A question for those of you who are dating multiple people. If you found out that the person you have a date with has a date with another person the same day, would it bother you?

I have thought about this alot.

I can't say that this has happened to me yet, but I don't think it would bother me. Am I weird? Should it bother me?

One of my dates for tonight, L, canceled last night because her mom is in the hospital with complications from gall bladder surgery. One of the other women I've gone out with, K, told me earlier this week that her date for tonight canceled on her as well. I called K and asked her if she wanted to have dinner tonight, but I told her that I had to be back in town by 10:00pm. She (jokingly) asked me if I had a date and I said yes.

She hummed and hawed and said that it wouldn't work out for her, because she was seeing someone earlier in the night and didn't feel righ having to cut the date short. I said I understood and said we'd have to catch each other another time.

K called me later this evening and told me that she was offended that she was a "last minute filler". I told her I asked her because I wanted to see her and this would have been the only time this weekend we could get together. Didn't matter, she was offended that I would set up another date the same day I was to go out with her. It bothers her that I would kiss her and then go kiss another woman on the same day. She said she asked someone else and they thought it was creepy too.

I don't know, is it creepy?

She keeps telling me I'm trying to be a player. Personally, I think if I was trying to play her, it would be a ****** of a lot easier if I just lied to her.

Anyway, I apologized for offending her and told her that I would respect her request to not go out with another woman the same day that I go out with her.

Any thoughts? Fire away...

I think the problem was actually TALKING about it. LOL.

I had a situation recently, where a fellow I've been chatting with told me upfront that there's someone else he's really interested in. For me, that threw him WAY back to the "friendship only" burner.

I met the guy on a dating site. I already KNOW that he's getting to know other women, just as I'm in the early stages of getting to know other men. But we don't have to TALK about that. It's uncouth, or something to that effect.

An analogy perhaps? Is it appropriate to give people details before or after you've gone to the ladies/mens room? LMAO! :P (couldn't resist that one.. sorry).

When you're in the early stages of casual dating, it's really not a good idea to give such details. The whole honesty is the best policy approach needs to be used with caution. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Karen

I dunno, but I have been thinking about the same thing today. My date from Thursday night... I was hoping we could do something Saturday night, but we haven't set anything up yet, and I'm kinda nervous to even TRY, because I have a lunch date Saturday (a 1st date with someone else). Seems weird to see 2 different people in 1 day. But part of me WANTS to, because it's the weekend and a good time to get the dates in, AND so I can go ahead and get to know them, so the decisions can be made. I can relate to the kissing thing. Some 1st dates involve kissing, some don't, so that DOES seem "creepy", even from one day to the next. Maybe it's best to NOT kiss on 1st (or 2nd) dates if we are multi-dating, except for small pecks. I guess we have to find a balance for what is comfortable for US, and what information to divulge. I don't like to lie, so I think there must be a mature, honest delivery of our status and intentions.

Last year I had four dates in one weekend. I hated it.

Big Guy, I know you are enjoying being out there in the dating world, and I am glad to see you happy. You are a kid in the candy store, BTDT <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />.

But I think you are a deeper guy than that, so my prediction is that the novelty will wear off, and you will eventually start looking more at quality than quantity.

I read the other thread, where a poster said she has three guys she has been dating for a year, three more she just met, and two more she goes to drink with "as friends". I can't see how this would be a satisfying solution for anyone seeking a longterm monogamous relationship. I doubt you would be happy in that situation.

Anyway, go date, have fun, but don't get caught up in the frenzy. It takes time and insight to get to know a person, something you will never be able to do if you have dozens of new prospects floating around. Reminds me of when I had to create a spreadsheet to keep all my dates straight, but that's another story.

AGG

I agree with K. I would be offended at being a last minute filler. TBG, you need to examine why you feel the need to be dating so many women at once. There's nothing wrong with dating more than one person, but your approach is sounding a little weird to me. It's like you are trying to fill some empty space with multiple women, but at the same time not allowing yourself to get emotionally attached to any of them. What's the point? All this is doing is costing you a lot of money. Are you looking to get laid and believe your chances are better if you date a lot of women at once? I ask because this is an approach the players use. K already suspects you're playing her. If the word goes round that your a player, the games over for you and nice women.

I would not have a problem with a woman having lunch with one man and then an evening date with me if this was just the way the scheduling worked out. I would have a major problem with a woman having a dinner date with me and then rushing off for a date with another man. If I knew about it, there would not be another date. Why? There are a lot of women out there who use men as a wallet. They want them only to pick up the tab for their entertainment, but have no real interest in them as a person. I know one women who "dates" affluent men who can afford to show her a grand time. But at the end of the evening, she blows them off and goes off to have sex with one of the low-file, dirt bag, bad boys that gets her motor running. Believe me, you want no part of that.

Duh. That is a no no. Keep it to yourself if you wanna do that.

I had a coffee date w/somebody and it went well. He kept watching his watch. We got along well and he asked me out again. But he bolted after an hour. I asked where was he off to in such a hurry? We had a good conversation. I asked if he was meeting his buddies? He had embarassed look on his face. I said "meeting another date are you?" He said yea. I said that I don't do serial daters...and that our second was not gonna happen.

Does this answer your question about how women perceive this? I think it unwise. Serial daters turn me off. I am not a number and do not and will not be treated as one.

For me, kissing the opposite sex on a date can be a very intimate act. Some kissing can even be more intimate than sex itself.

Personally, *I* would not be able to casually float from one date person to the next, regardless of same day, and kiss each and every one. Feels wrong. I think it would de-sensitize me to the whole experience, and potentially loose its meaning.

JMVHO
Jo

I don't see the big deal. It sounds like you are in the beginning stages of seeing both these women and you just want to get to know them more. Unless you aren't saying, or I am missing it, it sounds like you just kiss them. You don't try to get in their pants. And to me, kissing is NOT as intimate as sex. Especially not in the beginning stages of dating.You aren't naked, flesh to flesh, when you are kissing so I don't think you can even compare. I think it shows something about her being offended, if you aren't even committed to her yet. And that she had to verify with someone that it was creepy. So then it must be true, if 2 people think it is!? You are in a dating mode, not a marriage one.

Then just don't tell them ok? It is sometimes obvious when a person does this....and they wind up being labeled "serial dater" and it's not a good thing...

Your life is your life. And I don't kiss when meeting somebody either. Inappropriate I feel. Unless it's almost transparent you've met somebody very very special and they feel the same and have VOICED that very opinion...you get super starry eyed and are melting...melting...melting!

Geez. Why can't I feel like that? Lmao.

Agreed. There is such a thing as too much information.



Actually, with K, I bring up the "I'm seeing other women" issue a little more often for this very reason. (that and the fact that she keeps asking me about it) On our first date, K let her guard down. She started liking me quite a bit right away. I've been especially up front with her about what I'm doing to try and keep her from getting hurt. I'm trying to get her to put me on the "friendship only" backburner.



For my own peace of mind, I like to bring up the non-exclusive/seeing other people issue very early just so there aren't any misunderstandings. But beyond that, the actual details of who I'm seeing, etc. does seem to be a bit voyeuristic. Definately TMI.

"Let her guard down"? By being honest with you? Don't "try to get her to put you on the backburner" - be a man, and tell her you are not interested. Eek, Big Guy, you are beginning to sound like u da playa! <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />

I had three last weekend and it was kinda fun. I don't think I would want to do it all the time because then I wouldn't be able to get things done. The yard doesn't mow itself, ya know.



LOL, I was thinking that this week. That or a Bull in a China Shop... or maybe a Bull in a Candy Store...



Yeah, I think so too. I am reaching a point where more is too many. I'm becoming more discriminating, but it's hard saying no, and it's hard to stop "looking". I'm kinda glad that Match has run out of 'candidates' in my area.

I don't like the idea of "trading up", but soon I'm going to have to make decisions. My plate will be full, and if I want to continue looking for "the one" then some will have to go. Part of what it means to learn how to be a FREELOADER I suppose.



Very easy way to avoid vulnerability/intimacy this way. I've been thinking about my XGF this week. And being sad. The multiple dating is fun and distracting, but it really isn't what I want for long term. In some ways it's like being lonely in a crowded room.



Ha! Seeing 3 with 4 prospects and I already have the nagging feeling all the time that I've forgotten to call someone. This is more than I want for now... <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Well said, bud <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />. Sounds like you are doing fine.

Another thought for you - women who are perfectly fine with multiple dating (bouncing 3-4 guys for a year) are probably not the kind of women you want to meet for a commitment. Like CheckUrHeart said so correctly, they have probably become addicted to the fun of the regular wining and dining, i.e. have started to see dating as a meal ticket (of course they will vehemently deny it). They will be less likely to ever let go of that thrill.

So be careful with the women who are very easy going about your multiple dating - they won't "cramp your style", but they also may not you let cramp theirs. Whereas the ones that are monogamous and are looking for a longterm relationship may not put up with your multiple dating. It's hard to have your cake and eat it too, eh? <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />.

AGG

I HAVE talked to her and explained that I'm not looking for an exclusive relationship. I AM interested in spending time with her. My goal is NOT to get in her pants.

How does that make me a friggin player?!?

Slow down, my friend <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />. I didn't say you are a player, I said you are beginning to SOUND like one.

And since you are not a player, and don't want to be one, I was simply giving you a little nudge that you may want to be careful to not come across as one. That's all.

Why did your previous paragraph sound like a player? Well, what do players do? They balance many dates, being sweet and romantic with each one, but always keeping their options open and never letting anyone get too close. They are always playing the field, looking for that better deal. Even if they are not very interested in someone, they will keep dating them until something better comes along. It actually doesn't need to have anything to do with trying to get into their pants.

Now, to some extent, this is what dating should be all about - dating enough to know what's out there, so that you would know how to choose wisely. So the whole difference between that and a player is a matter of degree and semantics. Granted.

However, when you say that the girl "let he guard down" and told you she liked you, you made it sound like she didn't know how to "play" the game, at least not as well as you do. Why, because she was honest, and you know better than to make the same mistake?? See what I mean? My take is that a girl telling you she likes you (likes, not loves) should not elicit a negative response. If it does, then she is not right for you, so tell her so. But don't "try to get her to want to put herself on the backburner", that again sounds like you are trying to play a game, one where she painfully sees your cool response and decides to back off. These are games, bud.

I've met quite a few players. Some I could see through, and walked away quickly. Some were really good, they nearly broke my heart. I would never want to be one or act like one. I know you wouldn't either. So I am just giving you a heads up that at least what you are writing here is approaching "player" category, at least from the girl's perspective. If you don't believe me, ask her <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />.

Peace.

AGG

"However, when you say that the girl "let he guard down" and told you she liked you, you made it sound like she didn't know how to "play" the game, at least not as well as you do. Why, because she was honest, and you know better than to make the same mistake?? "

Didn't she say that on the first date though? To me she is coming on too strong. In reality a first date is just a getting to know you. And see if it progresses to date 2. I have just been burned too many times in my past, telling someone I like them on the first date. There's a time to say, and a time to zip it.

True. And a good dater will never say too much to show their hand.

OTOH, what if Big Guy really liked K too, from the start? He would have been THRILLED to hear her express that she likes him, first date or tenth date. And he would not say that she let her guard down. She was just being honest, not playing the dating game. It's OK to like someone on the first date, and express it. It's not a commitment or profession of undying love. It's not much different from saying "I like your eyes". Just means that she is pleased with what she saw so far.

What I see quite clearly is that he is not all that interested in her, and she sees it too. Which is why she said he is a player, because she feels some amount of playing taking place. Doesn't matter if she is right or not, that is how she feels.

This is a pretty common misunderstaning when someone who is looking for a longterm relationship bumps into someone who is "just dating". Neither is right or wrong, but they are incompatible. I've been on both sides of this.

AGG

Back to the original topic, if my date went out with another girl on the same day he went out with me, I'd feel hurt. BTDT years ago.

One reason I'd be hurt is my date didn't like me enough to provide the option of extending the date. Or if I was the last stop, my enjoyment of Saturday night wasn't considered. Imagine meeting someone for a date at 9:00 because they had a 5:30 date with someone else?

I would also wonder if my date viewed me as the unique individual that I am, or if I was just "a date."

Caveat: I don't think this applies to first meetings that really aren't even first dates. Peachy's coffee hour probably wouldn't have counted with me, except the idiot scheduled his dates back-to-back, not allowing adequate time to really get to know Peachy if they clicked. After all, they weren't on a Speed Date.

Years ago in my 20's I remember first dates where everything was cool and if things warmed up they did on the later dates.

I also remember a few first dates where she couldn't keep her hands off me. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

Hi TBG,

This is a hit and run post, since I normally post over on the boiling kettle of misery AKA GQII.

I've never been so fortunate to have more than one interested lady so I can't relate, but I can tell you about my grandfather.

Granddad was a grocer. From an early age, he managed grocery stores. In the old days, the way it worked was that he had to go to the farmers' market early in the morning to buy produce every day at maybe 5am. So, he always went to bed at 9pm. All his life - even after he retired, he was an early to bed early to rise guy. So, when he was dating my grandmother, it was always an early date 'cause he had to be home asleep at 9pm.

My grandmother apparently appreciated this arrangment, because she generally had another date after him. She married him anyway - and as far as I know it was a good marriage.

-AD

Loved this one AD
Too funny!! Your grandmother has some spunk!!!
Karona

It depends on what you call creepy, in all honesty.

I think it's creepy if you're not clear with all the people involved about what's going on, whether they ask you for clarification or not.

If everyone's clear on what's going on and fine with it, I don't see a problem.

I understand people not being fine with kissing multiple people on the same day, because that would wierd me out. I wouldn't say the word is creepy if it's all handled with Radical Honesty, but it would be clear to me that kissing means less to that person than it does to me, enough so that I shouldn't be kissing/dating them. But it would be fine with me if they did multiple dates a day with other people who were fine with it while I moved on without them.

For the number of times we've talked and been together, I would say that I'm appropriately interested in her. In fact, although I didn't have the sparks with K that I had with my XGF, of the seven women I'm currently communicating with, she has the most potential of something more developing.

K didn't have to tell me that she liked me alot on our first date. I read it in her body language. She just confirmed it when we talked next on the telephone. Did she commit faux pas by "showing her hand" this early in the relationship? Not in my book. I don't play that game. My XGF used to "hide her hand" and it would drive me nuts. I was getting mixed signals and it was setting off my "trust issues baggage".

My only concern is that she not set herself up to be hurt if things don't work out between us. Topie25 put the guy on the "friendship only" burner because if she allowed herself to really like the guy only to have him fall for someone else, it's painful. It's less painful if you're not so invested. I want K to be guarded with her feelings for me because I can't make any promises at this point.

I've done some research on the definition of what a player is. My own interpretation of a player is - a person who manipulates the feelings & emotions of another person in the guise of a relationship for personal gain. For men, it is for sex, for women it is for money. That's why I consider it an insult to be refered to as a player. But, I've read that the definition may be broader to include those people who understand human nature and use that knowledge when attracting the opposite sex. If that's so, then guilty as charged. But doesn't everybody do that to a certain extent? I mean, women don't put on makeup because its fun, do they? <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/crazy.gif" alt="" />

To answer my own original question, I would have to say that there is no one right answer. It is different for different people. What wouldn't bother me, does bother other people and probably vice versa. My new rule is to allow 6 hours or more per date. Oh... and never look at my watch during a date. Heaven forbid I should just want to know what time it is... <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/tongue.gif" alt="" /> (K gave me ****** because I glanced at my watch the last time we went out)

And for the kissing question... I think it just goes back to the exclusive issue. Is it something that should be just be reserved for exclusive relationships? That's a personal decision. Past that, frequency is (in my book) irrelevant.

Yip, like I said, it's a matter of semantics and extremes. So we agree <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />. In my book, it does not need to be sex as the personal gain. It could be anything that you want - sex, money, affection, company, fun, excitement, whatever.

Dating is by definition a game of sorts, we try to figure out the other person while they try to figure us out. So to some extent we are all players when we date.

What I consider players are those people who misrepresent themselves in any way to get what they want. It could be anything from outright lying, to much more subtle things. If you feel like you are always honest, then you are fine.

But, if you (for example) tell your dates that you are looking for a longterm relationship and are ready for one, and in reality (for example) you feel that you are still grieving over the loss of your last GF and really are just trying to kill the loneliness, then you are probably misleading them. See what I mean?

Big Guy, I am not calling you a player, I hope you heard me on that already. I am just saying that I think (from your posts) that you are a good guy (like me <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />), and so I want you to act like one with your dates. And it's easy to get excited about multiple dating - I am just saying that people who get really into multiple dating have a very short step to make before becoming players. I'm just trying to keep you from taking that step <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />.

Peace.

AGG

Just a quick update on that... the person he was really interested in; it turns out they aren't all that compatible anyways. But that's his loss... he's still on that backburner, and it's all because he said too much too soon. LOL.

The lesson here? It's STILL important to keep our mouths shut (about other dates) at the early stages of dating, when just getting to know someone. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

Karen

I'm not out there dating yet but I do have to say I would be offended also. If you want to date 2 women on the same day keep it quiet. lol... I know you're out there trying to make a connection and I'm assuming that you have to go out with several people to do that. Just don't hurt anyone's feelings. God....I'm kinda started to dread dating now. lol. I've been asked out a zillion times already and I'm overwhelmed with that. Holy Cow!!!!
Good luck Big Guy

Never. I'll never turn to the Dark Side. You've failed, your highness. I am a Jedi, like my father before me.

<img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/cool.gif" alt="" />


I'm such a geek.

This is why it is really important to establish objectives up front.

I am not looking for a long term monogomous relationship. Therefore I do not date people who are seeking that. I am very very upfront about that.

I have committed to not become "involved" until after my daughter graduates from high school. I'm not going to cause any disruption to her life in terms of introducing her to BF's, moving anyone into my home, etc.

I only date when my XH has the kids. Anyone who doesn't understand or respect my boundries - I won't date.

I do not consider myself to be a player -- whatsoever! I am very honest about my intentions and situation.

I'm just the opposite of you Lexxxy. I ONLY seek long term monogamous relationships and, because I'm not looking for one right now, I don't date. That doesn't mean I sit around the house and boo-hoo. I have friends of both sexes and I do things with them. I guess by some people's definition, because I take a single female friend to dinner and give her a little kiss at the end of the evening, I'm dating. But it isn't dating in the truest sense. If it were, I date men, too.

Whoa, you take men out and kiss them at the end of the evening? Kewl, you have some really relaxed male friends. A lot of guys would freak out over that one.

Well, I think "dating" inherently has some sort of a romantic tone to it. It may involve sex, it may involve kissing, hugging, or flirting, but there are clear differences between dating and simply hanging out with members of the opposite sex.

I still wonder what the objective of "dating" is if not to lead to a relationship? When someone says that they simultaneously date many guys for a long time, what happens on these dates? If they presumably don't sleep with all these different people (that sounds really creepy, even if it's been discussed and agreed by all parties), do they kiss them all? That sounds kinda creepy too, to me. If not that, then how is this "dating" any different from "hanging out" with buds?

I guess I am having trouble understanding the point of going on dates if you are not willing to have a longterm relationship. Is it just to pass the time, have someone buy you dinner, or what?

Dating to me is like courting, it is a process, but with a goal in mind, not a way of life.

AGG

No, the guys only get a kiss if they promise to respect me in the morning and I expect flowers on my desk by noon. LOL Really, though, I have no problem hugging a close male friend I haven't seen in a while. I'm secure enough in my masculinity that I can show affection to other males.

Why not date just because it's fun? It's FREELOADING. Yes, you can do most of the same things with your buddies, but buddies don't meet all EN's (and I'm not talking about SF). What is creepy for you may not be creepy for someone else. Some people consider it creepy for a single woman to be alone with a man who is not a relative. Does that make them right and you wrong? No, everyone is different.

Courting is a RENTER looking to BUY. But if you're not in a position where you want to BUY just yet, as Lexxxy is (and me), then why not date just because its fun to date?

Why more than one? Dating multiples makes it easier to maintain emotional distance. If you don't want to BUY, then dating multiples helps you avoid that position.

LOL <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

I don't understand dating for the sake of dating. But I can understand that it works for others, so no problem.



Like what? I am not being difficult or obtuse (I hope), I just don't understand. I have many female buddies, and I enjoy their company, I enjoy chatting with them, and spending time with them. But this is not dating.

What EN's can dating meet that buddies can't meet, other than affection and SF?


Of course, I wasn't trying to pass judgement. It's just that players are defined as those who use people for sex and affection with no longterm plans (at least that is the definition I read), so I am struggling to see the point of a non-player dating without sex, affection, or longterm relationship goals.


I understand. It's like window shopping <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />. I am afraid of window shopping, because I inevitably see something I want, but to each their own <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />.

I think that when you go on Match, most people assume that you are looking for a relationship. Now, you can say that you want to take it slow, which is fine and good, but I think if you honestly tell women that you have no intention to ever get involved with anyone exclusively, that your e-mail box will be lonely. What do you think?

AGG

Primarily I was thinking about affection, but I suppose you could throw in attractiveness, admiration as things you don't really get from buddies.




I think we need to nail down the definition of "player". I agree with your first definition, not with the second. If two people agree to be affectionate or even have sex with each other without committment to longterm plans, they are no more using or playing each other than two buddies who meet conversational or recreational needs. In both situations, ENs are being met, the only difference is the perception of exclusivity appropriateness.

If I want to hold hands with a girl without considering longterm plans with her, that doesn't make me a player, does it? I'm using her for affection and haven't committed to marriage... What if she's just a good friend. Am I playing her then?

I think, all we're really talking about here is who defines what activities should be exclusive.



Without sex, affection or longterm relationship goals, its not dating... its called hanging out together.

Dating is learning about another person and once a certain level of trust is established, meeting each others ENs that aren't met by other relationships in your life.




More than once I've encountered women who don't know what they are looking for. Did that prevent me from wanting to go out with them? No. To say that you never bave any intentions to get involved with someone exclusively is a lie. How can you be so certain that you are going to feel the same way a year from now? No, I say I have no desire for an exclusive relationship right now. And that is the truth. It is radically honest. It's not playing them.

TBG, you've repeatedly described what you are doing as "feeloading." Don't you understand that freeloading always cost somebody? The freeloader is letting someone else pick up the cost of his grand old time. This isn't right. Believe it or not, TBG, what you are doing is using women. This is not only disrespectful to women, but isn't a healthy way to strengthen your taker.

Ah, so there is a difference in your evenings with women (the ones you kiss) vs. men.

No, no difference. A friend is a friend. But males in the U.S. get very uncomfortable if you kiss them, so it's best not to even go there. I do have some European friends who don't think anything about grabing you and giving you a kiss. It isn't "gay" behavior to them.

I suppose if I thought that women were hapless creatures incapable of providing informed consent and constantly needing to be protected from their own decisions I would agree with you, but I don't, so I don't.

I don't force any of the women I go out with to hold my hand. If she choses to hold my hand back despite knowing that I hold other women's hands, then that is her prerogative. If she choses not to hold my hand knowing that I also hold other women's hands, that's ok too. I don't make my dating her conditional on whether or not she holds my hand.

I don't try to get her to hold my hand by leading her on that she is the only woman to do so. THAT is what a player would do. I am honest with her and allow her to make an informed decision. I call this "treating a woman as an equal". Yeah, I know, it's a strange new concept, but hey, I'm a progressive guy. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Tell me again how this is using her? If she gains benefit and I gain benefit, then at best you can say we are using each other. But then, when you meet recreational needs on your man-dates, one could argue that you are using them in the same fashion. How do you justify being so disrespectful to your man-friends?

You may be thinking, what's the big deal about holding hands? That's my point. Affection is affection. What we are really arguing about is where people draw the line for exclusive affection. Passing judgement on people who don't draw the line at the same place you do is unproductive. (and a little rude) To each thier own as long as they are honest about it, is what I believe. (and as much as you may think you know where I've drawn my line, you don't)

I don't know where you are getting your definition of a freeloader. Mine is from Dr. Harley's concepts of Freeloaders, Renters and Buyers.

Freeloading describes the level of reciprocal care a person is willing to provide in a relationship. It's not about getting a "free ride" off of anybody. It is a self-focused approach to relationships. Not always a pretty sight, but I can't begin to tell you how difficult it is for me NOT to put other people ahead of myself. It is second nature to me. And I see where it has damaged ALL of my past relationships. Until I learn how to speak up for myself and what I want out of a relationship, I will never have a successful one.

So, think of me what you will, but I will continue to treat women as equals and be focused on myself for the time being.

I have to jump in here with my admitedly very limited dating experience. I have dated women who won't go beyond a good night kiss unless they have an exclusive relationship. Others are very happy to kiss and neck knowing full well that both of us may be with somebody else next weekend. They find pleasure in holding hands, kissing, caressing and so on, and don't require an exclusive relationship.

Almost all women, do want an exclusive relationship before becoming intimate. But, up to the point the standards vary quite a bit.

Maybe it is all just a matter of semantics. To me, a "player" is someone who dates because s/he enjoys "playing" the field, rather than becasue they are looking for a relationship. Or, as I called it earlier, it is dating for the sake of dating rather than dating as a means to an end.

Certainly everyone is entitled to their approaches, and I do not fault Big Guy for choosing his. To each their own.

But he asked if #Dates > # Days would bother people, and I gave my opinion. I have been there done that, and I found it to be quite unpleasant. I want more out of dating than "if it's Monday it must be Candy, if it's Tuesday it must be Bambi, if it's Wednesday it must be Trampy", etc. To each their own <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />.

Anyway, Big Guy asked for opinions, and he got them. When you ask for opinions, you have to be prepared for some that you like as well as some that you don't, right? <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

AGG

TBG, To begin, you are mistakenly assuming that I am judging you harshly. I am not, but rather trying to get you to look at this in another way.

"I suppose if I thought that women were hapless creatures incapable of providing informed consent and constantly needing to be protected from their own decisions I would agree with you, but I don't, so I don't."

This is a dodge. I wasn't talking about the women; I was talking about you. Your statement does not address my point that if you are out there dating several women a day to satisfy your chosen desire to, as you call it, "freeload", you are by definition using these women for you own purposes. Here's the dictionary definition of freeload:

"to impose upon another's generosity or hospitality without sharing in the cost or responsibility involved"

See my concern? You say that you are using this approach because your working on your taker. Consider this: if you know your taker and giver are out of balance, and this has resulted in difficulties in your interpersonal relationships in the past, whould it not be better to first determine the reasons for the imbalance and take corrective action before involving innocent women?

Now, consider this. A lot of women will tell you that they aren't looking for anything more than you are - some light, casual dating with no strings attached. Some actually mean it. Some think they mean it, but find that they really don't. Some are just telling you what you want to hear. Most really mean that they aren't interested in more unless they hit upon Mr. Right and will become emotionally involved if they are really attracted to you. I can hear your protest before you utter it: that is their problem, not yours. Well, it actually IS your problem, since you are putting yourself out there in the dating game and you will have to deal with these problems when they arise. Saying I don't care, it's their problem because I'm just freeloading right now won't cut it. If it does, then you are playing.

Another point..... You are allowing your taker to have free reign and dating multiple women. Ostensibly, you are dating women who are similarly not looking for any emotional entanglements. Many of these are also giving free reign to their takers. Answer this: how can two people who's takers are in control possibly have anything other than a somewhat toxic interaction? The two of you are immedately at crossed purposes. This addresses my earlier point. If two people are going to have a healthy relationship (regardless of how emotionally deep they want it to be), both must have their taker and giver in balance. It's kind of like playing tennis without a ball.

I'm not faulting you on your approach either,TBG, but only challenging your thinking. I see nothing wrong with dating multiple people if that's your thing. What concerns me is the seemingly frantic way you are doing it. Reading over your posts, you seem to be putting an awful lot of effort into making sure your weekends are filled with as many dates as you can get or squeeze in. I cannot see why anyone would ever want to do such a thing, since it can only be stressful. Having multiple dates in one day as a one-off result of schedules is one thing, but deliberately seeking them begs the question: why?

Finally, this..... We've only danced around the issue of sex. You have stated that you aren't looking for sex and I take you at your word. But I am male and I know aaaaallllllll about the male libido. I know that we may not conciously be looking for sex, but subconciously, we almost always are. To paraphrase Freud, everything thing we do is for the purpose of getting sex. So, unless you've taken a vow of celibacy (and maybe not even then), if the opportunity for sex arises, you will probably take it. Every multiple-dating man I have ever known has/does/will. This isn't bad or evil; it's just the way we are wired. The dificulty is that it really complicates your life.

Notice, TBG, that it is the men here who are advising you to slow down and reconsider your approach. Can you think of why that might be?

This is an interesting discussion. I don't think he needs it, but I'd like to say something in defense of TBG:

Virtually every book I've read about getting back into dating tells the single person to date as many different people as they are comfortable dating for a significant amount of time before starting to narrow the field. Some of the reasoning is to experience as many different personalities as you can. And to avoid getting too serious about one person too quickly so that you don't hurt or get hurt.

Now, I don't have it in me to do that, and have been reading with interest all of the responses of those of you who also do not date multiple people. For a long time, I have thought I am odd because I really do not care to date for the sake of it - because I would rather approach dating with the intent to form a committed relationship - preferably long term. But that's what I want. It's the meeting enough people to find the right person with whom to form this committed relationship that is the hard part <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

A player, in my book (I'm going to define from the standpoint of a female - i.e., player being of the male persuasion), is someone who is a USER - a guy has no intention of even seeing a woman twice unless she performs well enough that he might want to keep her on the "string" for sex. He will not think twice about taking one woman to a club, disappearing for a little while to get a bj from some drunk chick he just met, then taking the first woman home, have sex with her and leave. And he won't call either of the two women he used ever again, unless they were A) good AND B) not going to get clingy on him.

That's my definition of a player. Unfortunately, back when I was a naive young woman in my early 20's (to distinguish from the more mature but still often naive woman I am now), I was involved with a SERIOUS player once... I was going to "change" him. Once he realized that I was hung up on him, he was CRUEL and EVIL about getting rid of me. The sad part of it was that I was dumb enought to fall for him -I knew his reputation and had a great deal of disdain for all the dumb women that fell for him and a great deal of disdain for HIM until he turned the charm on ME.

Can women be players? I guess if you consider a woman who does not think there is anything wrong with dating multiple men who meet her SF needs or her FS needs and discarding them when or if they do not ... sure, that woman is just as much a player as any male player might be.

Is TBG in danger of becoming a player? I don't think so... is he in danger of being LABELLED a player? That's a possibility, but really only if he is not completely HONEST with his dates about his intentions.

CS

I don't think TBG needs defense either, because he hasn't done anything wrong. I'm not just trying to challenge TBG's thinking, but everyone's. You see, the "dating game" as we know it, is a distinctly American phenomenon. People in other parts of the world "date" as a part of their courtship rituals, but their approach and attitudes about these things are very different from ours. Not only that, our current ideas about dating and courtship are really very recent. And guess what? We don't seem to do a very good job at selecting mates. While mate selection is not the only factor, it is one of the primary factors contributing to our very high divorce rate (which is the highest in the world). Not only that, the average romantic relationship lasts only six months. We spin our wheels a lot. What this tells me is that we jump into these relationships too quickly, with the wrong person and for the wrong reasons. Our dating game doesn't have a terribly impressive track record. So perhaps we all need to reconsider our approach and look for better alternatives.

CrystalSinger, take those books on dating with a grain of salt. They are written for a much younger audience -- 16 to 25 year olds. This is a group that has no experience in adult romantic interation. Moreover, it is a group who are still discovering who they are and what they want from life. So it is a great idea for them to "play the field" and get some experience before they start settling down on someone who meets their needs. I do not think that such an approach should be necessary for older people. By the time people get to be my age, they should know precisely what they want from a relationship and playing the field has no real advantage. Rather, we meet people who are attractive to us for reasons we can easily describe; we don't use that vague term "chemistry" in an attempt to put a name to some ethereal quality we don't quite understand. This is predicated on the condition that the individual is emotionally healthy and mature, which, as we all know, is not always the case.

A player goes far beyond just persuasion. He also lies and manipulates. So, I don't see a player in TBG either, though I have suggested to him that his approach can easily be construed as player behavior.

Can a woman be a player? Oh, you better believe it! They have different objectives, however. Female players practice something of a subtle form of dishonest prostitution and they are just as toxic as male players.

The Harley's recommend dating about 30 people before making a decision. As far as an "intended audience", each person is different, and experience is different for everyone. Although I'm 35, I didn't date much before I married my xH. Therefore, I think I need some dating experience before "settling down". Also, after a marriage that lasted several years, being betrayed, and being out of "dating practice", I would think that "dating recommendations" would still apply, regardless of age or experience. Yes, as you get older, and date more people, you begin to realize what you want, and you begin to recognize it better.

I just tend to agree that dating multiple people (2-3, for me) keeps you from becoming attached to one person too soon and gives you time to get to know them. It also releives the pressure and "sting" that comes from rejection in either direction.

Last Saturday, I started seeing Guy #2. We had a successful date #2 on Tuesday. On Wednesday, Guy #1 (from last Thursday) called me back for date #2. I discussed this with Guy #2, and he said he's OK with it. Really. So, this weekend, I have Date #3 with one, and Date #2 with the other. Guy #2 is cool with it, because he understands that I'm not ready to "settle down" yet, and neither is he, although we really like each other. And yes, we shared some very nice kissing... <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" /> but we are on the same page about continuing to see others, for now.

Faith1

LOL! Were I to folllow Harley's advice, I would never have married! I've only "dated" about 15-20 people in my whole life and I'm 47.

Really, though, I know within just a few minutes to an hour of meeting someone new whether I have any interest and what level/kind of interest I have. So I don't need a "date" with someone to see if there's any interest. The "getting to know all about you" part of it for me is something I do with people by participating in activities both find enjoyable; the learning happens in normal conversation on a wide range of topics. The sitting across from one anotehr in a restaurant palying 600 questions just won't work for me. I approach new friends and possible romantic interests in the exact same way. My approach works for me, because I have never been rejected.

Well, then, that explains a lot in this discussion. hehe. We're not all like you. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

I'm definitely not like that. I can tell right away if I can "click" with someone, but I have to spend more time with them in order to see if we are romantically compatible - both in conversation, and in experiencing things together. And... rejection DOES come my way, because I can tend to be infatuated with someone right off the bat, and they are not. Again... a difference in these "initial impressions".

Ah, but we aren't so different as you think. You see, I do not approach a woman from the start asking "is this a romantic possibility?" Rather, I just get to know her and have some fun and let that part come as it will. This makes love natural and I don't have to worry about whether or not I'm subconciously trying to pound a square peg into a round hole. All but three times, a romantic relationship just didn't happen, but it never was a matter of someone needing to be rejected, but more of a matter of it just isn't there, and both parties know this. But because we didn't start out with this being the all-or-nothing goal, no one gets hurt. It's a win-win situation, since you will always come away as friends.

Check,
You said

How do you do this without "dating" someone?

Well, I don't date in the sense that other people date. I meet someone, whether that person is male or female, and if we seem to hit it off will participate in activities together. In doing so we geete to know one another, but not necessarily with that big question mark hanging over our heads. Others would call this a date if I'm dong somethng with a woman and "doing something with a friend" if it is a man. I don't make that distiction. Now, with a woman, if there is an attraction, sexual and/or emotional, there is a possiboility for romantic involvement if other compatibility factors are there.

See, I have said in this forum before that the concept of dating that we have adopted over the last 50 or so years is contrived, artificial and, to my thinking, somewhat silly. As someone else pointed out in this thread, dating is something of a game. That's correct, but it should NOT be this way. I have stated today that the way we are doing things today doesn't appear to be working well. So it is doesn't work, why not try something different?

Here is a very interesting article that is somewhat relevant to the discussion:

Female Players

What I find interesting is that none of the female players in the article are in any way dishonest with their men - to them, this is all a chase, and they dangle the carrot that the "last man standing" (or, the one who impresses them the most) just might get the prize. So the guys pursue them, and the women eat it up.

So, there is no dishonesty here, even though they are being labeled "players". And I think we all agree that these women are players. Why? Because of that darned carrot. Because of that implied promise that if the guy spends enough money and impresses her enough, that he may end up with her.

And I think that is exactly what people who say that they are "just dating" without "wanting a relationship" are sometimes doing too - they are out there getting what they want (be it flowers or free dinners from the men, or the affection or intimacy from the women). Sure, everyone is honest about it (sometimes), but the reality is that most people going on dates are hoping to eventually "land" someone, so that implied carrot is always there.

If I go on a date, it is because I want to learn about the woman I am going to see, not to get a hug or a kiss. And hopefully that will be her intent as well. But if I tell that same woman that I have another date later on that day, and two more the next, etc, then I am sending her the message that I am quite the catch, and maybe, just maybe, if she works hard enough at it, she might end up with me. I know I am generalizing, but I think that this is what the article is all about - players do not commit to anyone but promise the potential to everyone.

L.A. is full of women like the ones in the article, to the point that I hardly date anymore. I only date women who are looking for a relationship, because I think I will barf if I see another woman who has five dates a week with different men.

I am curious, those who advocate multiple dating (BTW, I am making a big distinction between dating many different people before becoming exclusive with someone and dating many different people simultaneously without any intent of finding an exlusive partner), how do you see yourselves differently from the people described in the article? I don't mean this question as an attack, I am just curious about the answers.

AGG

Oh, yes, AGG, these women most certainly are being dishonest. They have no interest in these men, but use their libidos to manipulate them. They want them to pick up the tab for their fun. Nothing more. Sarah was on the phone to Brad planning a weekend within hours of setting up the invitation for a trip to NY. It isn't just LA overrun with women like this. Atlanta is too. Here it's know as "Atlantatude."

The kind of female player I was referring to can best be described by a conversation that my wife and I overheard at the table next to us at an upscale Midtown eatery one evening a few years back. There were two women, obvioulsy friends, talking. Here's a summary of the conversation:

Woman1: So how are things going with you and Scott?

Woman2: Oh, I'm just about finished with Scott.

W1: Oh? I thought the two of you were hitting it off?

W2: He thinks so. We've been dating now for two months and that's about all I need.

W1: So what's not right? He seems nice to me. Is he awful in bed or something?

W2: Awful, good, who cares. No he's nice enough. It's just time for me to move on. I'm going to wait for a few more weeks though.

W1: Why?

W2: You remember that necklace I showed you a few weeks ago? Well, I manuevered Scott to that restaurant next door to the jewelry store and got him to take me in there. I went crazy over that necklace and asked him to put it on me. Valentines day is coming up and i know he's going to go back and buy it for me. After than I'll do him a couple of more time and then break it off.

W1: Anybody else you're interested in?

W2: Yeah, you remember that guy who was flirting with me the other night? I gave him my number and he called me last night. We're having lunch Saturday. He drives a Bentley, so who knows what I'll be able to get out of him!

Laughter.....

Sick, but I swear it's true.

How do I see myself differently?

I don't want "things" from anyone. I am a pay-my-own-way kinda girl. I don't date so that someone will take me somewhere fancy. I am very uncomfortable with having a date pay for dinner, unless we agree that I pay the next time.

Admittedly I love the attention I'm getting. However, if I am getting that attention from someone I am not interested in, I am upfront about that. In fact I met someone a couple weeks ago that is very interested in dating me, and I had to tell him that I'd be very happy being his friend but I don't want a romantic relationship with him.

After being tied down for twenty years, I am in no rush to get back into an exclusive relationship. Dating is actually a low priority for me behind my kids, my job, and my racing. What's the rush? I spent all of my twenties and thirties being tied down. I like the idea of spending my forties and fifties free as I want to be.

Wow, Lexxxy, do you know how unique you are? I am truly impressed with your approach, I wish I were able to meet women who have a similar outlook (I did happen to meet some in the past, but they seem to be nowhere to be found these days <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />). Don't get me wrong, I am perfectly willing to be the gentleman and pay for my dates, but I feel that the "guy always pays" rule becomes a bit odd when a) this becomes the norm, b) the woman makes as much money as the man, and c) the woman is seeing many other men. I know I got chewed out for saying this before, but I am a somewhat "equal rights" kind of guy, and I find it odd when "equality" based women still expect the guy to always pay.

I have a hilarious story in that regard - I was dating a woman for a few months. One day, we went to lunch, and when the check came, I reached for it, as always. But she said "I'll get it". I said "are you sure?", she said "Of course, I was the one who invited you to lunch!". I said "OK, thank you!". Later I found out that she was furious about how "easily" I let her pay - she told a mutual friend that a man should know that a woman asks to pay only "to be nice". Needless to say, we are not dating anymore <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />.


That is my present outlook on life as well. So obviously I have no problems with your approach <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />.

AGG

I'm not sure that I qualify, because I do ultimately have the intent of finding an exclusive partner. Reading Dr. Harley's article again reminded me that exclusivity doesn't really begin until marriage, at least by his definition. Having the courage to allow your fiance to have a fling still blows my mind.

I also date with the intention of getting to know the woman without the expectation of affection. So, AGG and I are quite a bit alike. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> THAT, is how I see myself differently than the women in the article.

Players are users. You don't have to date multiple people to use them. You can be a player and just use one person at a time. It's just a he**ofalot slower.

Just for the record...

The last two weekends I've only had one date for the weekend. [gasp] Yeah, I know, my reputation is in danger. But hey, it just worked out that way. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

For the 5 dates I've had over the last three weekends, I've spent a total of $83. The largest part of that was $50 for the golf game. (but she picked up the tab for dinner, so Lexxxy you aren't THAT unique) Again, I'm not normally that chincy, that's just the way it worked out. I'll probably pay twice that this weekend.

Having 2 kids involved with extracurricular activities (and an XW who doesn't assist with said activities) makes for busy weekends on a fairly regular basis. Scheduling multiple dates on alternative weekends isn't frantic, just judicious time management.

Oh, and Faith is right, rejection is sooo much easier when all I have to do is remind myself that X number of women are very happy to spend time with me. I mean, it still hurts, but not nearly like it did before. It keeps me from ripping myself a new one over analyzing what is wrong with me because the truth is, there's nothing "wrong" with me. It just wasn't meant to be.

Heck, if my dates averaged out to under $20, I'd be dating more too :-D. I kinda lost interest when I had three dates in one weekend that set me back $400... I'm not talking anything fun either, just "nice" (read - expensive) dinners, and some drinks. I started feeling guilty, thinking that I could put this kind of money to better use by saving it for the kids' college tuition... I know, silly, but that is how I'm wired. So, I don't date <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />.

AGG

Personally I think if I pay more than $20 for a first date, I've paid too much. First dates are about getting to know the person. Besides, she's going to have to prove to me that she's worth spending more money on her. Lunch or coffee or some event at the park, nothing more. (my last "first date" cost me $6 for two lemon shake-ups and a corn dog, but watching the hot air balloons light up the night sky was priceless)

Good inexpensive dates are there to be had, it just takes a little more creativity. Besides, if it takes money to impress the woman, then I'm not particularly interested in her.

Not all women are looking for sugar daddy dates and it's a shame that you're depriving all of them of you. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

BG - I pay if I've invited the guy to something. I offer to pay half if it is a big ticket item or like your date of multiple big ticket items. I always offer to pay on the first date or to split because I want to be sure the guy doesn't end up feeling entitled to anything. I also suggest small coffee or tea or a walk cheapie first dates.

It's not fair to expect a guy to have to cough up the dough every time. Of course it is easier for me since I make a decent salary. I'm sure some women stick to old fashioned dating schemes out of necessity because of a tight budget. (just as some guys may quit dating because they can't afford to wine and dine every weekend - or I've gone out with a few who will take you out a couple of times then move the relationship to a "let's hang out and watch tv")

I think that the gist of the "He's just not that into you" craze is that rather than obsess over a guy that doesn't act the way you NEED him to act (meaning maybe he isn't going to fulfill your emotional needs), then you write him off if he fails to call etc. Making excuses for shyness, lack of motivation, laziness, social gaffes, whatever, just helps you to wind up with someone that is forever going to push your buttons.

A guy that is willing to ensure that you stay happy is by far the better catch. This is the guy willing to go the extra mile to correct his course if he goofs. I know my BF made some big errors and left me feeling like he didn't care. Any time I've gone to him with a complaint he has immediately corrected future actions. This is in line with Harley's stand on correcting love busters for annoying habits and independent behaviors.

I'm not saying that if a guy doesn't call for a week that if he calls and has some reasonable excuse you should tell him to go pound sand. I'm saying that obsessing over a guy that doesn't call is a waste of time. If his not calling becomes a pattern that bugs you - then tell him so and if he doesn't correct the behavior - se la vie - bye bye... He's just not that into you.

V.

Yeah, well, lucky for you that you're in IL... When I lived back in Philly, it seemed the same.

I don't know if times have changed, or if it's the L.A. scene, or the influence of Sex and The City, but around here, it seems that money (especially money spent by the man on the dates) is the primary determinant if the woman will keep seeing the man. I have a good female friend who always tells me that she liked a man she met because he took her to front row Lakers game, or hard to get Fleetwood mac tickets, or the most exclusive restaurant in town... I rarely hear her tell me that she actually liked the guy, it's always the "generosity".


Hehehe, well, call it a temporary hiatus. "Aaaahhhh'll be baaaack", as our famous governor once said...

AGG

GG - I resent that remark about the Philly area being full of women users - I live in the philly area, and I'd be happy to buy you dinner. <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> send me your pic.

V.

You misread what I said - I said that when I was back in Philly (20 years ago), things were similar to IL, i.e. women were NOT looking for sugar daddys! So no need to resent me, I was badmouthing L.A., not Philly <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />. I always liked the Philly women, they had that "normal" charm to them! Where are you in Philly area? I lived in Jenkintown for many years.

But since you offered, do I get to choose where the dinner will be?? Is Chez Robert still around?? <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />:) Can't wait! Tell me where to send the picture, if that's all it takes <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />.

Speaking of pictures, I still think that MB should take this forum one step further and actually let people put up "profiles" and maybe even meet each other... OK, OK, I am prepared for the criticism, don't shoot me <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />.

AGG

[color:"blue"] Why thank you <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />[/color]

[color:"blue"] I don't know but chez V is open <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" /> - actually the striped bass is popular fine dining (or the stripped bess as one of my former foreign born bosses used to mispronounce it...) [/color]



[color:"blue"]Now you are teasing me. I don't date guys that don't live within a 25 mile radius of me - too much heartache with long distance things. [/color]

[color:"blue"]Well maybe they could allow that only in this forum and not in the building side... Actually with all the WS now populating the place, don't you wonder if it wouldn't become a place where they could shop to trade up?

V. [/color]