So I asked a guy out...

[™BlackPearl The Empress™]

this is kinda fukked up... seems like he earned it by now, especially considering your a woman that gets naked in front of strangers.

The ignorance is so vast that you actually made me laugh. Good day.

 

[™BlackPearl The Empress™]

I wouldn't consider that example of your ex being balance. If he was paying for every(or vast majority) date AND cooking for you, then you are receiving output from that association with that man. All you had to do was drive less than a half hour and he was happy. That is not balance. He may have been happy with that for a myriad of reasons, but based on your statement, he was not receiving equitable input for his output.

I mean, that was your dude....why wouldn't you go see him as much as you could?

And to alleviate any needless typing, things that are standard and appealing to both parties are not considered output: sex, time together, loyalty, etc. Those are pre-requisities and go without saying. Nor should they be used as a measuring stick for who does what. The essence of that is a trick-ho relationship, which I assume wasn't the case between you and someone you consider an "ex."

Balance could've been he paid for dates and cooked while you made sure his spot was always clean and his clothes always smelled like Tide and Bounce. Or some other variation as long as he was receiving equitable input from your output. Mind you, I'm responding based on your statement and nothing else.

I can understand the nickel and dime statement, but expecting a working woman, who also espouses the ideals of feminism if I'm not mistaken, to contribute financially at some point is not nickle and dime. That's called "walk your talk." I have no issue with chivalry when its deserved and I have no problem with traditionalism....but any man that allows a woman to have it both ways is doing a disservice to himself and even the woman.

There are many men who want to treat women well. Its just some dudes expect the same treatment in return....no getting over, just quid pro quo.

Peace

Well to your first point. I had to drive and see him 3 or 4 days a week in a direction I would never otherwise go and deal with a rush hour I would not otherwise have to deal with. Last I checked gas cost money. My home was on his way to work and recreation. It would have never cost him a dime more to see me. Transportation is not a automatic output cost when it is extremely one sided. He wanted to be in his owe space. Not everyone only places value in money and manual labor. In your scenario, he should have come over equal number of times and I should have paid equal number of times which still wouldn't have been equal b/c in the long run I would have been paying equally in dates but more in transportation. He didn't want to do that. He wanted his space so to him: His space+My transportation cost = His food & His money. Just b/c it is not what YOU value doesn't make it any less equal in OUR relationship since, being our relationship we get to determine what is and is not valuable.

To your second point, you said "expecting a working woman, who also espouses the ideals of feminism if I'm not mistaken, to contribute financially at some point is not nickle and dime." I agree with you but that is not what the song you are singing. You are singing absolute equality or nothing. Not a practical way to have a relationship IMO because most people are not on equal footing in all departments but you are allowed whatever you like. It's funny you are trying to hit me with this point in a thread where I talk about footing the bill.

Then go on to say "I have no issue with chivalry when its deserved and I have no problem with traditionalism....but any man that allows a woman to have it both ways is doing a disservice to himself and even the woman." Well you actually don't believe in chivalry or traditionalism. You believe in quid pro quo. Those 2 stances are light years apart. In traditionalism, the man automatically assumes the roll of provider to eventually rep the rewards. You are not looking to provide. You are keeping score.

No one (at least not me) is talking about a one sided scenario. You just see money or maid service as the only things that balance a relationship; a point we disagree upon.

To my own point, men are usually the aggressors. If a man who is actively pursuing me, it my job to determine if he is the type of man I want to deal with. YOU are the one interested. I don't even know if I like or have any interest in you beyond superficial observations. A man who wants me to pay for his pursuit is ludicrous. Once I have determined that you (the aggressor) are worth my time then I will happily begin to reciprocate (ie the current scenario). Thereafter, we can determine balance/equality on our own terms.

If a traditional man is worried about being taken advantage of then he obviously shouldn't be approaching any old woman on the street. He should know a little bit about this woman. Take my current scenario for example, I have known this person for some time. He knows my friends (barring Little Miss Hungry) and my personality. He knows what he is getting into which is why he probably has no problem being a gentleman and footing the bill.

Anyway, there is more than one way to get what you want. You are free to do what you wish but it can be done with far more finesse than your approach. If you did some leg work in the beginning you wouldn't have to worry about being taken advantage of b/c you would only be dealing with prime women in the first place.

 

[™BlackPearl The Empress™]

A8 as in that's what he drives? I'm certain that the fact that you mentioned what he drives in the second sentence of your story carries a long list of implications...

With that said, good luck on the date.

I called him that b/c that is what others called him in last thread I made that included him. What he drove was pertinent to that last story. It was mentioned for reference sake.

 

[charmander]

didn't read the thread, are there pics of the threadstarter somewhere in here?

 

[BlackedOut]

Yes he knows I am a stripper. I don't lie about it.

All kinds of men chase me. Simps and @ssholes alike. I think it would surprised the hell out of you if you knew the type of men I usually date. I only date men who are doing well for themselves so that is pretty much standard. He is handsome and in good shape but I like him b/c he is a gentleman. He is super respectful and doesn't try to come on to me.

Classic "Hoe speak"

Check any backpage add all of them references some being a gentleman who is respectful.

Guess what bytch, you a hoe and will be treated accordingly. #HoH

 

[Typical Simp]

I hope this man pays for everything and wines and dines you and treats you like the queen you are. I know I would.

Make sure if you ever kiss him it's not until at least 5 years after marriage.

 

[™BlackPearl The Empress™]

I hope this man pays for everything and wines and dines you and treats you like the queen you are. I know I would.

Make sure if you ever kiss him it's not until at least 5 years after marriage.

Did you create this account just for me? I'm touched.

 

[Typical Simp]

Did you create this account just for me? I'm touched.

Sweetheart I would do anything for you.

 

[™BlackPearl The Empress™]

Didn't read previous story... read the OP on this one.

Dude is known as the A8 guy and people wonder why nikkas be getting certain cars. That's how they remember you.

Funny enough it was the dudes who started calling him that not me. I could care less what he drives. So you should probably check your fellow bros.

 

[posterchild336]

Funny enough it was the dudes who started calling him that not me. I could care less what he drives. So you should probably check your fellow bros.

would you still ask him out on a date if he drove a 95 accord?

 

[Chesirecatdaddy]

would you still ask him out on a date if he drove a 95 accord?

of course he's super respectful and a gentleman plus he pays for everything.

 

[MrFettuccinnePockets]

@TheStripper still aint gon give bruh any.

Smh. Cold piece of work.

 

[mcdivit85]

Well to your first point. I had to drive and see him 3 or 4 days a week in a direction I would never otherwise go and deal with a rush hour I would not otherwise have to deal with. Last I checked gas cost money. My home was on his way to work and recreation. It would have never cost him a dime more to see me. Transportation is not a automatic output cost when it is extremely one sided. He wanted to be in his owe space. Not everyone only places value in money and manual labor. In your scenario, he should have come over equal number of times and I should have paid equal number of times which still wouldn't have been equal b/c in the long run I would have been paying equally in dates but more in transportation. He didn't want to do that. He wanted his space so to him: His space+My transportation cost = His food & His money. Just b/c it is not what YOU value doesn't make it any less equal in OUR relationship since, being our relationship we get to determine what is and is not valuable.

Whatevery you say. If that worked for you and dude, then it worked. That was the point of my first comment-if he's cool with that, then it is what it is.

To your second point, you said "expecting a working woman, who also espouses the ideals of feminism if I'm not mistaken, to contribute financially at some point is not nickle and dime." I agree with you but that is not what the song you are singing. You are singing absolute equality or nothing. Not a practical way to have a relationship IMO because most people are not on equal footing in all departments but you are allowed whatever you like. It's funny you are trying to hit me with this point in a thread where I talk about footing the bill.

I don't recall making an "all or nothing" statement in any of my responses. Simply stating that if dude accepts the "pay for my time" contract, then he accepts it. I actually applaud you for being honest about that since most women, who want a man to "pursue" them, do not plainly state such when that is what they really want.

Maybe my statement around some dudes not accepting the "pay for my time" thing is what you mean? Well, there are dudes who simply wouldn't go for that. No need to even discuss it because it would be redundant.

Then go on to say "I have no issue with chivalry when its deserved and I have no problem with traditionalism....but any man that allows a woman to have it both ways is doing a disservice to himself and even the woman." Well you actually don't believe in chivalry or traditionalism. You believe in quid pro quo. Those 2 stances are light years apart. In traditionalism, the man automatically assumes the roll of provider to eventually rep the rewards. You are not looking to provide. You are keeping score.

I don't think they're that different at all. Branching off on this would be too lofty for this discussion, but I think quid pro quo is the essence of chivalry and traditionalism. Where one person played one role off the other. The man took care of the outside world while the woman took care of the inside world.

My view of quid pro quo is not necessarily equal task but equal effort and equal accountability. I think you took my use of that phrase too literal when I look at it from the spirit of the interaction between two people.

Who said I'm not looking to provide? I surely would for a woman who is providing equal value in other necessary areas. Should I neglect her responsibility to me? Because I am sure, especially if she has leanings similar to yours, that she wouldn't neglect my responsibility to her.

I give...but I also take. I would expect no different from anyone...male or female.

No one (at least not me) is talking about a one sided scenario. You just see money or maid service as the only things that balance a relationship; a point we disagree upon.

Whoa brehski....who said anything about maid service? Extrapolating a bit much maybe? Your feminist is showing.

To my own point, men are usually the aggressors. If a man who is actively pursuing me, it my job to determine if he is the type of man I want to deal with. YOU are the one interested. I don't even know if I like or have any interest in you beyond superficial observations. A man who wants me to pay for his pursuit is ludicrous. Once I have determined that you (the aggressor) are worth my time then I will happily begin to reciprocate (ie the current scenario). Thereafter, we can determine balance/equality on our own terms.

You don't know if you're interested in someone until they're full swing of "wine and dine" mode? Ok, I see.

If a traditional man is worried about being taken advantage of then he obviously shouldn't be approaching any old woman on the street. He should know a little bit about this woman. Take my current scenario for example, I have known this person for some time. He knows my friends (barring Little Miss Hungry) and my personality. He knows what he is getting into which is why he probably has no problem being a gentleman and footing the bill.

Can't disagree.

Anyway, there is more than one way to get what you want. You are free to do what you wish but it can be done with far more finesse than your approach. If you did some leg work in the beginning you wouldn't have to worry about being taken advantage of b/c you would only be dealing with prime women in the first place.

So, expecting a woman to give like she takes is an example of me being afraid of reprisal? N#ggas be funny.

Peace

 

[LostOne]

I love how women think they are being generous by gracing men with the pleasure of being on a date with them. Women are so gassed up.

 

[Blackking]

The ignorance is so vast that you actually made me laugh. Good day.

i always make hoes laugh. Peace.