What is a Cougar? How come this dating term only applies to females and not to males who exhibit the same behaviors?

Definition

According to Wikipedia, a Cougar is “a woman, 40 years of age or older, who pursues younger men, typically more than eight years her junior. The term is also commonly applied to women that are thirty or older.”

This is clearly a corny & simpe viewpoint. Urban Dictionary has some more definitions for us:

• An older woman who frequents clubs in order to score with a much younger man. The cougar can be anyone from an overly surgically altered wind tunnel victim, to an absolute sad and bloated old horn-meister, to a real hottie or MILF. Cougars are gaining in popularity — particularly the true hotties — as young men find not only a sexual high, but many times a chick with her **** together.
• (see also hunt, prowl, corner, pounce). Noun. A 35+ year old female who is on the “hunt” for a much younger, energetic, willing-to-do-anything male. The cougar can frequently be seen in a padded bra, cleavage exposed, propped up against a swanky bar in San Francisco (or other cities) waiting, watching, calculating; gearing up to sink her claws into an innocent young and strapping buck who happens to cross her path. “Man is cougar’s number one prey”
• An attractive woman in her 30′s or 40′s who is on the hunt once again. She may be found in the usual hunting grounds: nightclubs, bars, beaches, etc. She will not play the usual B.S. games that women in their early twenties participate in. End state, she will be going for the kill, just like you. Associated with MILFs.
• A woman in her sexual prime who prefers to hunt rather than be hunted. A cougar’s victims are usually under 25, as cougars prefer to mate with men who still have hair. Cougars generally feed and then continue hunting, as they enjoy role reversal.
• A Cougar is a female, usually between thirty and fifty years-old, who enjoys the sexual company of younger men. Cougars are only usually interested in men under the age of twenty-five. Also, Cougars are non-committal, choosing to move from mate to mate without ever settling down. It is not uncommon for the same Cougar to attack (sleep with) many different men in the same group of friends. Furthermore, Cougars are older and more practiced in the ways of snaring a mate so they will rarely broadcast their intentions to sleep with you until you are already in her Jetta, headed for the condo she just bought. It is this elusive behavior that earns her the name “Cougar.”
• Hot and sexy older woman, usually in her 40s or 50s, single or married, who is sick of her same-age counterparts which are usually hairless, have big guts, who only talk about their insurance premiums and have the TV remote control attached to their hands. Cougars are attractive, in their sexual prime, who know what they want and aren’t afraid to go after it. BIG misconception is that they dress cheap, wear hot pink nail polish, animal skin prints and are not-so-attractive old-looking hags with bleached hair (Yeah those women exist, but they are NOT cougars). True cougars are classy, beautiful creatures who have made their successes on their own, have real brains, usually with expensive cars/homes, and are real head turners. Cougars seek younger men, and don’t have to sneak up and attack…they know their younger mates are eager to get an experienced woman who won’t ask if they’ll call them the next day. Being a cougar is a positive thing.

Did you notice how this is like a crime scene where everyone has a different description of the perp? :D

She was 35.. No.. She was 50…
She was rich.. No.. She was broke…
She looked busted.. No.. She looked HAWT!!! :D

For the purpose of this discussion, I’m going to define a Cougar as a female that’s older than the male she’s kickin’ it to who has uncommon advantages over that male that she’s not “supposed” to have.

We need to keep the “older than” component, or the concept isn’t any fun. If you get served by a chick your age or younger, she was just smarter than you and your life sucks.

I’m willing to toss the “how much money she has” component and the “whether she looks good or not” component as those aren’t going to be primary issues during the locker-room talk debriefing the next day with his boys. As soon as he mentions that he hooked up with an older chick, the conversation could potentially stall there indefinitely as he attempts to explain why and save face in front of his friends who are dying to call him “desperate”.

The age component needs to be dropped lower because those mid-western grade-school teachers that keep getting busted for being in love with their 14-year-old (happy as HELL to get laid!!! :D) students already qualify as Cougars in their late 20′s.

So we need for the Cougar to be older, except we also need for her to have uncommon advantages in the relationship. Otherwise, she qualifies as a MILF, which is a similar, yet completely different fetish category.

MILFs

The acronym MILF stands for Mother I’d Like to ****. It’s a technically incorrect term because nobody cares whether the older chick has kids or not. The concept is more that she’s old enough to have kids or maybe that the way she looks, you would say “She’s old enough to be my mother” even though she might only be 5 years older than you are.

MILFs don’t have any advantages in relationships.

They’re just like regular females except they were born before you were. You don’t need to apply any special tactics for them. Actually, you can do even less as you imagine them to be relatively desperate and hungry for some male action.

MILFs are a fetish category because they’re not supposed to still be in The Game. They’re supposed to have had all the sex they’re going to have in their lives and now, their function is being somebody’s mother or a secretary or something.

The problem with this theory is that women supposedly peak sexually in their 30′s, so even though their looks might be way past their prime, they’re way more DTF (Down To ****) than younger girls who are still playing stupid games and frontin’ like they don’t want to hook up with you when you know that they’re dying to give you some.

So, a MILF is an older woman that you’re not supposed to be able to have sex with, but somehow you do.. Like, you go to some chick’s house to take her out to the club and she got stuck at the library studying so her mother invites you wait for her inside and you happen to hook up with the moms, probably including all sorts of stuff that her daughter wouldn’t have done for you anyway.

Or.. Maybe you decide to do your laundry late at night and this older gal is the only one in the laundromat and one thing leads to another…

These qualify as MILF encounters… Regular stuff, except it just so happens that the gal’s older than you are.

Cougars

A cougar, OTOH, is making moves from her own personal power. You have to imagine a Stella trying to get her Groove Back.

The Cougar knows what she wants and she knows how to get it. There’s an empty space she’s trying to fill… She’s looking to add an element to her already HAPPENIN’ lifestyle.

Unfortunately.. Unless you know how to tell the difference, a Cougar looks just like a MILF and you might could get caught slippin’. :D

It might be a part of her game plan to play that submissive “Oh.. I do declare!.. I think this whippersnapper’s trying to have sex with me! :O” role because she doesn’t want to scare you off by saying “Let’s get out of here” or asking you to accompany her to the bathroom of the bar and then locking both of y’all inside.

The trick to the Cougar is that “She don’t need you.. She’ll let the welfare feed you.”.. The tricks that usually work on women will actually leave you in a worse position than if you hadn’t tried to use them.

Declarations of love and promises of long-term relationships don’t have the pantie-dropping effect they’re supposed to. She’s not looking for Mr. Right.. She’s looking for Mr. Right Now. >:D

It’s also easy to miss it entirely when a Cougar propositions you because the way some of them press up is so subtle and slick. For instance, they might use the typical guy’s trick of feigning interest in your business so you have to.. what?.. Give her your business card.

After that, you need to talka about the business, right?.. Which is usually best discussed over what?.. Dinner. O_o

Of course, you need to meet at the restaurant’s bar before dinner, which leads to what?.. Drinks…

Next thing you know, you’ve gone on a full-fledged DATE with her and you can’t even accuse her of having asked you out! :D

So What?

What difference does any of this make? How come we need a special term for this behavior?

Cougars do what they want to do when they want to do it. If this attitude somehow permeated the female population, it would be a complete disaster for guys trying to get laid.

Sometimes, the only leverage you have is that she wants you to spend money on her or take her dancing or buy her a house.. The only carrot you have to dangle in front of her face is how much better her life will be if she hooks up with you. Take that away, and women would only give it up to guys they actually thought were sexy, and society as we know it goes down the tubes. :D

Once you label the behavior, you can convince people that it’s a deviant lifestyle and eventually even prescribe medication for it. mo money, Mo Money, MO MONEY!!! :D

More importantly, you can utilize the new distinction to brainwash girls that this is not who they want to be when they grow up.. A free-thinking, financially independent woman enjoying her life without being subservient to a man (unless that’s how she gets her kicks..) and getting involved with sex & relationships on her own terms.

It’s kind of like how they try to blackmail guys into selecting a girlfriend by telling us “You don’t want to end up as that old-ass man at the bar, do you?”

Speaking of which…

Male Cougars?

There is no similar term that means male that’s older than the female he’s kickin’ it to who has uncommon advantages over that female that he’s not “supposed” to have.

Guys are SUPPOSED to have lots of advantages over the women they’re dating. That’s the whole point of the mating ritual. She’s trying to make a come-up by latching onto a guy that’s better than her, taller than her, stronger than her, richer than her, with a better career than she has, owns more property than her, has better genes than her family does, etc etc etc.

The phrase women like to use is “I can do poorly all by myself!”

There’s no point in a woman latching onto a man who’s a lesser human being than she is unless she’s one of those people that enjoys telling people what to do. If that’s her idea of a fun relationship, then more power to her.

So there IS no Cougar-type term for guys because we date women as young as we like, so long as they’re legal in that particular state.

Will you ever see Hugh Hefner cold lampin’ with chicks his age? NOPE!.. He likes young chicks and can afford as many of them as he likes. There’s no term for that, except perhaps “The American Dream”. >:D

According to society’s standards, guys are SUPPOSED to be older than the gals they date. They’re supposed to be taller and smarter and richer… It’s not enough of an issue to warrant a particular label, just like women getting laid *WELL* isn’t enough of an issue to warrant the creation of brothels where women can go to Get Their Groove Back right quick and then get on with their business like men all over the world do every single day of life.

According to a recent Time/CNN article, the Cougar craze is a myth… What do YOU think? O_o

Related Posts

• Ass Out, In The Garbage (Homegirl Epic Failure)
• Bill’s Dating Tips For Women [Part 05]
• Safe Sex Tutorial (Big Willie Pockets)
• Who’s The Leader In Your Relationship?
• That’s Your Man’s Problem

“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.

This worked, BTW, with videos that didn’t even have a female IN THEM, because guys couldn’t figure that out without clicking on the bikini-chick, by which time your ‘view’ was already counted. Thanks, sucker! :D

“The Formula” was so pervasive that I was discussing doing a show for these guys’ company and one of them actually said to me (verbatim) “We’d love to do a show.. but we don’t have a girl.”

Having a female headlining your show that guys would enjoy imagining having sex with was certainly the key to success back in the day, but at this point, if you look at numbers of YouTube subscribers as well as episode views, Content has clearly come into its own as guys and gals who are actually talking about something intelligent or providing some kind of actual entertainment value to their viewers have vastly outpaced the “Look at me and my tits” chicks.

I mean, VASTLY, like left them in the dust. I didn’t think it would happen, but it has, and there’s no end in sight. I think what happened is that the early adopters enjoyed success at the time, because they were the only ones doing it. Now that everybody and their sister has a YouTube channel and is doing the exact same thing, it’s tough to gain new followers / subscribers. As a matter of fact, an annoying trend has developed, where people actually ASK YOU not only to subscribe to their channels, but to rate their episode “5 Stars”. :/ .. Um.. How are you going to TELL SOMEONE what to rate your episode? wow. “Please rate my episode” I can understand. “Please rate it 5 Stars” (Top Rating Available)? Come on. :/

So.. If you don’t have any girls (or, no *attractive* girls), do your show ANYWAY. *THIS* is your time! :D Eye Candy is OVER!

You have as much chance of your show becoming popular as anyone else. So long as you have a good topic that’s sustainable (you can consistently release episodes ad infinitum), the viewing public is willing to accept, watch, listen to, follow, friend, subscribe, rate and virally pass your show on to their friends & relatives.

If you don’t believe me, go check out the current Revision3 lineup, including my friend Anthony Carboni‘s show, “Bytejacker”.

Blog about what you’re passionate about in text, audio or video.. Be consistent, relevant, informative & entertaining and you have a shot at becoming popular in the ‘online video’ game.

Content, at this point, truly *IS* King, so the only things limiting you are your own imagination, creativity and determination.

Make It Happen! :D

~ Bill Cammack | @BillCammack

Related Posts

• Internet Blog-Influenced News Cycles
• Social Media Smoke & Mirrors
• Safe Sex Tutorial (Big Willie Pockets)
• Requests For Action / Fishing For Compliments
• Nobody Cares Who Social Media Guys Are Dating

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/

Related Posts

• Street Game 01: Denial & Experience
• “Street Game” Production Notes
• Street Game
• Street Game 05: Who Should Pay For The Date?
• Street Game 04: The Reason Why He’s Talking To You

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.

Remember Dig A Tech Girl and Dig A Tech Guy? You probably don’t, because I didn’t either! I had to google all over creation to remember what the name was. Interestingly enough, when I finally found the guys’ page, the first two entries were Chris Boucher and Oz Sultan.

Chris, Rana & Bill

Bill & Oz

Anyway… At the time, ALLLLLL the attention was on the girls and none on the guys. There were a lot of complaints that a lot of the women on the list didn’t have ANYTHING to do with tech and that it was yet another reason to line up attractive females and rate them, as we Americans love to do! (and probably the rest of the entire world) :D

What Difference Does It Make?

I would love to see a study (which is clearly infeasible) about the effects on viewership / community participation for a female show host before and after she revealed that she was “involved”. Off the bat, I’m clear that a) it’s nobody’s business and b) her relationship status has nothing to do with whether she has a fun personality or can read a script beyond a 2nd grade level. Personally, I think that in most cases, it wouldn’t make any difference at all. I think that in most cases, people like what they like about a show host and their relationship status has no bearing whatsoever on their performance in the show, on Social Media sites where they follow that host or IRL.

The case where it WOULD make a difference is when that particular host is playing up her sexuality or sensuality in order to gain followers. If guys are only watching her show for T&A, it’s pretty likely that they’re imagining they have some form of a shot of being in a relationship with her or at least messing with her at some point. Revealing that she’s “spoken for” would put a completely different spin on her act and lead to several (if not MANY) disillusioned followers.

Opinions?

Ultimately, I don’t have an opinion on this topic, haha. I just wanted to post about it because I was so surprised that I was completely stuck with no response when Adrienne mentioned the disparity. If you have something to add, please write a comment below and we’ll discuss it.

The way I see it, it’s “same as it ever was”. Guys like looking at attractive women. That’s never going to end. There’s no reason why it SHOULD! :D I don’t think that should put any extra pressure on female show hosts to “play up” their attractiveness or sensuality, but we all know that “sex sells”.

As far as I can tell, the most SUCCESSFUL female hosts just so HAPPEN to be attractive, but they also know what they’re talking about, bring quality to their shows and also happen to be decent Human Beings IRL.

~Bill Cammack

Social Media Category: billcammack.com/category/social-media
Subscribe via RSS or Email
 

Related Posts

• Content is King, *NOW* (Eye Candy is Over)
• Videoblogging & Vanity
• CNN Presents “Black In America: Silicon Valley”
• Internet Blog-Influenced News Cycles
• Google Plus Circles – How To Use Them

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? :D 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. :D 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 :D ). 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!!! :D “. 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

Related Posts

• Dating for Misanthropes
• Top 5 Reasons Why Overweight Women Have More Sex
• How To Avoid Pregnancy
• Dating, Socialization & Class
• Why Women Have To Be Attractive And Men Don’t