Cougars vs. MILFs

What is a Cougar? How come this dating term only applies to females and not to males who exhibit the same behaviors? Continue reading “Cougars vs. MILFs”

Content is King, *NOW* (Eye Candy is Over)

Bill Cammack“Content is King” is a lie that’s been perpetuated in web video circles for a few years now. “Eye Candy” has always been.. Queen.. but I’ve recently noticed that the tables have turned and Content actually *has* overtaken EC..

I wrote about EC in March 2008 and mentioned “the formula”, which was that whatever actual content you had, the way to get views for your show was to have an attractive female as the ‘front’ or the ‘face’ of the show. She didn’t have to know or understand JACK about JACK so long as she could look good and read her lines. I probably noticed this formula in 2007, since I got started in online video in 2006.

Regardless of the content, the most popular shows were headlined by a female that was nice to look at. Period. (with the one obvious exception being Ze Frank’s “The Show”)

It was even worse on YouTube, because everybody knew that YT took the picture that represented your video from exactly 50% into your episode. If your video was 6 minutes long, the still YT would take was @ 3 minutes. So.. Regardless of what the actual content was, people would figure out the final length of their show and insert a few frames of a chick in a bikini exactly in the middle. They’d upload their show, YouTube would pull the image of the bikini chick, all the boys would click on it expecting to see some ass, the video would get popular and then eventually ‘featured’, where it could really take off and get more views. Continue reading “Content is King, *NOW* (Eye Candy is Over)”

Street Game 02: Female Players vs Male Players

Listen / Download => Street Game 02: Female Players vs Male Players (.mp3) [13:43]

Bill & Frank’s audio podcast derived from the DatingGenius dating advice blog.

More Episodes: http://billcammack.com/category/datinggenius/streetgame/

Nobody Cares Who Social Media Guys Are Dating


Adrienne & Bill

So I’m chatting with Adrienne Brawley the other day, and we’re discussing web shows since we’re both shooters and editors. We were talking about my post Personal Brand? No Crossover, and the topic of internet show hosts came up.

I “matter-of-factly” mentioned how several female show hosts either ACTIVELY HIDE their boyfriends or whatever and some of them merely omit the fact that they’re in relationships, to which Adrienne replied something to the effect of “But the guys don’t have to say who they’re dating.”

That’s where I lost whatever point I was about to make, because all main & auxiliary mental power was diverted to attempting to recall even ONE instance where a guy was asked about that.

Once I realized I wasn’t going to be able to cite a single instance in the 2+ years I’ve been involved with internet shows, I started thinking about WHY I couldn’t come up with one. 🙂 What I decided was,

Nobody Cares Who Guys Are Dating

According to my Quantcast demos, my site has a 65% female readership. BlogHer has 61% female readership. Rocketboom has 65% male readership. Digg has 58% male. Wallstrip has 56% male. Blip.tv has 51% male. The point is, that according to statistics, it’s mostly males that are watching internet shows (even though studies are saying there are actually more females on the net, they just don’t identify themselves in surveys as female).

So, basically, there are a lot of guys that watch these shows, and if you go to IRL conferences or at least look at the flickr sets from these conferences, you’ll see there are a ton of guys at these things as well. There really isn’t a lot of representation for the female population. So that’s one reason why there isn’t any pressure on guys to disclose their dating status. Nobody cares. Continue reading “Nobody Cares Who Social Media Guys Are Dating”

Recreational Sex

One of the ‘consequences’ of the fact that I write in so much depth is that people find it tough to follow my concepts. It’s also because I’m talking about things that people don’t understand. I’m talking about WHY things happen, not *what*happens*. I’m not telling guys to go buy flowers for their girls. I’m talking about THE EFFECT on her when you buy those flowers.

Another ‘problem’ with my style is that I write from “stream of consciousness”. I think about a topic and I type what I’m thinking…. on the fly… When I post something, it’s because that’s what I’ve been thinking about and typing about for the last hour or two. This also makes it tough for the average Joe/Josephine to follow, because it’s not aimed at them. It’s aimed at myself and people who can grasp and process my concepts and the way I present them.

The good thing about this is when someone gets pissed off enough to make a comment. This way, I can see what they took away from reading my post. I get to see the difference between what I THOUGHT I was expressing and what they received… or at least what they were able to articulate from what they received.

Reader “AJ” (no site link… so you know what that means) left me a comment this morning on my post, “Male Birth Control Pills!!!”. I think the points that AJ brought up were too important/interesting to have my response stuck in my comment stream, so I wanted to make a new post based on his/her comments.

Briefly, “Male Birth Control Pills!!!” is about the fact that if they actually create this stuff and it works, guys are going to have a new choice when it comes to attempting to ensure that they don’t get chicks pregnant. Here’s AJ’s response:

AJ: June 30, 2008 at 6:43 am

“All about being the sleezy, gutless guy with no responsibility hey? All play and pleasure no actual contribution to anything. In complete control of his self-centred pleasure obsessed destiny!

If you want to be a loser in life, use the pill, your chick if she is using her’s already, chances are she will get fat for it, if not get cancer! Use her to the point where she is risking her life for your pleasure. You da man aren’t you!”

First of all, sleAzy is spelled with an “A”. ( http://mw4.m-w.com/dictionary/sleazy )

Second, my post was about GUYS *USING* BIRTH CONTROL, which equates to TAKING RESPONSIBILITY. Being *irresponsible* is *NOT* making sure that you use birth control and getting a chick pregnant when you have no intention of having kids with her. So your first sentence doesn’t make any sense. A “sleazy, gutless guy” would do what he wants to do and not care whether the chick gets pregnant or not, so he wouldn’t be READING my post, and he MOST CERTAINLY wouldn’t be WRITING my post.

Third… Not like your troll-ass is still anywhere near my blog, but responsibility for what? If she doesn’t get pregnant, you HAVE no responsibility. Does that make sense? “No actual contribution to anything”? Contribution to WHAT? What are you talking about? 🙂 You mean like a campaign contribution? The “contribution” in messing with a chick is that she has a good time, gets some sort of satisfaction and feels like a desired and attractive woman. What else would you like a guy to contribute to? PLEASE feel free to respond, because I’d love to know. 🙂

I’m going to skip “play and pleasure” for now, since I think that’s the most important point AJ makes, and move on to:

AJ: “If you want to be a loser in life, use the pill”

um…….. WHAT? 😀 hahahaha Did you read this before you posted it? According to my stats, you’re from Australia. I don’t know “how they do” over there, but in the USA, we have a bunch of what are known as “deadbeat dads”, which interestingly enough, Wikipedia has down as “deadbeat parents”.

Deadbeat parent is a pejorative term referring to parents of either gender that have freely chosen not to be a financially supportive parent in their children’s lives. Primarily used in the US, the gender-specific Deadbeat dad and Deadbeat mom are commonly used by the child support agency to refer to men and women who have fathered or mothered a child but fail to pay child support ordered by a family law court or statutory agency such as the Child Support Agency. The real definition is an unrestricted parent treated equally who chooses not to be a regular or supportive parent in their child or children’s lives.”

THAT’S “being a loser in life”, my mellow. So by avoiding the situation of having kids a guy never intended to have, that’s the OPPOSITE of losing, which is WINNING. 😀 So your statement should have read “If you want to be a WINNER in life, use the pill”.

AJ: “your chick if she is using her’s already, chances are she will get fat for it, if not get cancer! Use her to the point where she is risking her life for your pleasure. You da man aren’t you!”

If you go back and read my post, you’ll notice that I don’t advocate ANYWHERE putting your girl on the pill. *THAT’S* irresponsible, assuming YOU’RE THE ONE that doesn’t want to have kids with her. There’s no reason to mess with her body chemistry for your personal fun and recreation (and her fun and recreation as well, haha 😀 ). That’s actually the ENTIRE point of the post. Supposedly, the day is coming where there’s a choice that the male has to enact protection besides condoms and vasectomies.

On top of that, besides potential health issues, if she goes on the pill it could change her body-type, potentially taking her outside of your personal range of what you find sexy, and then you won’t want to hit it anyway. Putting her on the pill defeats the purpose of her going on the pill in the first place. This is why Male Birth Control is a grand option, if they ever figure out how to make it happen.

Having said that… I understand what AJ’s overall issue is, and I think it’s an important point to bring up, because it’s an extremely common disconnect that many women have which disallows them from grasping the actual reality of their “relationships”.

AJ: “All play and pleasure no actual contribution to anything. In complete control of his self-centred pleasure obsessed destiny!”

Another of the many things lots of women never realize is that there are A LOT OF GUYS that want to have sex with you with *NO* *INTENTION* *WHATSOEVER* of having kids with you. 🙂 There are lots of guys that want to have sex with you with no intention of entering a “relationship” with you. There are lots of guys that are into sex exactly for the reasons that AJ states… “self-centered, pleasure-obsessed DESTINYYYYY!!! 😀 “. In the best-case scenario, he’s up front about that with you and you know this guy’s physically attracted to you right now, and doesn’t necessarily want to call or iChat you tomorrow. Even in the case of recurring sexual encounters (often referred to by women as “a relationship”), the fact that he hits it over and over does NOT imply any form of progression towards you becoming his girlfriend or wife. This is why y’all are always asking dudes “where is this going?”… It’s because it’s not *GOING* anywhere. 🙂 It is what it is. He gets to tap that. You get out of it whatever you get out of it. The sun “comes up” and then it “goes back down”. Rinse & Repeat.

This is what AJ’s issue is. The fact of the matter is that there are lots of guys that are having recreational sex with chicks that turn them on, and they have no intention of having kids with said chick or starting a family or even discussing future relationship configurations with her. For those guys, supposedly, the day is coming where they’re going to be able to protect their self-centered, pleasure-obsessed destinies by taking pills that will make it extremely unlikely that the chick will get pregnant, even if he’s using a condom and it breaks.

From where I’m sitting, that’s BEING RESPONSIBLE and WINNING at the same time.

Thanks for the exercise, AJ. 😉

DatingGenius