, blacksmiths, and cobblers. And we can be happy too!

    For some readers EMK’s advice is nothing new. It’s stuff they grew up with, practiced all along. For others it may be a new way of looking at things, at men, at relationships, at themselves. I don’t think the women who follow EMK’s adviced are brainwashed. They seem to be the ones who are open to trying something new, to look at something in a different way – because what they were doing previously wasn’t working for them.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 28 Thumb down 1

    • Greg Figueroa Says:

      For most of those Alphas fighting for the wheel isn’t sexy for them.

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

      • Selena Says:

        I think that’s the point EMK tries to get across to his *alpha female* readers who say they want/need an *alpha* male. *Alpha* guys don’t want someone fighting them over the wheel. They want someone who won’t.

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

  14. Fyodor Says:

    “You could just as easily give the same advise to effeminate men. He can either “man up” or accept the fact that the fact that he will be attractive to a masculine woman who will call all the shots in the relationship.”

    Men very frequently get this type of advice and other types of advice about how to adjust their personalities to be successful with women. It is so obviously accepted that the decision moves immediately to the “how” without even stopping at the “whether.”

    A man who said “I’m an effeminate marginally employed introvert, but I’m not going to change! Women collectively have an obligation to be attracted to me as I am!” would be laughed out of the room. He wouldn’t get choruses of “you go [guy]” from other men on the Internet.

    It is true that very successful asshole men don’t have to change their personalities, but that’s because there is a market of women who will tolerate the assholeness because of the success and/or confidence that often accompanies it. Not necessarily a majority of women, but enough that he can find plenty of people to date or marry. But that’s on women, not men. The implied idea that men are obligated to adopt the same bad standards so that successful unpleasant women can have the same experiences as successful unpleasant men is both wrong on the merits and very unlikely to happen.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 25 Thumb down 1

  15. Yvonne Says:

    Evan caters to a specific demographic: upscale, well-educated, high-earning women who can afford to pay for his services. Ironically, it’s those very women who have the highest rates of marriage today. There is a “marriage gap” in this country, and college-educated men and women are more likely to marry and combine their high incomes. They are also less likely to divorce. Both women and men with less income and education are seeing declining rates of marriage and higher divorce rates when they do marry, but I don’t think Katz is concerned about them.

    For me then, there is still a subtle message in some of what Katz preaches; that successful women are bitchier and need to tone it down in order to find a man. Given the reality of marriages rates today, is that really true? There is also the fact that women are the large majority of Katz’ clientele, and again, there is the subtle message that women often get; that you are doing something wrong. Whether it’s your hair, makeup, body, or demeanor, it needs improvement.

    OTOH, there are plenty of PUA sites for men who want to up their game, but that’s more about getting sex than marriage.

    I was surprised that Evan admitted to having a low libido, though. Not very “alpha” of him!

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 10 Thumb down 3

    • Greg Figueroa Says:

      The message is the same because, like you said, he’s dealing with a certain demographic.

      In PUA sites, a lot of guys tend to have a few of the same problems: approach anxiety, unsure about building attraction, and not knowing when to close (phone number, kiss, sex). So the message tends to be the same based on the needs and issues of PUA’S biggest demographic (so called beta males).

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0

    • Nicole Says:

      “There is also the fact that women are the large majority of Katz’ clientele, and again, there is the subtle message that women often get; that you are doing something wrong. Whether it’s your hair, makeup, body, or demeanor, it needs improvement.”

      Well, he’s in the business of giving advice … If his message was that women are doing everything right already, he wouldn’t get very many paying clients.

      “For me then, there is still a subtle message in some of what Katz preaches; that successful women are bitchier and need to tone it down in order to find a man.”

      As you mentioned, he’s speaking to a certain subset of women – well-off and having trouble with relationships. I’m sure Evan knows (as we all do) plenty of career-oriented women who have never had difficulty getting relationships to work. But they aren’t his potential clients.

      I do think – and I know this is an unpopular opinion these days – that there are a lot of women who were so focused on school, career, and being independent that they missed the basic lessons in “Girlfriend 101″. These women are Evan’s market – they have money and they are sufficiently clueless about men and relationships that they will take his advice as gospel.

      One of the other recent posts he had up was about how men like women who show affection and interest. That seems like saying “the sky is blue”… But the comment thread was full of disagreement. Women insisting that flirty touching on a coffee date made them uncomfortable because personal space. Women confusing acting interested with blowing up a guys phone for a week straight. If Evan can convince these one of these women to lean forward, touch a guy on the hand, and say, “You’re so much fun to be around” – then he’s probably going to triple her success with men and seem like a genius.

      Tldr… He’s not saying successful women are bitchy. He’s just pointing out that the skills that get you success at work aren’t the same ones that get you success in relationships.

      Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 22 Thumb down 0

      • Selena Says:

        “I do think – and I know this is an unpopular opinion these days – that there are a lot of women who were so focused on school, career, and being independent that they missed the basic lessons in “Girlfriend 101″.

        This reminded me of something I read in EMK’s comment section years ago. I woman wrote she never said “Thank You” on a date.

        I was floored.

        How can anyone not do something so basic? And think it’s perfectly fine not to do it? !!! Wow.

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

      • Yvonne Says:

        “I’m sure Evan knows (as we all do) plenty of career-oriented women who have never had difficulty getting relationships to work. But they aren’t his potential clients”, but then you say, “He’s just pointing out that the skills that get you success at work aren’t the same ones that get you success in relationships”, so that sounds like a contradiction to me.

        My guess is that there are more women out there having problems with relationships because they don’t stand up for themselves then that they are too career-oriented. The days of the CEO marrying his secretary are gone. From what I read a lot of high-powered men and women are joining forces and marrying each other. I’ve read Evan’s blog (and this one as well) and have seen many more examples of women trying to make things work with men who are indifferent to them than anything else. Men do that too, although they may not complain to a dating blog about it.

        My biggest takeaway with dating is to be able to discern when someone is truly interested and when they are not. Katz actually does a good job in helping women make that interpretation, and in that respect, I agree with much of what he says.

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 2

        • Nicole Says:

          I don’t see the contradiction…
          There are skills that help you succeed in a competitive, stressful work environment – and there are skills that help you succeed in relationships. Some people have the former, some the latter, and some have both.

          I know lots of women who are take-charge leaders at work and also very nurturing and sweet and supportive with their families. They don’t defer to their husbands, but they ask or suggest rather than tell, and they take as much pride in being awesome wives and moms as they do in their jobs. More, probably.

          I also know a few women who bring their “work selves” everywhere and expect their families and friends to work around their schedules and defer to their opinions. The women from the latter category are either single or married to super chill, easy going men who like having their wives run the show at home. I think this is the type of woman Evan is speaking to in that column. I haven’t read much of his stuff though so I could be way off base.

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0

  16. Ben Iyyar Says:

    I cannot help but wonder why, if we modify our standards for an intimate relationship, behave less abrasively or be less demanding, get counseling, or try to react more positively to others, it is considered almost a betrayal of ourselves, or at least immoral to ourselves. Changing our behavior is what many see as compromise, or what is disparagingly referred to as “settling.” This is because I just do not see any real difference between physically modifying our appearance, like straightening our teeth, fixing our nose, having laser surgery, or losing weight to make ourselves more attractive to potential partners with changing our relationship patterns. As we get older we mature, experience, and reevaluate our lives and our relationships, so when we do marry (settle) later in life we stand a good chance of success. I say this as I married in my thirties and yet I am more in love with my wife of thirty four years than ever, and our family of four wonderful sons still brings me to tears of happiness.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 22 Thumb down 0

  17. mindstar Says:

    If the women who Evan coaches were getting they type of man they wanted then they wouldn’t be going to Evan for coaching. I do disagree with what seeems to be his unwillingness to acknowledge exceptions to the advice he gives but he’s clearly making $$$ of his audience.

    The idea of finding someone with a comptaible personality is NOT settling. You can’t have a enjoyable relationship if both you and your partner are constantly fighting. Changing what you’re looking for is not settling. It may even be an improvement.

    In my opinion the big difference between men and women is that men are more willing to change to accomplish their goals. The point of the PUA sites is that you as a man HAVE to change yourself and your behavior if you want to change the type of women you can get. So the sites encourage men to dress better, get in better physical shape, earn more money, be more socially aware and yes some sites do encourage asshole behavior for the sad but simple reason that many women like assholes.

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

  18. ATWYSingle Says:

    The success of Evan’s advice depends largely on what the woman is looking for. If a woman just wants to get married and have kids, then dating a “beta” or someone “easy going” will work for them because they just don’t want to be alone or want to have kids. They’re the women who aren’t looking for someone who is an equal and don’t prioritize sexual compatibility/care about sex. Guess what? They probably weren’t going to have much sex any way. They’re just looking for a guy willing to marry them so they can be married.

    I think people are missing that part.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 8 Thumb down 25

    • bbdawg Says:

      That is very simplistic, Moxie. People want partnerships. I don’t think women will marry just anyone. I find it troubling that you seem to look down on women who want to get married and that you dismiss them as “not liking sex” and “marrying down”. That is what the large majority of the female population wants, worldwide. Partnerships, companionship and protection that is afforded by marriage.

      Because the alternative is, a lifetime of unstable, casual relationships with promiscuous men who are sleeping with lots of women at the same time, or serially. Who cares if they are “equal”? Who cares if that you have “good sex” with them?

      At the end of the day, these people are not around, you can’t count on them, you can’t share experiences with them, they only come into your life for sexual activity. They are not going to be there for you when times are hard. You are going to have a hard time selling that as an alternative, because it feels shallow and short-sighted.

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

      • ATWYSingle Says:

        I find it troubling that you seem to look down on women who want to get married

        You’re internalizing my words. I don’t look down on women who want to get married. Hate to break it to you, but lots of men and women get married to just anyone just to get married. In fact, I think it happens quite often.

        Who cares if they are “equal”? Who cares if that you have “good sex” with them?

        Speaking of simplistic.

        Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 9 Thumb down 16

      • ATWYSingle Says:

        At the end of the day, these people are not around, you can’t count on them, you can’t share experiences with them, they only come into your life for sexual activity. They are not going to be there for you when times are hard. You are going to have a hard time selling that as an alternative, because it feels shallow and short-sighted.

        Gee. I hope I’m able to get through hard times without a man.

        Oh wait…I DID. Maybe that’s why I feel the way I feel. I’m sure that has something to do with it. Sorry, I don’t live my life wondering how I’ll get through “tough times” all by myself.

        Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 14 Thumb down 20

      • LostSailor Says:

        That is very simplistic, Moxie. People want partnerships…Who cares if they are “equal”? Who cares if that you have “good sex” with them?…At the end of the day, these people are not around, you can’t count on them, you can’t share experiences with them, they only come into your life for sexual activity.

        Wow. What a stunted view of relationships! Who cares if you’re equal (or complimentary) in a relationship! Who cares whether you are sexually compatible and enjoy good sex! People like that are unreliable and won’t be there for you when the hard times hit!

        I call complete bullshit on that. Aside from distorting what Moxie’s written. Talk about shallow and short-sighted…

        Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 4 Thumb down 9

        • bbdawg Says:

          What I am saying is, casual “relationships” are worthless. Yup. A waste of time. A waste of time if you’re seeking a long-term relationship.

          It is irrelevant if you are “equal” or if the sex is good. It’s not a relationship. (A great satirical blog called “black girls are easy” coined the term “situationship”). I am yet to meet a woman who benefited from a casual situationship. What is the use of meeting a guy with a similar background “i.e. equal” who wants an open relationship. Delete. Next.

          If a person isn’t part of your life, won’t call you or give up on sex with others to be with you, if you can’t share or build something together, it’s pointless to pursue this. It’s about shifting the focus from the “great guy” to what your needs are as a person. What is the use of the “great guy” if he is not available? Delete. Next.

          LostSailor I recall reading that you have FWBs and other than your past marriage you haven’t had or pursued long-term relationships so I can see how you will take issue with that. We’re on different camps, essentially.
          I am not trying to change your perspective since I am not interested in what you have to offer.

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

          • LostSailor Says:

            bbdawg, you can’t “change [my] perspective” since you have no idea what my perspective is, you have only your erroneous guesses about what my “perspective” is.

            You wrote: Partnerships, companionship and protection that is afforded by marriage is what the large majority of the female population wants, worldwide.

            I’m glad you can speak for women worldwide. The same level of insight into their “perspective” is at play here, too.

            No one is putting down partnerships or even marriage, though I can not in good conscience recommend marriage for younger men to many Western women, given the current legal landscape.

            But you are also saying that equality, compatibility, and good sex are apparently only the province of players and cads and are unimportant to a “real” relationship. And there, you are completely wrong. Those aspects are crucial to long-term relationships. You dismiss them at your peril.

            You also write I am yet to meet a woman [who is solely focused on a LTR/Marriage] who benefited from a casual situationship. Fixed that for ya.

            That you don’t find benefit in “casual” relationships or find value in them is on you. You can’t speak for women who do find value and benefit in such relationships. That, and you have twisted Moxie’s words as well as mine in an attempt to make your point.

            Then you dig into my mind. I’ve had a number of LT relationships when I was younger, and a long marriage. I know quite well what goes into a solid LTR. It’s true that I haven’t had a LTR since my divorce, but you have no idea whether I’ve “pursued” one.

            Yes, I still have a long-distance FWB relationship, one that’s lasted over two years so far. Yes, it’s an open relationship, but we’re quite open and honest with each other about any other activity. And I’ve been there for her when she has needed it, including a medical emergency that I took time, money, and travel to help her deal with. And we both benefit from and value the relationship–and it is a real relationship, even if it doesn’t meet your definition. Pro-tip: you don’t get to determine what is a real relationship for other people.

            But bbdawg, you are right about one thing. If what you have to offer is a relationship of just support and obligation where equality, compatibility, and good sex don’t matter, then I am definitely not interested in what you have to offer.

            ATWYS?

            Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 5

            • ATWYSingle Says:

              One of the reasons I find writing this blog so tedious is that the perspectives on marriage and monogamy and relationships amongst many of the commenters are still so painfully narrow. Especially in regards to women.

              Not everybody goes through life searching for a committed, monogamous relationship. Not everybody fears being alone through the rough times. Some of us just decided to be happy on our own, or feel confident that we’ll get through harder times on our own, or enjoy relationships that, to many, might not look “real.” Maybe we’ll get married. Maybe we won’t. Either way, we know we’ll be okay.

              That’s not giving up. That’s letting go.

              Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 9 Thumb down 3

            • Nicole Says:

              LS, you wrote this in today’s thread – I’m replying here to keep from going off topic on that page.

              “I was called out as only wanting “casual” relationships because I think that compatibility and decent sex are important to relationships and told that “real” relationships are (to women) are about partnership, companionship, protection, and support. Compatibility and sex are apparently not necessary.”

              I usually agree with your comments on this board … but it seems like you’re being deliberately obtuse here so you can take people’s words out of context.

              She’s not saying that sex and compatibility are unimportant in relationships. I don’t know any woman who would say that. Even folks with low/no sex drive want a partner with a similar libido so they don’t end up resenting each other.

              What bbdawg is saying is that IF a woman seeks a long term, stable, monogamous relationship, AND she meets a guy who is only interested in casual sex/short term/FWB, THEN it truly doesn’t matter if said guy is awesome in bed and gorgeous and smart and funny. He’s not the right guy for her, because they want different things. Applies the other way around, too… you could meet the most beautiful, sexy, brilliant woman in the world tomorrow – but if she tells you that her goal is to be married and pregnant by next year, you’d ignore her amazingness and run like hell, right?

              Relationships – whether they are FWB, marriage, casual, serious, monogamous, monogamish, poly, whatever – don’t work if people want fundamentally different things. That’s not saying sex and compatibility don’t matter; it’s just acknowledging that they aren’t the only things necessary for a healthy relationship.

              Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1

  19. KarmaQueen Says:

    Why do you assume that a man who is less opinionated isn’t an equal? Why do you assume that a man who isn’t difficult is bad in bed? You are trying painfully hard to justify your minority opinion that Katz is telling women to settle, when it’s obvious to everyone else that he’s not. Sounds like you’ve chosen not to “settle” and it feels better to you to try to take down others who have made successful compromises – by suggesting that they are not happy or have bad sex.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 23 Thumb down 4

  20. ATWYSingle Says:

    Why do you assume that a man who isn’t difficult is bad in bed?

    The issue about sexual compatibility got brought up because Evan made a point to mention he had a low libido. That’s doesn’t mean he’s bad in bed. It means he has a low sex drive. So, either his wife has a low sex drive, too, in which case Mazels to both of them OR she has a higher sex drive and quite possibly isn’t all that satisfied. He mentioned that for a reason. That’s not something you just throw out there.

    As I said above, Evan’s advice is geared to women who just want to get married or have a relationship. Anybody can find compatibility with anybody is that’s the goal. But if you’re seeking something more – and plenty of women are – then his advice to date someone more easy going isn’t going to work. What if they like more extroverted guys? Then what? The only guys tolerating Evan’s “don’t put out til he commits” advice are men desperate for a girlfriend or any sex at all. Sorry, but I don’t want that guy. He doesn’t have to be an Alpha with a ton of options, but he shouldn’t be passive,either. I don’t like passive.

    He has a very specific niche: women desperate to get married. I’m not desperate to get married, which is why I find fault with his advice. He’s totally lost when it comes to dealing with successful, secure women who like sex who aren’t terrified of ending up alone. Dare I say..they intimidate him.

    You disagree. Cool.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 12 Thumb down 19

    • mindstar Says:

      “He’s totally lost when it comes to dealing with successful, secure women who like sex who aren’t terrified of ending up alone.”

      Exactly right because those women are not his target audience thus his advice has neither meaning nor value for them. Whether or not they intimidate him (which may be correct) is beside the point because he’s not concerned about those women. They’re not going to sign up for his lectures so they’re not on his radar.

      To those women who are in his target audience then his advice does have meaning and value.

      Most men are not terrified of ending up alone so his classes would be valueless to us. Similarly for women who are not terrified of ending up alone his classes are equally valueless.

      But some women ARE terrified of that and they will pay him to lessen or eliminate that terror. I’f I’m scared of drowning taking skydiving lessons, while fun, will do nothing to address my fear of drowning. Swimming lessons will.

      Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 1

  21. Fyodor Says:

    Right, you’re not anti-marriage, but women who don’t insist on a powerful and successful alpha male “just don’t want to be alone” and are “just looking for a guy willing to marry them so they can be married”

    And by not insisting on someone who is also aggressive and professionally successful these women are revealing themselves to be frigid and doomed to a life of sexlessness with their non-successful (and thus non-equal and thus sexually incompetent) spouses.

    But other than those stipulations you don’t have any prejudices about marriage. And Evan’s greater success as a marriage advisor is solely because of sexism and not because he gives better practical advice about finding a spouse.

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

    • ATWYSingle Says:

      Right. I’m not anti-marriage. There’s no divorce in my family. Marriage is a big deal. I grew up around nothing but positive examples of marriage, which is probably why I feel the way I feel. I don’t date passive guys. I know what I’m looking for, and it doesn’t involve much more than grit. Those guys exist. I get along best with guys who are a little intense. They aren’t assholes or bad boys. They’re just more assertive.

      I didn’t say that had to be aggressive or professionally successful. I’m not advocating that women chase around Alphas. I’m interpreting easy going very differently than everybody else, and that’s the disconnect. I’m sure I’m internalizing some stuff, but based on my interactions with Evan, I get the feeling he’s not comfortable with women who aren’t easy to influence, which is why I interpret easy going as something different.

      Evan’s success as a marriage advisor, I believe, stems from his clientele being mostly women eager to get married.

      Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 8 Thumb down 14

      • BrooklynRoyal Says:

        I agree, Evans advice is for women who are eager to get married. There is nothing wrong with women who feel that way and no it does not automatically mean they are terrified of being alone. People have bonded as couples since the beginning of time. It is a normal, natural desire.

        Your advice on the other hand is more geared towards people who want casual sex/causal short term relationships. There is nothing wrong with that either, you say you are happy with your lifestyle as I am sure are many other women who surely appreciate your advice.

        We are talking about two different audiences, both area valid. So why all the hate?

        Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 1

      • Selena Says:

        “Evan’s success as a marriage advisor, I believe, stems from his clientele being mostly women eager to get married.”

        I found your blog through EMK’s website when it had a “People Who Get It” sidebar. I also read one or two of his articles where he referred to you as “my fellow truth teller Moxie…”

        You’ve known for YEARS his target market and predominate audience are women who would like to be married.

        So why is his writing/business model bugging you so much lately?

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

        • ATWYSingle Says:

          Why is it considered “hate” because I disagree with him? How many times did I say in this post that I agreed with his advice?

          I agree with his advice that women who want to get married and who apparently have personality defects they can’t or won’t change should do what Evan advised and make physical chemistry less of a priority and start going for men who are more agreeable and easy going. I agree with that. I’m merely pointing out what it is he’s actually telling women to do.

          Maybe I take issue with what Evan says because I’ve become a bit more evolved and have branched out a bit. Maybe I think what Evan is actually telling women to do is go for guys they don’t find all that attractive, either in personality or in looks, and stick with them so they can achieve their goal of getting married. Telling women in their 30’s and 40’s to hold out on having sex until a guy commits is completely counter-productive. It’s horrible advice, especially given the fact that a large number of men in that age range are divorced because things stopped working sexually in their marriage and because those guys have more than enough options that they don’t have to tolerate that. He’s saying, “No no no. Forget those guys who want sex without commitment. They’re never going to commit. Go for the guys who will wait.” Great advice, except the guys who are willing to wait are guys they routinely rejected for a reason, and that reason was that they didn’t find them attractive. What people find attractive doesn’t change all that much. Do you really think he’s waving a wand and teaching women how not to magically find attractive what they find attractive? That’s some potent witchcraft.

          I’m sorry, but how dense are some of you? He’s not helping women find men they desire and are attracted to. He’s not teaching women how to compensate for their more assertive personalities so they can get the guys they want. If he could do those things, he’d be a millionaire! He’s helping women find guys who are just good enough. Evan’s clients are mirrors of him: difficult, argumentative, and always have to be right. He’s teaching them to do what HE DID. Hello? Did nobody else make that connection? Did nobody else hear, “I have a low libido” and not immediately question what that meant?

          And, really, why does it bother you so much other than it gives you something to talk about in the comment sections of dating blogs? It honest to god blows my mind that the most prolific commenters on this site are people WHO DON’T EVEN DATE.

          Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 8 Thumb down 17

          • Nicole Says:

            “It honest to god blows my mind that the most prolific commenters on this site are people WHO DON’T EVEN DATE.”

            I don’t think there are many frequent commenters here who have sworn off dating in favor of being Forever Alone. There are a lot of us who are not currently part of the dating scene because we’re in relationships. I can’t speak for anyone else, but I still read and comment because a) being in a relationship for 6 months hardly guarantees that I’ll never have to date again and b) there are letters and articles about relationship progression that I enjoy… This is my longest relationship since my divorce and frankly I have no clue what’s “normal”. This site is really helpful, even for those of us who are looking for more than casual dating – after all, even serious relationships start with a first date!

            Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 0

            • C Says:

              Evan doesnt even date. That alone should invalidate his point of view. I kid. I kid. Didnt sound like most of the commentors were all that bothered by your point of view. They simply disagreed. You write an engaging blog that you finish with an invitation for the readers to share their “Thoughts?”. So they/we do.

              Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 0

              • ATWYSingle Says:

                No, seriously, explain to me why you are THE MOST vocal commenter and you just got married 2 months ago. Honestly. What the hell are you here EVERY DAY, MULTIPLE TIMES A DAY???? I’m sorry, I don’t get it. You just got married and yet you live on a dating blog. There’s something wrong with that.

                Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 5 Thumb down 16

                • C Says:

                  Good memory. Yep, two months on October 23rd. Initially my husband thought it was pretty weird too but just thinks its funny now. I’m here more then likely for same reason Ben Iyyar is here after 34 years of marriage: its fun brain candy.

                  I dont know about being the most prolific commentor. There are certainly a few regulars vying for that honor, but whateves. If I’m not welcome, I won’t comment.

                  Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 12 Thumb down 3

          • Selena Says:

            “Why is it considered “hate” because I disagree with him? How many times did I say in this post that I agreed with his advice?”

            I never thought “hate”. If anything, more like “don’t relate to”. Or perhaps, “burned out from reading the same thing over and over”.

            So why bring him up on YOUR blog? And write so many negative comments about him? Wouldn’t it be easy to just…you know…NOT read his stuff?

            Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 12 Thumb down 3

            • ATWYSingle Says:

              I read his stuff and a bunch of other sites because it’s part of my job. I only caught that article because it showed up in my twitter feed. I don’t regularly read Evan anymore. The tweet said “Is Evan Marc Katz a Sexist?” or something like that. So I clicked.

              Why bring him up here? For the same reason I bring up stuff from The Frisky or xoJane or any other dating blog – to discuss it. You never have a problem with that.

              Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1

              • Selena Says:

                No, I don’t have a problem with it. I don’t have a problem with you bringing up EMK. It’s some of your…vehemence?… in this thread that has me scratching my head.

                Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 8 Thumb down 6

                • ATWYSingle Says:

                  What are you even talking about? I had nothing to say about this all day yesterday. I wrote ONE comment in a reply and then answered the questions posed to me, including yours. That’s not vehemence. That’s responding.

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

          • KarmaQueen Says:

            You’re making a faulty assumption here: that if a guy really likes you, he won’t wait four weeks to have sex with you. You talk as if alpha males are Neanderthals who have no capacity for sensitivity. That’s just not true. If he’s into you, you can tell him that you don’t have sex until you’re in a relationship. Sorry, but men are rational actors. Even the hot ones. So instead of distorting Katz’s advice into “he’s telling women to only settle for betas they’re not attracted to,” how about you own up to the fact that his advice doesn’t work for you, and only you. I can pull it off because I’m confident, I don’t like sleeping around, and if the guy thinks he deserves to get laid on Date 3, he can take a hike. Why is that so hard for you to accept? That some women don’t like having sex with a guy and seeing him online the next day? And that those women can actually get great guys to come back anyway? Sounds like you don’t want to believe it, even when I’m telling you it’s true.

            The other thing that screams “pot, kettle, black” is your claim that Katz always has to be right. Are you listening to yourself? You’ve got 25 readers calmly telling you that you’re twisting his message, and all you can do is continue to disparage him, and focus on his sex drive. You believe that he mentioned that for a reason. I would guess he mentioned it because it’s one reason that someone wouldn’t want to be with him, not because it’s some hidden clue that he isn’t attracted to his wife, like you were suggesting. Maybe he just has low testosterone, or a couple of kids or is in his forties. You’re like a conspiracy theorist, convinced that you’re right and that everyone who says you’re leaping to conclusions is wrong.

            Maybe you’d get more respect if you were more respectful, and had the capacity to admit any of your own flaws like Katz does. Seems to me that you’re just like him but you don’t want to admit that you have any problems.

            Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 7

            • ATWYSingle Says:

              that if a guy really likes you, he won’t wait four weeks to have sex with you.

              No, I said that a guy isn’t going to commit before having sex. Nobody put any time limit on it. I don’t know a lot of men who commit after dating four weeks. Not men in their forties and above around here, anyway.

              Why is that so hard for you to accept? That some women don’t like having sex with a guy and seeing him online the next day?

              I don’t have a had time accepting that at all. That just doesn’t apply to me. That doesn’t make me better or worse. Just different. That doesn’t faze me, but then I don’t go looking at their profiles to see what they’re doing, either. I know better. You live in LA (like Evan!) and so you face a similar dating market as people in NYC. You should have a better idea of how things work.

              I don’t need to follow Evan’s advice because I’m able to sleep with a guy and not demand commitment and just see where things go because I don’t have a biological clock ticking or feel pressure to marry and still get him to call me again. Why is it so hard for you to admit that some women can achieve that?

              Good for you that you prefer to wait. Nobody’s dumping on you for that. I’m merely pointing out that not all women require that.

              Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 7 Thumb down 6

              • BrooklynRoyal Says:

                Most women are “able” sleep with a man without commitment and just see where thing go, but simply don’t want that. Most want intimacy too, and that just isn’t a part of casual sex. That you are happily fulfilled by sex without intimacy is fine, but women who do not feel the same way you feel aren’t somehow lacking in a skill set you have.

                Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 8 Thumb down 5

                • ATWYSingle Says:

                  You don’t need commitment or exclusivity to have intimacy. Maybe that’s how it is for you, but that’s not how it is for me. You guys are making assumptions based on your own priorities.

                  Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 3

                  • BrooklynRoyal Says:

                    Didn’t I read somewhere you saying you have never been in a serious LTR nor have you ever been Married? If so, how intimacy feels like in a relationship that is budding and will ultimately be serious? And apologies in advance if I am confusing your status with someone else.

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

                    • ATWYSingle Says:

                      I’ve never been married, I’ve never lived with anyone, and I’ve never been in a relationship that lasted longer than a year. My longest is a year. That still doesn’t mean that the relationships I’ve had – casual or not – lacked intimacy.

                      ETA: I’ve had relationships that were off and on (My Ex, S. ) or casual (Tad) that spanned several years. I’m not saying I don’t have my issues, but my relationships where we saw each other consistently for several months, both past and present, had intimacy.

                      Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 2 Thumb down 8

                    • BrooklynRoyal Says:

                      Wow, I am sorry to hear that. You truly don’t know what most of us are talking about. Building a loving, intimate relationship that last for many years is a wonderful experience and gift, so I hope that some day it happens for you, even though you seemingly have given up.

                      Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 16 Thumb down 10

            • ATWYSingle Says:

              You’ve got 25 readers calmly telling you that you’re twisting his message, and all you can do is continue to disparage him, and focus on his sex drive. You believe that he mentioned that for a reason. I would guess he mentioned it because it’s one reason that someone wouldn’t want to be with him, not because it’s some hidden clue that he isn’t attracted to his wife, like you were suggesting.

              I never said he wasn’t attracted to her. I suggested that, for him and the women he advises, sexual/physical attraction wasn’t a priority. He even admitted that when he met his wife he thought he could do better. What exactly do you think that means?
              You’re awfully testy about all this and reading things into my statements that aren’t there. It’s..weird.

              Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 7 Thumb down 11

            • Tinker Says:

              I don’t believe Moxie is bringing up the low sex drive thing to be catty or mean. There are a whole lot of people out here, men and women, for whom a satisfying sex life is very important. So important that we are not willing to commit, in any form, without having a good idea and some evidence that the person we are committing to is a match in that area. It doesn’t seem so outrageous to me- most people won’t even commit to a drink in a bar with someone without seeing a few pictures and exchanging several messages right?

              If you take people who have lower sex drives, they may be more willing to roll the dice and take their chances on testing for compatibility in that area. And I think that’s perfectly valid. A lot of people aren’t willing to take that gamble, and chances are the people who aren’t willing to take that gamble place a higher priority on sexual compatibility and have higher drives. This is also a perfectly valid viewpoint, and not in opposition to long term partnership, despite how Katz and others may categorize it.

              Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 1

              • D. Says:

                If someone says “Ok, we’re exclusive now,” what’s that really mean? For that matter, what should it mean? In my opinion, it should mean “I want to date you and only you. I’ve considered the possibility that I might want to see other people, and I’ve decided that, no, I don’t.” It’s not “eh, you’ll do til something better comes along.”

                Evan’s women to look for a statement that ultimately is based on incomplete information, which makes it tenuous at best, and a complete fiction at worst. People won’t stick around if they decide they’re sexually incompatible, and in many cases, that’s abundantly clear from only a handful of experiences with someone.

                So, it raises the question of why bother in the first place? What’s this really about? From my perspective, it’s about mollifying someone’s fears, except that too is illusory. Saying “Ok, we’re exclusive” doesn’t guarantee that the guy won’t decide after lousy, incompatible sex to call it off.

                If you’re afraid of being “hurt” by a guy not wanting to continue dating you after sex in a casual setting, what the hell makes you think it’ll sting less if he decides that — as great as he thought you were — the sex was just lousy? I’d figure that’d hurt more than just some casual relationship fizzling.

                Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 2

                • Yvonne Says:

                  Men – and women – can decide to break up for all kinds of reasons. Deciding to be exclusive before having sex doesn’t change that fact. Exclusivity isn’t marriage.

                  Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 5 Thumb down 6

                  • mindstar Says:

                    Except Evan seems to be selling that (holding off sex until a commitment is given) as some marvelous charm which will weed out those men who would not be good matches for his female clients.

                    It’s not a charm and he is likely given them a false sense of safety by doing so.

                    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 9 Thumb down 6

                    • Yvonne Says:

                      I disagree. I think he’s advising women to avoid casual relationships if they want something serious.

                      Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 9 Thumb down 3

                    • Nicole Says:

                      I think he’s dealing primarily with women who are burnt out after years of feeling “used for sex” and telling them to wait for some kind of commitment is his way of helping them avoid that. The problem, to me, is that he’s advising them to force the issue of commitment instead of letting it happen naturally.

                      In every relationship I’ve ever had, we just spent time together, enjoyed each other’s company, and at some point the guy just offered up that he wasn’t dating anyone else and hoped we were boyfriend and girlfriend. Sometimes before we’d had sex, sometimes after we’d spent a few nights together. But it was always freely offered, unprompted. I can’t imagine using Evan’s advice to force the issue, but hey, different strokes.

                      Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 1

                    • mindstar Says:

                      I’m likely more cynical about the idea of “commitment” being the be all and end all of relationships because I practiced divorce law for 20+ years.

                      With the exception of some “green card” marriages every single couple who divorced believed, even if only for those few minutes before the priest, minister, rabbi, iman, judge or tribal witch doctor, that they would be together until death do them part.

                      They made a public committment “before God and man” as friend of mine once said yet 50% of all first marriages end in divorce as do about 60% of all second marriages. The numbers only increase for third and additional marriages.

                      Commitment is not the end of the journey. It’s only the beginning.

                      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0

  22. Ben Iyyar Says:

    ATWYS writes, “As I said above, Evan’s advice is geared to women who just want to get married or have a relationship.” In other words, Evan’s advice is probably applicable to around 90% of the distaff population and most of those women probably do benefit from his help. ATWYS then writes, “Evan’s success as a marriage advisor, I believe, stems from his clientele being mostly women eager to get married.”, well, yeah, and in my opinion, Evan is doing God’s work, helping lonely and alone women (and men) with relationship difficulties find intimacy and love with their partners, and hopefully a happy marriage and a loving family later on. Sometimes Evan’s advice sounds a little sloppy and impractical to me, but like ATWYS, most of his advice is sound and positively applicable to most relationships. Maybe not so oddly, in my opinion ATWYS comes across tougher in her advice than Evan, but again in my opinion you are both doing God’s work helping lonely and alone men and women find each other, just from different angles.

    Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 0

  23. Shadowcat Says:

    There are no books marketed to men desperate to get married. I could name a dozen marketed to women desperate to get married. (or at least eager). Actually, I probably own a dozen on my Kindle, there are I’m sure hundreds. If there was no audience for this advice, it wouldn’t be so popular. How many “How can I snag a husband” books spent a year on the NYT Best-seller list? How many advice books geared to “desperate to get married men”or “women who just want a one night stand” books are selling any copies? No one likes the way this sounds, but some realities unfortunately just are what they are.

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

  24. The D-man Says:

    “doesn’t challenge you and let’s you be an asshole”?

    I don’t see how one follows the other. If I’m being an asshole, tell me. But if you get up all in my face all the time about stupid shit, then you’re the asshole, and it’s not attractive.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1

  25. Julie Says:

    I don’t like to Go On and on racketing and complaining like you do, so I’ll keep this short. Evan EMPOWERS people to get what they want in life. Primarily, love. I’ve been following him for years, and he helped me see that I deserve to have my basic needs met. Before working with him, I thought relationships were unfulfilling masks of misery to fit into society. Evan had me see that I was choosing the wrong kind of guy. If ANYthing, he stands up for people NOT SETTLiNG. He stands for true love, not false chemistry. Reality, not fantasy.
    Thanks for the option to reply.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 13 Thumb down 4

  26. D. Says:

    In broad strokes, I think Moxie and Evan both offer advice that’s about waking people up to the idea that their ideal fantasy match is very often just that: a fantasy. And dogged pursuit of that ideal is often one of the things that’s actually getting in the way of finding what would make you happy.

    So, the same way that Moxie advises women who are 35+ to stop chasing men who are the same age and looking for a younger woman, Evan’s advising driven career women to stop chasing driven career men who are busy looking for someone who isn’t as driven. While you can obviously find anecdotal examples of either scenario working out in contrast to the advice, in general terms, I think most folks would agree that the advice makes sense. Seek the people who are seeking you, rather than chasing people who are unavailable. This is the same advice as “Shoot within your league” or “Don’t chase unavailable people.”

    Where I think Evan runs into problems is in the fact that he tends to assume certain things about his audience. Now, it may be that his assumptions are correct, but all that means is that his advice is not universally applicable, and ultimately lacks nuance.

    So, yeah, assuming that you’re speaking to an audience of people who generally are not comfortable with casual sex or the risk of ending up disappointed that sex in early dating didn’t lead to a relationship, it makes sense to advise those folks to not have sex.

    What doesn’t make sense is applying that advice to all women, because there are plenty who can simply shrug and say “Oh well. On to the next one” if they sleep with a guy and it doesn’t end up working out. If you assume his audience prefers to say “He just wanted sex” and is unwilling or unable to shift their attitudes about sex in the pre-exclusive stage of dating, then yeah, follow his advice.

    Likewise, yeah, assuming that you’re speaking to an audience of not merely career-driven, successful, dynamic women, but women who are simultaneously demanding, then yeah, stop chasing guys who are equally driven and demanding.

    What doesn’t make sense is the notion that driven to succeed = inherently unpleasant and demanding. And that applies to both men and women. I expect most people here can think of plenty of examples of people who are direct, driven, highly successful careerists, but who are also perfectly pleasant and delightful human beings in social interaction.

    From what I’ve seen, when he’s challenged on his tendency to speak too broadly in his advice, he seems to back up and say “Well, obviously if this advice doesn’t apply to you, don’t follow it.” But he’s also not bothering to offer advice to those people, so the only assumption I can make is that he isn’t really focused on them, and is purely focused on what he perceives his market to be. Within that circumscribed market, I think his advice is probably good. Outside of it…eh…not so much.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 7 Thumb down 5

    • Nicole Says:

      “And dogged pursuit of that ideal is often one of the things that’s actually getting in the way of finding what would make you happy.”

      Evan said something in the comment thread on that post that I really liked – that he advises people to stop chasing “impressive” qualities and focus on “important” qualities instead. A guy’s PhD may be impressive, but is it really that important to the quality of your relationship? Maybe the important thing is being with someone who enjoys intellectual conversation – and an advanced degree isn’t necessary for that!

      A lot of women unfortunately see dating and marriage as another arena where they need to prove something and “win” by getting the most impressive guy. When the reality is, a guy like that isn’t even going to make them happy. Better to focus on what you really need in a partner than what you can brag about to your friends. Maybe that’s “settling” but it’s better in my opinion than being in an unhappy relationship or chasing an imaginary Prince Charming.

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

  27. Millie Says:

    I don’t understand this “women who are drivers want men who are even more successful.”

    I consider myself a “driver” and ambitious and driven and successful. And no I don’t want some one–I hate to use this term, but “beta”–for the reasons Noquay said. You end up doing everything.

    But does it have to be EQUAL or *MORE* successful? In my opinion, no. If I make $90k and he makes $73 does that make him not successful? If I have a phD and he just has a master’s or even just a BA does that make him not successful? No.

    It’s all just relative. I don’t even necessarily have a “rule” that someone has to have a degree. I dated someone is tech who makes 90k-100k and he dropped out of college. It’s the actual markers of success, it’s more that someone actually has goals and ambition, etc.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0

  28. LostSailor Says:

    women…aren’t crazy about being told that they might be doing something wrong

    True words. Very true words.

    What I hear in this passage is, “If you want to be a bitch, find a pushover. Settle.” I don’t necessarily disagree with this advice.

    Oh, I disagree with that advice. It’s a recipe for disaster…for the “easy-going” guy. It’s nearly a guarantee that she’ll come to resent him and the “better long-term partner” will be out on his ass in divorce court before he knows what’s happening. The real better long-term partner for a “dominant, assertive, difficult” woman is a man who won’t put up with her shit. The only problem is that a man who won’t put up with a “difficult” woman will generally be not putting up with it with a different woman.

    I question if Evan is capable of telling the difference between a woman who is assertive and dominant and a woman who is abrasive and aggressive.

    This I agree with. And i think he is incapable of making that distinction. Part of that is because that’s his brand. Making that distinction requires “judging” women’s behavior, and if there’s one thing I’ve learned, it’s that what women like even less than being told they might be doing something wrong, is women thinking someone might be judging their behavior. One reason why I don’t read Katz.

    And that “masculine energy” (read=asshole) is acceptable in men, but frowned upon in women?

    That’s where you’re incorrect, Moxie. Masculine energy does not equate with being an asshole. My experience is that men who consistently come off as assholes don’t really have masculine energy, they’re aping what they think it is. Assholes are assholes. Assholes are overbearing, arrogant, and self-absorbed. And that also describes women who are aping “masculine energy” as being arrogant and abrasive.

    But here’s the crux of the post:

    I don’t think Evan is aware of the fact that, just by being a man, he can pretty much tell these women anything and they’ll do it. I’ve argued with Evan plenty of times over the fact that, just by being a guy and by being married, he automatically has more cache with his audience. He always staunchly denied this

    As well he should. Because he’s not trading on some “male privilege” that women are “conditioned to please,” he’s pandering to them, understandably, because it benefits his business. His style is different than your’s Moxie; he has his market, you have your’s. The reason why I’m here rather than there is because you’re actually more honest, usually, than he is.

    Bottom line: Katz’s “influence” over women is that he panders, not that he’s a man. Both men and women can be assholes. If you want to find an LTR partner, don’t be an asshole.

    Seems pretty simple to me…

    Masculine men are confident, honorable, protective, alternately hard or caring as the situation requires. I find it interesting that you describe “masculine” traits only in negative terms. Masculine men are indeed not intimidated by strong, assertive, successful, outspoken women. But men are attracted to those women who also exhibit a kind and caring side. I certainly don’t want a push-over for a partner; I want someone who is intelligent, knows herself, has opinions and voices them, but not someone who is strident and opinionated.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 7 Thumb down 5

  29. Matt Says:

    So, dating a quiet, pleasant, easy-going guy is “settling” now? Like they’re somehow inferior to the so-called “alpha males”? That might be the most awful thing I’ve read on this blog, and people once accused me of being autistic because I believe in respecting people’s boundaries.

    Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 11 Thumb down 2

© 2013-2018 And That's Why You're Single All Rights Reserved