First you have to make sure the real person matches the profile - once you get past that it's easy breezing.....

I agree with Moe, online dating has made a mess of things kind of. And I will agree with the person in the article. I dunno if I've been on dates or not. I'm pretty sure they were just meetups. Coffee and go home. Because if I'm going to go on a date with someone, I guess I want to know more about them before hand. Otherwise it's just awkward.

I also believe the world is so incredibly overpopulated and so many people have been raised in the generation of "I'm entitled" that it's ruined the whole "someone for everyone" myth that most like to use or say to those that haven't found anyone yet.
It's very um...what's the word, calculated now. You must fit "this mold" or you are undateable.

Now for those that are already together/have someone, or are married. There's absolutely no excuse to not "date" your significant other. That is something that I will definetly make a point, becuase I know it get's old, tiedious, expensive, etc etc blah blah those are excuses. Flowers, special time together, whatever it is that brought you together. I do think society has made that a little more difficult to continue. It's looked at as gross, or they're being silly. It's not.

I understand this is a "Glamour" article, so "women centric" (at no point in this article is there any mention of men's feelings on the matter - I doubt the numbers would be that high for men... see below).


Now, here is the interesting point:
"73 percent of single women said they often can't even tell whether they've been on a date or not—and, shockingly, 19 percent said they had never been on a "real date" at all"
This is plainly and simply impossible.

I say impossible because I know for a fact that the average human person is perfectly capable of organising a what *they* would call a "date" *themselves*.
To be clear, if a woman/man organises this event she would (herself/himself) call a "date", to which she/he invites this person she would call a "date", then the event subsequently and logically can be called a "date" by the said person organising the event.
Granted, it might be a crappy one, things might not be as perfect as you would like to, but this would be nonetheless a "date" by the standards of the person organising the event.

Whether this is seen as a date by the other party is debatable (as what is and what is not a "date" will vary depending on people: cinema, camping trip, 5 stars hotel, coffee, nightclub, motorbike trip, etc.).
But whether this is seen as a "date" by the organising party is NON debatable (which is why men, traditional organisers of dates, would never feel that they haven't been on enough dates).

I also believe the world is so incredibly overpopulated and so many people have been raised in the generation of "I'm entitled" that it's ruined the whole "someone for everyone" myth that most like to use or say to those that haven't found anyone yet.
It's very um...what's the word, calculated now. You must fit "this mold" or you are undateable.

I personally think the effect is similar to the effect globalization had on economies. The world, as a whole, is just a smaller, more competitive place now (dating, job, money, enterprise and products).
Everyone competes with everyone (that is: the foreign employee who is cheaper, the foreign woman who is content having a very average male partner with more money and a better situation that she would have in her country - these are the people we are all competing against).


Also, there is a contradiction in your paragraph, as the "someone for everyone" myth is the very definition of entitlement: I am entitled to someone (as everyone is) as there is this "someone for everyone" rule.

To give the rule some credit, it probably used to be true in a not so distant past with social pressure, religion, arranged marriages being more prevalent (and with travel and telecommunications being rarer and more expensive, the size/distance of dating pools would have been smaller than it is nowadays).
The quality of that special "someone for everyone" would have varied of course, but most people were content with what they had because they didn't/couldn't know any better (I find it amusing when people say they miss these "old days", they probably don't think about the amount of constraints people dealt with in the past too).


Nowadays, people realise this "someone for everyone" thing is not true (statistically it probably is true for most people but it is not an absolute truth so it won't be true for everyone). Some people will live and die alone - it might be depressing, but it is what it is.

This is why many people are trying to show their best selves - to have their chance at it too. They see themselves as hard working, strong, funny, intelligent, interesting, etc. you name it.
Then of course, they expect the quality of that special "someone for everyone" to match their perceived own "quality" at least (this partner should be as special as I am).
Thus comes another form of "entitlement": if you do what you're told, you should find a special someone of quality (at least equivalent to yours, but probably higher - after all, we need to admire the person we are with). This of course doesn't always happen (especially as you might not, as you said, fit the mould of what other people perceive as a higher quality partner).


Anyway, I am rambling and I probably have forgotten the initial point, but essentially you are responsible of your own success (primarily as only you can define what a "success" is).

This is plainly and simply impossible.

I have a couple of friends who have never been on a date before. I've really only been on two real dates. I actually think that number is probably too low.

Now for those that are already together/have someone, or are married. There's absolutely no excuse to not "date" your significant other. That is something that I will definetly make a point, becuase I know it get's old, tiedious, expensive, etc etc blah blah those are excuses. Flowers, special time together, whatever it is that brought you together. I do think society has made that a little more difficult to continue. It's looked at as gross, or they're being silly. It's not.

Shawn and I go on dates all the time. We actually plan date nights and get a sitter!!! Might be because we love to go out and be kid free, but none the less we do it.

Even with my kids dad (my ex) we planned date nights, you need too or your relationship would suffer IMO

This is plainly and simply impossible.

I have a couple of friends who have never been on a date before. I've really only been on two real dates. I actually think that number is probably too low.

I think he meant for people who are actually getting out there.... if you friends chose to simply not date, or go out with men, or whatever, that is totally against what he was getting at. I think he was going more for women actually getting out there, but still thinking they weren't official dates.

Ah yeah I think I understand. 19% of women who have been out with a man before didn't consider it a real date?

My friends and I would love to date the "old-fashioned" way. Unfortunately this hasn't happened for us. It really is a shame that dating has gone downhill the way it has. I feel like nowdays, if you missed the college boat where a ton of men and women were thrown together, you're screwed. I would love to be asked out and go on dates. I think most women feel this way!

It still will happen, I really do believe.
Shawn seems to be a rare breed from the men I dated but he still was out there. Very old fashioned and traditional in that sense. Love it!

I can't read the article, because it's blocked here in the Middle East, where I'm currently on a business trip. Side note: arranged marriages are still the norm here. That would definitely solve this issue, although create other problems. But I digress...

On a more practical note, I think this may be generational. We (ahem) older singles still go out on dates. I've been to the theatre probably 3-4 times over the past couple of months, went out dancing, went to the movies numerous times, etc. If you let yourself be relegated to "hook-ups" from a mobile app, you really only have yourself to blame. Unless, of course, that's what you're into.

Edit: interestingly, while at the theatre, I see the following demographic:

1 - Lots of the 35 and over crowd, couples. The majority of theatre goers. Obviously depends on the play, but this is generally true.
2 - Some young couples (under 35), as well. A smaller percentage, but some do go to the theatre.
3 - Lots of young ladies with other young ladies (under 25). Typically 2-3 in a group. Friends going with friends to the theatre.

My takeaway would be that if I'm a young man (I'm not), I would definitely advertise my interest in the theatre (on dating sites?), since there is a very large pool of young ladies that would perhaps be interested in going. Most young people, especially men, don't realize what they are missing. Good theatre is better than the movies. But of course not everyone has access to a wide selection of quality theatre, really depends on where you live.

But again, I can't read the OP's article, so apologies if I'm way off topic.

--P

Oh god, if I had to rely on my parents to find me a husband, I would probably end up with some ultra-religious freak who wanted to talk to me about my spiritual health every night before having really bad sex :laugh:

I honestly don't think I have had a huge problem with this. I was trying to think of the last time I actually met someone without him suggesting we meet for dinner, and it has happened literally once. He was my age, which I think may be the point. I generally go out with guys who are anywhere between the ages of 37-50, and it seems like they are willing to spend a couple of hours with a woman over dinner to see if it could possibly be a real match based on attraction, intelligence, etc. rather than a quick hookup because they are feeling horny and then keeping the girl on the line if she was good.

I could be wrong about the age thing, and I am sure that there are guys my age out there who don't just go for hookups, but the vast majority seem to just be into quick and easy. Anna was right, I think. It is really important to set the precedent for what you want. If you want the hookup, by all means, go for it. If you are looking for real dates with the possibility of a relationship, then say so. We can't be afraid anymore to communicate what we want as women. It's easy to just blame guys for being pigs, but we have to take a bit of responsibility for ourselves too. (I mean this as lovingly as possible!)

At your age, I am curious what makes you lean to a much older man? 37 isn't bad, but 50 is much older. Is it just the maturity leave of it all? My kids dad is much older than I, I was only 23 when we met. I was so excited to date an older man who probably had his *kitten* together, could provide me a life as he had already started his (ie not going to school, etc.) and boy was I wrong. Don't get me wrong, some older man could have fulfilled this, but I chose the wrong one.. his life was more crumbling down!!! But after that experience I wondered to myself 'what the heck am I doing with someone who is potentially old enough to be my dad?' and won't go there again.

I was also reading full chapter books at the age of four, and read my first full length Tolstoy at the age of 12.

In the original Russian? ;-)

--P

This article is in the same vein...

http://www.cosmopolitan.com/sex-love/relationship-advice/relationship-virgins

The author wrote a book, which I have on reserve from the library.

my definition of a date involves spending time with someone who is clearly interested in getting to know me and is using that date time to do that and you're both participating in an activity that you are both into to or interested in doing.

I completely agree with this. And this is what is so confusing to me. If men are typically the culprit, why would we (men) be against classical dating? As correctly noted, if done correctly, it's just participating in activities that both parties enjoy. Seriously, who could be against that?

We're talking about a picnic in the park, going to see a movie, or just having a nice dinner and talking a bit. And most women, at least based on comments here, are willing to share costs. So if the guy is struggling financially, it's not like he has to spend a lot of money to participate in these mutually beneficial activities. Worst case is you see a nice movie, have a beer, and realize this person is not for you. Maybe 4 hours max???

Perhaps it's just extreme laziness? But who wants to start a relationship with someone who is just too lazy to go see a movie, or talk a bit in a restaurant over dinner? That seems rather pathetic, to be honest. I can't imagine we've sunk that low. Is this really a trend among anyone over 21 years old???

Again, I'm not really sure I'm completely understanding the dynamic. Would be good to hear from more men who just don't bother dating in the traditional sense. Why the change? What am I missing here?

--P

Personally, I have never ever met anyone who wouldn't at least go on a date (or do "something")

I would agree with this. The only thing I can think of is that they skewed the results somehow to prove a point. Or they only polled people who actually responded to the "hey sexy come over and watch a movie with me tonight" messages that I seemed to get on a daily basis while actually using an online dating profile.