I just watched this Paul Newman film that was released in 1967, called “Hombre”.

Skipping past the race-relation value of the film, while I was watching it, I was amazed (yet, not) about what they were asking Paul Newman’s character to do in the situation they were in.

Basically, some guy stole money from the people that raised Paul Newman’s character, like in a significant amount that it endangered their lives. This guy had that money and his wife on a stagecoach that Paul Newman happened to be on.

The stagecoach got robbed, and criminals stole the money from the dude that had stolen it from the people. They also took the dude’s wife.

Paul Newman got the money back that belonged to his people, but the criminals still had some other dude’s wife.

They sent one of the criminals to negotiate, who basically said (it was a Western, and they were in the desert) “Give us the money and give us your water, and we’ll give you some other guy’s wife back… If you don’t give us the money and water, we’ll kill the woman.”

Paul Newman’s reply was basically “**** you. Shoot her.”

A conversation ensued, after the criminal returned to his posse to relay the message, where this woman that was also on the stagecoach with them asked him something like “Money is more valuable to you than a woman’s life?”

I understood what she was saying, but she wasn’t looking at the big picture.

Focus On The Facts

The money in the saddlebags was going BACK to the people that it had been STOLEN FROM, who were ALL in danger of losing their lives because they weren’t going to be able to buy food or supplies in the wild west. Paul Newman was carrying ALL OF THEIR LIVES on his shoulder in those saddlebags.

What she didn’t want to address was that the people that Paul Newman was trying to save were equally valuable to the one female that he was NOT going to save by giving away those people’s money.

She also didn’t want to address the fact that the money had been STOLEN by the captive woman’s husband in the first place, which was why they were in that predicament.

She also didn’t want to address the fact that if Paul Newman hadn’t shot two of the robbers, their posse would have gotten away with the money AND the woman, AND left them in the desert with no water or horses, presumably to die of thirst.

Most importantly, and the focus of this article, is that NOBODY in the entire film wanted to address the fact that this was NOT. PAUL. NEWMAN’S. WOMAN.

Regardless of what happened to her, his life wasn’t going to be any different.

If he gave the money away, he saves some nobody’s life, so she can go off with her husband and do God knows what, to ZERO benefit to Paul Newman.

If he keeps the money, he gets to save the lives of the people that raised him.. A LOT of the people that raised, him, not just one person.

This is clearly a no-brainer… “**** you. Shoot her.”

Meanwhile (which is relevant to my eventual point), the husband tries to get slick.

Even though the criminals have his wife, and the money and water are their only bargaining chips, he gets the drop on everybody BUT Paul Newman and orders them to give him the money and the water because he’s breaking north (leaving).

Of course, he gets caught by Paul Newman, who offers him a 1-on-1 shootout, which this ***** of course, declines. He’s made to leave the money, leave the water, and LEAVE! :D hahaha SEEYA!

Now… Here comes the same chick, asking Paul Newman questions about “How do you expect him to live in the desert without any water? :O”

Another stupid question, because he was about to leave YOU, ME and all the rest of us HERE without ANY bargaining chips against the criminals, INCLUDING water, so **** him.

The husband ends up rejoining the group, and they’re trapped in a house with the criminals surrounding them and once again attempting to use this guy’s wife to barter for the money.

The robbers decide that it would be a good idea to take this guy’s wife to an open area and leave her there, tied to a tree stump or something, in the desert heat, with no water, until someone came down from the house and traded them the money and water for her life.

That’s Your Man’s Problem

This sparked a new round of conversation about “How can you NOT trade some MONEY away for a PERSON’S life? :O”

Now.. This conversation didn’t go the way it was supposed to go, and I understand why it didn’t, for the general welfare.

The back-story to this situation was that the people that had been robbed were “Indians” (which, of course, nobody’s an Indian here because this isn’t India and Christoper Columbus was LOST! :/), and Paul Newman was white, but had been raised by the Indians that had been robbed by the husband that was cold chillin’ in the house, safe, with everybody except his wife.

Therefore.. In 1967, it was important to get the point across to the movie-goers that people raised by Indians are taught proper morals and will do the right thing when the situation calls for it, and “Indians are people, just like us.”

So, I understand, artistically, why the proper conversation never occurred in “Hombre”, and I’m glad they wrote the script that way, and I’m sure a lot of people learned something from it, but here’s how the conversation would have actually gone:

Chick: You’re just going to leave her out there to die, instead of giving away the money that will save the people that sustained your life to this very day? :O

Paul Newman: There goes her husband right thurrr.. Let *THAT* mother****** go get her.

It was the husband’s fault that he stole the money. It was the husband’s fault that he brought it on a stagecoach. It was the husband’s fault that he brought HIS WIFE with him while transporting his stolen money. It was the husband who tried to leave with the money and water while holding the rest of the group at gunpoint. It was the husband that NEVER. *******. VOLUNTEERED to go save his own ******* WIFE when the criminals put her out on display to quickly die of dehydration.

THAT’S the bottom line of the discussion. I didn’t steal the money from the Indians.. HE did. If I hadn’t shot those two dudes, the money and water would be gone, so now, they’re both *MY* property and the money will be returned to the people from whom it was stolen, because I say so. This husband-dude put his own wife in danger by bringing her along with him during a criminal enterprise. He got her into this, so now it’s up to him to get her out of it. Period.

Of course, since they needed to prove a point for race relations in 1967, Paul Newman goes to save some other guy’s wife, gets in a gunfight with the criminals, kills both of them and dies in the process, thus proving that Indians can raise a white guy to have morals and compassion. Fortunately, he had already told this other dude in the group to return the money to the Indians, so we can assume he didn’t die for nothing and that they got their money back.

I personally found this situation amazing. I was like *WHEN* are these people going to complain to the thieving, flat-leaving husband that *HE* hasn’t lifted a finger to try to save his own wife, who’s currently tied to a log right there in front of his eyes? o_O

They didn’t even bother to film one single frame of that dude showing ANY concern for his wife’s situation or well-being. Not. One. Frame… They showed him caring about getting away with the money, though.

Real-World Application

Fast-Forwarding to the year 2011 AD, I still find it funny that people expect people with no vested interest in a situation to act more responsibly than people that are directly connected to and/or affected by that situation.

Let’s look at “cheating”, for instance… I find it completely amazing that a gal will be in a relationship with a guy, he hooks up with some other chick, and the girlfriend gets mad at…. drumoll… THE. OTHER. CHICK! :D hahaha That’s SOOOO STUPID! :D

First of all, that other chick didn’t make any agreements with you.. Your man did.

*HE’S* the one that swore up and down on a stack of bibles that he wasn’t going to hook up with anybody except you when you agreed to date him or marry him or become FWB or whatever… Shouldn’t you be mad AT HIM instead of some random chick that met a guy that may or may not have said he’s in a relationship before they got busy?

Why are you expecting someone with ZERO vested interest in your personal happiness to support your relationship? o_O .. How about the person that told you to your face that he was going to be ‘faithful’ to you?

I’m completely amazed. Don’t ask Paul Newman to go save somebody else’s wife.. That’s. Her. Man’s. Problem.

Her husband/boyfriend/whatever is the one that took on the responsibility for her well-being. She aligned herself WITH HIM for whatever reasons she had at the time. If she wanted to be under Paul Newman’s protection, she should have hooked up WITH HIM, but noooooo. :D

So, don’t expect other women to support YOUR relationship to some dude.. Especially women you don’t even know. That’s. Your. Man’s. Problem. He’s the one that signed the exclusive-sex contract with you, so if he hooks up with some other chick, take it up WITH HIM, not WITH HER.

This also applies to the club.

If you’re broke and you can’t afford to buy a drink, that’s YOUR MAN’S problem! :D

You’re providing value to him, so he needs to be providing value to you.

Random dudes that you don’t know from Adam and that you’re not hooking up with have no obligation to get you drunk offa their hard-earned money.

You can call them cheap or whatever, but it’s not THEM that’s begging.. it’s *YOU*!!! :D

If you want a drink at the restaurant, bring your money or offer to wash some dishes for them to earn your keep. If you can’t afford it and don’t feel like working, tell YOUR MAN that you’d like to party beyond your financial means and get HIM to hook you up.

Good For The Gander

Of course, the same advice goes for the fellaz.

If you make a deal with some chick and then she gives it up to the next man, get mad AT HER, not at him, because he didn’t promise you jack-**** as far as not screwing your woman. SHE promised you that she wouldn’t hook up with other guys, so talk to her about your breach of contract issues.

Also.. If you’re one of those guys that plays up to less-attractive women at the club to get them to buy you drinks for free, then you just might have to play your position and actually hook up with her if that’s how you’re livin’! :D haha You might have to put in some work or stay sober.. your choice! >:D

Off The Market

A lot of women run into this issue when they change their classification from “single” to “in a relationship”. They don’t become aware until after the fact that the only reason certain guys were doing things for them is that they were currently FWB or at least in the running to get some in the near future.

Once she selects a guy and claims she’s only going to hook up with him, some of her so-called “friends” become immediately unavailable.

If she needs to change a light bulb, she needs to tell HER MAN to do that for her. That’s HIS responsibility. Nobody else cares if she sits around in the dark.

If she had a bad day?.. Save it for David. That’s HER MAN’S JOB to listen to that stuff.

If she needs to get some…. well…. a brotha Might Could see what he can do about that! >:D

But Anyway… I think people need to focus more on the alliances and affiliations they make, so they have a more realistic understanding of what’s going to happen when they ask someone to do something for them.

In “Hombre” (putting aside the race-relations subtext of the script), the choice was clear.. One chick doesn’t get shot by dudes that shouldn’t shoot her anyway, or A LOT OF PEOPLE that raised Paul Newman’s character starve and die because that chick’s husband robbed them.

Real-World no-brainer.. “**** you. She’s nothing to me. Shoot her.”

As far as the conversation in the house? Another no-brainer.. “There goes her husband right there. Tell that ***** to go get his wife, whom he dragged into this situation in the first place by robbing people and then inviting her on the stagecoach with him as he was transporting the money, and whom he tried to flat-leave by breaking north with the money and the water when he knew damned well that the criminals were holding her hostage. I’ll cover him from here with the rifle.”

As far as women trying to juice guys for drinks at the bar, if you’re cold lampin’ with no visible means of purchasing anything, I hope you have a bus pass stashed somewhere on your person, because whether you get drunk right now or have to walk home later tonight… That’s YOUR MAN’S Problem! >:D
–
Connect with Bill via Facebook, Twitter, Email Subscription, RSS Feed

Related Posts

• How To Starting Dating Again
• Relationship Compressors vs Limiters
• How To Deny Allegations
• Appreciate Your Girlfriend
• What if she could hear what you’re thinking?

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

Every so often, a word gets stolen or misused by someone and that word becomes a part of popular culture and retains the new meaning, going forward. One of these myriad words is “Player”.

I’m extremely tired of people using the word “Player” when all they actually mean is “He doesn’t want a ‘relationship’ with a chick, but he’s down to screw them”. The reason this happened is that most people have exactly ZERO idea of what they’re doing when it comes to dating, which is why they use terms like “getting lucky”. Anything outside of what THEY THINK should go on during dating is considered to be some kind of conspiracy. If you’re not down with the get married, have kids, croak pattern, then either there’s something wrong with you or you’re deliberately jacking the system.

Let me tell you now… There’s a distinct difference between actual Players and guys that just plain like girls and are going to mess with as many as they can before they (the guys) become busted-looking and their career is completely over. Of course there are lots of levels to this, but let’s just stick to this basic separation for now.

*I* am a Player. What makes me a Player is that it’s all business to me. I’m leaving either NOTHING or as little as possible to chance. If a chick turns me on, I get a certain energy that tells me what to do. The goal from then on is to get to the nitty-gritty. I’m attempting to get what I want ASAP. *NOW*, if possible! :D I don’t’ care what your future plans are. I don’t care how many kids you want to have. I don’t care where you want to live 5 years from now or where you’ll be in your career. I want to do what I want to do and I’m going to do my DAMNEDEST to make that happen… NOW! :D

This has been described to me in myriad ways. My friend Joyce calls it “Always On”, haha because I’m always angling for whatever I can get from a chick. Another gal told me “You’re the guy I’m scared of meeting when I go out to parties”. Chicks I’ve actually been dating at the time have informed me of their impressions of my way of being, and I’ve been amazed at their insight whilst in the heat of things.

I’m from New York City. There’s nothing but competition in this town. There’s someone taller than you, richer than you, smarter than you, cuter than you, funnier than you, that dresses better than you, has a better car than you, wears better jewelry than you, is more popular than you, more talented than you, blogs more than you……. ok, maybe not blogs more than THE KID! haha but you get the picture. You have two choices in this town.. Take the scraps that are available to you, the leftovers from the guys that are actually makin’ it happen and turning chicks on, or figure out how to get in the game and make it happen for yourself.

My friend Karen (Thanks A Lot, Karen… Good Lookin’ Out! :/) recently posted a picture that was taken of me when I was in High School. There are eight (8) guys in that picture. I would have been exactly in SLOT NUMBER EIGHT to get the rap if some random chick had walked down the street and happened across all of us. LAST. I have no idea what the actual pecking order would have been, because I wasn’t paying attention to that stuff at the time, but all the guys had gimmicks that I personally didn’t have in my arsenal at the time. ‘Matter of fact, I *HAD* no arsenal at the time! :D

Chicks just like me. Not all of them, but ENOUGH of them. Because of that, up until HS, I had never developed any format for pulling chicks. It’s just a gift from God. Thanks, God! :D I’ve literally been ASLEEP and chicks have woken me up to talk to me. Like. Actually. Asleep, and when I woke up, I was at a party and some chick is tapping me on my shoulder wanting to kick it to me hahaha. That’s happened more than once, due to the fact that I hang out with people that have my back entirely, so I’m perfectly safe going to sleep anywhere at any time. If I don’t get my second wind, wake me up when the party’s over so I can get out of someone’s house! :D

Anyway… That’s all well and good if you’re not around guys with specific plans on how they’re going to pull chicks. They have the right jewelry. They have the clean sneakers. They have the Lees with the sewn-in crease. They ironed their fat laces. Their name buckle’s shiny. They got their ‘line’ done (got their haircut shaped up perfectly). They practiced their Electric Boogie routines. They know the lines to say to chicks to get them to lay down ASAP. They know which chicks are down for the action regardless of what you say to them. They’re wearing the latest clothes. They have murals painted on the back of their denim jackets. They have the right AC/DC and The Who patches. Their parents are rich and live on Park Avenue and they’re rarely home and they have a liquor cabinet…..

This is why I’m a Player. I’ve had to overcome too many obstacles in my life to leave dating to chance. When your allowance is $20/week and your homeboy’s allowance is $150/week…… IN JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOL!!! :/ You end up looking like a BROKE MotherTrucker.

Meanwhile, dudes are ACCUSED of being Players just because they happened to mess with you AND your cousin last summer. Sorry. That doesn’t qualify you as a player that you messed with two chicks that happen to be blood-related. You can get extra points for it and a pat on the back from the fellaz, but *ONLY* if at least one of them knew you were already messing with the other one. If you pulled two girls that just so happen to be related, who cares? Ultimate Dap if you hooked up with them simultaneously, but that’s not normally the situation. What normally happens is that just because a guy thinks a chick is attractive and he wants to spend some intimate time with her, she thinks he’s angling for some sort of exclusive relationship. If that’s not the direction it goes, her girlfriends are like “Oh!.. So he’s a PLAYER, HUH? :/” as they commiserate over Häagen-Dazs.

The reason this is important is that the non-Players aren’t getting a fair shake. Just because they don’t conform to your idea of what’s supposed to go on when a guy and a gal hook up, you label them as something they’re actually not and then here come the sanctions and embargoes against the guy for just being who he is, whether he tells you about it straight up or you hear it through the grapevine. Doesn’t it make sense that the guys with no game or no looks or no money are going to be MORE LIKELY to take what they can get from a chick? It’s not that they’re being deliberately manipulative… They’re just trying to live their lives and have some good times with some chicks they think are FOYINE!!! (haha, right, Corinne? :D).. They’re not doing ANYTHING underhanded to you. They honestly like you… AND your cousin… AND your moms, if she’s still got it like that! ;)

I was watching one of these infinitely-produced COPS-type shows and they had to go to a trailer park for a domestic disturbance. The chick was wildin’ out and the cops removed her from the guy’s trailer and put her in a cab to her relative’s house. When they were talking to the guy on camera, they asked him about her demeanor. He said (and I wish I could remember verbatim), essentially “She’s completely a *JERK*, but I’m a fat, unattractive guy… \o/”. Guys will take whatever they can get. It doesn’t make them Players / manipulators. They’re just tryin’na Live The Dream!

The funny thing about all this is that the Players know how to make themselves look like regular dudes and the regular dudes don’t know how to make themselves NOT look like Players, haha so most of the time, women are looking in the wrong direction when they’re trying to figure out who’s going to “take the money & run”. There’s no distinction made for the set of guys that are just trying to enjoy an attractive female’s company without turning it into some kind of overblown production about “what this means” and “where is this going?”. It’s like “Dudes that want to get married” and “Players”. :/

What makes the situation even worse is that there are lots of Players that would LOVE to get married and DO get married. Let HER make all the money while I play video games all day and listen to how her day was when she comes home? HAHA “But Where Does Homey Sign? :(” hahaha You Bet! There are lots of dudes that hook up with some rich chick so they can lamp in her crib and live off her money while they still hook up with whatever other chicks they want. Actually, there are dudes that hook up with POOR CHICKS for the same reason! :O .. She’s getting X amount in food stamps, plus money from “her baby’s father” every month? Sign A Brotha UP! :D Spread the wealth, amongst other things!

As I always say.. The only way around this is checks & balances. If you date people that you have mutual friends with that you can trust, you’ll most likely be alright. 325 Mutual Facebook Friends aren’t going to ALL steer you wrong if you ask them questions about a guy you’re thinking about dating or at least hooking up with. In the year 2009, the reasons for dating someone that NONE of your friends have ever heard of is ZERO. Start making groups of guys and gals that go out together all as friends and see if anything develops from there. Make as many pressure-free situations as you can where you get to spend time with guys and see what they’re really like. Is he paying attention to you, or checking out ass every second he can? hahaha Not that *I* know anyone like THAT, but still! :D

So give these guys a break. They’re not PLAYERS, just because they’re not going to commit to you or anyone else. If you ever run into an ACTUAL Player, you may very well learn the difference and start to appreciate ‘regular’ guys that aren’t going to lie, cheat & steal to get into your panties by any means necessary! haha YA HEARD? :D

~Bill Cammack | @BillCammack

Related Posts

• That’s Your Man’s Problem
• Why You Can’t Get A Boyfriend In NYC
• How To Starting Dating Again
• Relationship Compressors vs Limiters
• Unattractive Women’s Relationship Advantages

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

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

Related Posts

• Street Game 04: The Reason Why He’s Talking To You
• Street Game 03: Trust & Truth in Relationships
• Street Game 02: Female Players vs Male Players
• Street Game 01: Denial & Experience
• “Street Game” Production Notes

ok.. So I’m listening to this conversation that Danielle Ricks hosted, and the gist of it was whether men (in general) were looking for strong women and I hear several times from several people, male & female, something to the effect of a woman “letting” a man lead in the relationship.

This is a very basic, yet fundamental problem, and women need to cut it out, ASAP.

Leadership

If you’re in the army, and woman has a particular rank and a man has a lower rank than she does, he doesn’t get to override her opinions… about ANYTHING. NUTH-THANG!… NOTHING!… NEVER. Case Closed, Done Deal, It’s a WRAP! She outranks him, so by the codes that they live and fight by, he has to take orders from her or peel potatoes in the brig.

There’s a reason why the woman gets to tell the man what to do. She’s put in the work to achieve the rank she’s achieved and he hasn’t achieved that rank, so that’s that. Unfortunately, people don’t tend to apply this simple logic to relationships.

Brainwashing

Back in the day, women had no choice but to “date up”, because they weren’t allowed to vote or own land. The only way they were going to have ANYTHING in life was if they married a guy that had something good going. Due to Women’s Suffrage and eventually the depletion of the American workforce due to men being killed in world wars, that all ended.

At this point, in 2009, women have the same jobs as men (or better), own the same amount of land, own the same type of cars, houses and apartments and have no problem taking care of themselves and whatever kids they amassed along the way with no help from any men whatsoever. This would seem to be an advantage for women, but it isn’t. It’s not an advantage because women STILL want to date men that are better than they are.

Why is this a problem? Because women are progressing faster than men are. Go hang out on a college campus and see if you don’t see MANY more gals than guys. Walk around town and see who’s working in the stores… See if you don’t see MANY more gals than guys. Basically, what’s happening is that women are severely limiting the pool of men that are “better” than they are by out-learning men and out-working men. Women are painting themselves into a social corner because they’re brainwashed to date men who are achieving more than they are.

Life Isn’t Fair

Meanwhile, men couldn’t even, hardly, practically, not even GIVE A DAMN whether some chick they want to date is achieving ANYTHING IN LIFE or not. She’s hawt or she isn’t. They want to tap that or they don’t. End of story. Nobody cares.

So, while women become more educated than men, on the whole, women’s pool of viable prospects is becoming smaller while men’s pool of viable prospects is growing larger, because more and more girls turn 18 (become legal for sex anywhere in the United States of America) every single day.

Of course, this makes things even TOUGHER for the accomplished, older women that are trying to hook up with accomplished guys that are dating twenty-somethings and will still be dating twenty-somethings ten years from now.

Wrong Solution

This is where statements like “Let a man lead in the relationship” come from. A guy who called in to Danielle‘s show accidentally hit the nail on the head and didn’t realize it. He said “By saying that, you make it sound like you actually have the power in the relationship, but you’re letting him lead”. um… That’s EXACTLY what’s happening.

She knows damned well that she’s smarter than him, wiser than him, makes more money than he does, has more common sense than he does, etc etc and for the sake of being in a relationship, she’s going to defer to him so that he can feel like he’s leading something.

Lame.

The fact of the matter is.. If he were naturally the stronger person (for whatever reason), he would NATURALLY be the leader between the two of them and she would NATURALLY defer to him. For her to let him lead, that means that he hasn’t demonstrated to her AT ALL that he SHOULD be the leader.

What’s that dude in the military going to tell that woman that outranks him? Nothing.. Other than “Yes Ma’am” and “No Ma’am”. Does she defer to an obviously inferior male so that they can have a nice relationship? Nope. You never succeed with the less capable leading the more capable. The armed forces would collapse if they let privates tell generals what to do.

Right Solution

I think that a better idea for a woman than letting a man that she feels is inferior to her lead their relationship is for her to select a better man to begin with. I also think remaining single and not settling for anything she can get is a better idea.

This presents an obvious problem for women that want to have a family. Time is running out for them faster than it’s running out for guys. On top of that, guys can have kids with a chick that makes minimum wage just as easily as a gal who’s an MIT-educated Rocket Scientist. ‘Doesn’t make a difference.

Since lots of women aren’t willing to accept a future of being single, they start compromising and lowering their standards without even recognizing it. If you have to let someone lead, they shouldn’t be leading in the first place. Does that make sense? How about letting the leader lead? How about that? Doesn’t that seem to be the efficient way to run a relationship?

Why let someone less educated in finance decide what to do with your money?
Why let someone who doesn’t know about Italian cuisine select the restaurant?
Why let someone with no income decide how many kids you’re going to have?
Why let someone with zero battlefield experience determine your troop movements?
Why let someone with no playoff experience pinch-hit for your best player?
Why let a guy that you KNOW shouldn’t be leading you run your relationship?

Can you tell me?

~ Bill Cammack

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

Related Posts

• Cougars vs. MILFs
• That’s Your Man’s Problem
• How To Deny Allegations
• Appreciate Your Girlfriend
• How To Compliment A Woman