TER General Board
I totally agree with Pat. For some -- if not MOST -- dating is difficult, to near-impossible. I find the question(s) that head this thread rather naive.
If I could create a bond with a partner who was as physically attractive as some of the providers I've seen, I would be more physically attracted to my partner. If I could find a woman who didn't want to warp the boy-girl relationship into one in which sex was a remuneratory exchange, in which I OWED her something for the experience (even though she enjoyed it, probably more than I, given her greater capacity for orgasm, etc.), I wouldn't find hobbying to be a parallel arrangement.
"Just go out and get a date" is often not very fulfilling, and MUCH more difficult for the male to achieve than for the female. I agree with the folks who've posted that the best sex, and the most fulfilling experiences in life, often come in the context of a caring relationship. I don't reject that. I would LOVE to have that. But women DO reject me.
I think my problem has been largely not knowing how the "game" is played. I hate the idea of having to "game" a woman into being interested in me -- I thought if I were nice, considerate, attractive, her type, etc., then there'd be some hope for me. I'm learning that's bollocks -- an attractive female's selection criteria are largely unknown to herself, largely random, based less on viability of the partner than on a given male's approach strategy. She picks NOT because he's good for her, but because he knows how to flirt.
All this makes the whole question of "why don't you get a date" or "don't you want a caring relationship" rather moot. Sure, I'd love to. Are you volunteering?
I remember a few months back, one of the HOTTEST looking providers out there (I saw the pics on the website! 
of course) posted that she wanted us all to be less greedy, be more "sharing and giving" about our sexuality. Evidently she'd had this religious experience in which she and a very gorgeous other woman, and a guy who was evidently about as hot-looking as a Chippendale dancer, all "shared" and "saw the Goddess." I found her remarks patronizing, to the point of offensive. If she were volunteering to date me and be "sharing and giving," I'd be ALL FOR IT. Wahoo, more good beautiful partners for me. But as it stands, no HOT women WANT to date me, and I don't know HOW to make them want to, and may NEVER be able to bring that about. I found her patronizing attitude -- that somehow it was the male's problem, that we males should somehow lighten up and give her more of what she wanted -- very annoying. She is the one who holds the keys to access to beauty. She is the beautiful one, and she usually charges $300 an hour for her company. And if she weren't a provider, she'd be dating the Chippendale guy and not me. So who the HELL is she to tell ME that I don't "understand" relationships, that I could see the Goddess if only *I'd* open up more? Bull dooky. SHE needs to OFFER the opportunity more, and if she really valued seeing the Goddess, she'd make the visions accessible to more people more often.
This thread has some of that flavor to it. Guys and gals posting about how "meaningful" a relationship can be with someone you trust, someone who's attractive to you. By God I agree. I only wish women wouldn't make it literally impossible for me to engage in one of those. Therefore, I attend providers.
Harrumph.
I recently wrote Pat McGroin a long letter about my dating experiences. I might rewrite it and post it ... I dunno if I'll have time tho ...
-- Modified on 10/8/2002 1:26:30 PM
Here is the letter I wrote, posted to a public web host.
http://www.geocities.com/book_guy/dating/dating.html
Read it or not, wuddever.
I welcome replies, either here or via the email contained in that letter.
BG
At least to me, the most interesting part of this post is that you say that hobbying for YOU could be good for your relationship... as long as your Mrs. is sitting home like a good girl! Ah, the old double standard
Hugs*
Nicole
I'll address your specific questions one by one.
"I am simultaneously amazed that: 1) you have EVER had trouble picking up women"
Aha. But there's the rub. As my letter details, for a long time there were PLENTY of women who LIKED TO THINK they would want to go out with me, but (perhaps since I didn't know the "game"; or perhaps simply because women don't actually know what they DO find attractive, only what they think IN THEORY they SHOULD find attractive) it never materialized. Without the advice on how to play the "game" from the websites (and other places, taken with a grain of salt, etc.), I'd be shit-out-of-luck. So, you've proven my point. Thanks.
"that men - any men - spend this much time and energy trying to attract women. "
Sad, ain't it?
But without that type of effort, I'd still be shit-out-of-luck. Literally, I would have no access fo female intimacy of the type I want, which is longer-term relationships with women I'm attracted to. So, I HAVE TO spend that much time and energy trying to attract women. WOMEN REQUIRE IT.
Sad, ain't it, that I could have applied all that effort to curing cancer, or feeding the starving in Ethiopia, or building a phenomenal personal fortune, but instead women were so full of shit I had to do all those mental genuflections just to get the time of day from them? I'm sorry that's how rigged the "game" is, but, that's the way it is. I didn't choose it.
"I almost thought most men were more the low-effort love-me-or-leave-me types"
Some are. If it works for them, then bully. But that never worked for me, precisely BECAUSE I provided what women THOUGHT they wanted (as you say, that whole "you're intelligent" well-written-post thing, among other characteristics) but STILL I wasn't getting any action. I could have gone through life as a low-effort schlepp never getting laid, but I got too horny for that, and had to find some kind of solution. Some guys can remain satisfied without getting laid, and some guys DO get laid even though they're low-effort types. I turned out to be neither. And it sometimes pisses me off, that women held such sway over my sense of well-being, and my allocation of free time. If they'd just LIGHTEN UP and GROW UP and PUT OUT once in a blue moon ... oh, never mind ... 
"it's simultaneously sweet and humorous to see men invest so much time into this self-help type of activity that one normally associates with females trying to "catch a man"."
Yeah, that's funny and frustrating to me, too. "Sweet" isn't an adjective I'd use for it. I read a slight air of disbelief, that these sorts of websites could work, that it's all just about as effective as the self-help aisles in the bookstore with the "catch a man" diatribes. Well, I kinda agree -- many of the specifics on the websites are really just random shots in the dark, and "social aptitude" can't be taught on-line.
But I kinda disagree. Some of the more over-arching understandings from the websites -- that a woman answers "yes" not on the basis of the desirability of the man, but the desirability of the approach; that committing to a woman categorically means she no longer has to do anything nice for you in order to cause you to commit; that the "game" is geared against males; etc. -- those are all important understandings that I, personally, lacked. Now that I don't lack those understandings, I feel that it's a level playing field. Not that I'm a constant winner, but at least I feel INVITED to play the "game" at all. I still don't like that it requires "playing" and that it's a "game," this love thing, but I didn't pick it, that's the way it is, I'm stuck with it, so I might as well make the best of reality rather than just deny or rail against it.
"I guess the difference is these websites seemed to be geared toward "players" and short term relationships."
True. That's a fair assessment of these websites, and sometimes I am disappointed about the fact that the advice seems largely geared toward younger non-committed types (but then, if you see my previous paragraph, you'll see what I think about using "commitment" in the same sentence as "women," heh). I'm still of two minds, as to how much of a "player" I actually WANT to be. But at least nowadays I'm not DESTINED to be PERMANENTLY lonely. I'm not happy that this seems so far to be the only escape, given the fucked-up nature of the "game," and the manner in which it requires that the male who is a good catch must learn to be a bad catch.
"You mentioned your current sigO had not ever been a provider or a stripper - as if they were both undesirable. What's so horrible about being an ex-stripper? Or even an ex-provider for that matter? Just curious."
In my opinion, I think it's a fair generalization that people in the adult industry (providers and clients) are less emotionally balanced, and have less of their lives "together," than people outside of the industry. That's my own prejudice, I admit. People who can concoct an intelligent discussion on these web-boards (such as yourself) do not necessarily fit those generalizations. Perhaps I was negative about providers in that off-hand comment.
But that section of the letter was meant to allay the fears of someone who might dismiss the seduction advice from the websites with a typical objection, such as, "This shit would never work, unless the chick was a stupid stripper or something like that." So, really, personally I try not to judge ex-strippers or ex-providers negatively at all, but had presumed many of my readers might. Please remember that the letter is written for a general community, not necessarily strictly a community comprised solely of mongers and providers. It's more a statement of what I think the "overall perception" out there in the real world is, and not what the "specific reality" here in the provider world might be.
I dunno. Maybe I should take that sentence or phrase out. I'm still rewriting the thing, in the hopes of getting to the bottom of it. Some day. :-P
BG
I want a jackpot too!
Heather,
I find the dating process very difficult. I am 38 years old, am so-so in the looks department, but short (5'5"). I used to have a low six figure income (recently laid off, but I consider this a temporary set back). In the tall, dark, and handsome test, I consider my height to be a definite strike against me.
I would love to meet someone that I could click with. To me, leaving the hobby wouldn't be something I would be "thrilled to get out of", but rather, I would see the exit as graduating to the next level. I got into hobbying as I was so damn lonely. I pay for food, rent, clothes, cable tv --- I thought I might as well pay for companionship. I have a number of male friends but very few female friends.
Recent dating attempts have included using jdate.com and 8minutedating.com. Very few dates were generated from jdate and zero from 8minutedating. I consider myself to be the most normal hermit one would ever meet. Am also in psychotherapy to see if such will help.
Also, I have never, ever had a girlfriend. I may be 38 years old, but my "relationship age" might be 12. Who knows? (Who is John Galt?)
Interesting to note that when I do see a new provider (I mostly stick to a couple I have known for a while), I am almost always asked if I am married. Am supposing I look normal from the outside
-Hoot.
-- Modified on 10/9/2002 2:00:24 PM