The poll of consent and appropriateness.

[honorentheos]

I voted other. A person who has reduced relationships down to the level most of the discussions here place them isn't talking about healthy relationships, period, regardless of the relative ages of the folks involved.

I was looking for your opinion, not your opinion of what others opinions might be. That sounds harsher than I'm trying to express it.

I think a person who is discussing relationships to the point of assuming the world is out to get them might feel that they are struggling and might be having difficulty navigating what might feel alien. Some wise words for those with more experience might be more beneficial?

I can imagine that if I wasn't married and was struggling to find a relationship that felt good, then I'd either assume that I am being isolated because of an external force or that there is something wrong with me. My personality type would assume I am the problem. I think it's easy to see things differently when you aren't worrying about why you aren't in a relationship.

I do NOT agree with adults dating children and teens. 19+ maybe. But a 17 year old with a 30+ year old feels wrong to me. Just to clarify my view. It is legal in the UK but I do think 17 year olds are not ready to settle down. And most 30+ year olds are. But not just that... It's the sense that there is an imbalance. But I am sure there are some rare cases. Like my sister in law who is still with the guy who literally has children older than her. I don't like him but I wouldn't tell them that.

She has grandchildren now. And has been with him all this time.

Oh the rain is pouring hard. Haha.

I'm rambling.

No worries. I don't see DT being helped by other folks weighing In on age-appropriate relationships because he masks the real issue he has with that topic. That being he hasn't learned other people are people rather than means to achieve some end. That end may be emotional, physical, what have you. But he needs real world help with that.

[Marcus]

Such words have been posted a myriad of times, for more than half a decade. If you're interested in seeing what people have been suggesting to him and why people think there is so much repetition in his posts, you can read his megathreads for a start.

DT's second megathread is here in this board rendition, and here's the link to the first one, starting in 2018, from a previous board rendition:

viewtopic.php?f=7&t=152634

Thanks for sharing. I read the first page but I'm still seeing the same thing. I am seeing a person struggling to navigate the dating world. You could say maybe there is a masculinist energy (is that the word? A male version of a feminist) but that can be caused by dating trauma...

First, I wouldn't define "masculinist energy...caused by dating trauma" as a "male version of feminist."

And second, there are over a thousand posts in that thread, of which you said you read ten, not to mention the second thread which has over 1300 posts. I don't think anyone, especially in this case, would be able to see a complete picture by only reading 10.

[Gadianton]

I think DT deserves at least a little bit of defending.

The bottom line is that romantic relationships in the real world don't happen mostly because the average person has read the works of Immanuel Levinas and sees everyone as the other, has a healthy regard for the other, would never use another person, have never been sexist, and so most people have healthy, respectful, mature relationships while DT along with a few incels are immature little pervs.

I think the average person makes their decisions mostly on materialistic metrics exactly like DT does. I think most of us have made plenty of relationship decisions purely by biological drives and have gotten burned for it at least once but probably more. DT in my view has two specific problems. The first is that he has this "on the spectrum" thing going where he has no filter, very literal, and possibly doesn't comprehend how people wear facades in polite society. What I'm saying is that people fall in love for DT reasons more often than not, but they know how to talk about romance in dressed-up terms, to make themselves not sound as if they are being superficial. The second problem is that his interests border on if not cross the line on age differences. Combine the two, and it's a guaranteed epic fail for conversation in polite society.

Let me give an example totally unrelated to the board that just now popped into my head. Back in school, there was this girl who I became acquainted with briefly who according to a friend I had, who was friends with her, was completely obsessed over finding a man. Talks about nothing else. But not any man would do. She was vocal about specific features, mainly shoulder breadth and barrel-style chest. I was told by the friend, "wait for it..." and yeah, she brought it up. A while later, at church, this girl's brother was there with her. She bragged about his broad shoulders and chest pointing his features out to us saying, "this is all I need..." and laughed etc. Now, just to be clear, she wasn't saying it in an inappropriate way at all.

Now, nobody even in private, is going to sit down with her and feel sorry for her that no man with her specific shoulder width requirement has swept her off of her feet, let alone discussed how society needs to enshrine laws that condition men with broad shoulders to find interest in her. And it sure as hell would never happen on an internet forum. One cure, people might say, would be to suggest counseling so that she could see a man for something other than a set of shoulders and broaden her horizons, or at least help avoid the inevitable failure when people get together entirely for looks. But another option is to not be so obvious about it. She probably was no different from her friends, she just had less of a filter and got to the point, whereas her friends might date someone with insufficient features but then point to less superficial reasons why it didn't work out -- he bought a coke on Sunday, or something.

I don't require that DT get help and achieve Zen enlightenment on mature relationships that most other people don't have. Sure, if he wants to, would be the better route, but if you're losing the game everyone else is playing, then learn to play the game and get better at it. Some people are born rich, others have to work their asses off for money. The one thing guaranteed not to work is going on message boards trying to get people to feel sorry for you not being rich and admit society is wrong for not having made you rich.

[IWMP]

Thanks for sharing. I read the first page but I'm still seeing the same thing. I am seeing a person struggling to navigate the dating world. You could say maybe there is a masculinist energy (is that the word? A male version of a feminist) but that can be caused by dating trauma...

First, I wouldn't define "masculinist energy...caused by dating trauma" as a "male version of feminist."

And second, there are over a thousand posts in that thread, of which you said you read ten, not to mention the second thread which has over 1300 posts. I don't think anyone, especially in this case, would be able to see a complete picture by only reading 10.

Depends on how you view feminism... Some feminists are feminist because of trauma. They have a bad experience of men. But yes, I over simplified and gave a gross description. I was trying to portray an energy. But that's ok.

And yes you are correct. I haven't seen DTs conversations over the years. I am basing my opinion of everything I have seen him post which is not everything he has posted. I do feel that if he has a better experience with relationships then his view of dating would be very different. If he was in a relationship that was long-term and settled he wouldn't be expressing what he is expressing. He wouldn't even be thinking about it. We are out experiences.

I'm not sure how he can be guided but I know fighting against it is getting his back up and everyone else's in turn. He just needs to be brave and go experience the world. Have dates with people and put his assumptions aside. Love is not something you can expect to find in a particular look or age. It's about finding the person that understands you and you understand, who is available for love. But DT needs to be available for that too. And not looking for reasons to fortify the wall. A bit of kindness wouldn't go amiss.

But yes I do admit that there are lots that I might have missed and might not be seeing. But ultimately, as humans, when we hyper focus on something it is usually something we need support with or something we are struggling with.

From what I had read he said specifically that he wasn't interested in dating teens. He also said he didn't want to date people with children and older women. The way he words things does make an eye brow raise but from his recent posts, he does outright say he isn't interested in young people. I think he is limiting himself from opportunities and he would benefit from building his own confidence and just having fun with people.

But maybe I am seeing things wrong. I know I'm not always right and often tend to see the better.

I haven't got the energy to be researching to argue my point. I may be wrong but I'm inclined to give the benefit of the doubt from my perspective and say he needs a chance to develop positive relationships with women and the only way he will be able to do that is to put aside his views that society is against him.

I doubt I'm making sense.

[IWMP]

I think DT deserves at least a little bit of defending.

The bottom line is that romantic relationships in the real world don't happen mostly because the average persons has read the works of Immanuel Levinas and sees everyone as the other, has a healthy regard for the other, would never use another person, have never been sexist, and so most people have healthy, respectful, mature relationships while DT along with a few incels are immature little pervs.

I think the average person makes their decisions mostly on materialistic metrics exactly like DT does. I think most of us have made plenty of relationship decisions purely by biological drives and have gotten burned for it at least once but probably more. DT in my view has two specific problems. The first is that he has this "on the spectrum" thing going where he has no filter, very literal, and possibly doesn't comprehend how people wear facades in polite society. What I'm saying is that people fall in love for DT reasons more often than not, but they know how to talk about romance in dressed-up terms, to make themselves not sound as if they are being superficial. The second problem is that his interests border on if not cross the line on age differences. Combine the two, and it's a guaranteed epic fail for conversation in polite society.

Let me give an example totally unrelated to the board that just now popped into my head. Back in school, there was this girl who I became acquainted with briefly who according to a friend I had, who was friends with her, was completely obsessed over finding a man. Talks about nothing else. But not any man would do. She was vocal about specific features, mainly shoulder breadth and barrel-style chest. I was told by the friend, "wait for it..." and yeah, she brought it up. A while later, at church, this girl's brother was there with her. She bragged about his broad shoulders and chest pointing his features out to us saying, "this is all I need..." and laughed etc. Now, just to be clear, she wasn't saying it in an inappropriate way at all.

Now, nobody even in private, is going to sit down with her and feel sorry for her that no man with her specific shoulder width requirement has swept her off of her feet, let alone discussed how society needs to enshrine laws that condition men with broad shoulders to find interest in her. And it sure as hell would never happen on an internet forum. One cure, people might say, would be to suggest counseling so that she could see a man for something other than a set of shoulders and broaden her horizons, or at least help avoid the inevitable failure when people get together entirely for looks. But another option is to not be so obvious about it. She probably was no different from her friends, she just had less of a filter and got to the point, whereas her friends might date someone with insufficient features but then point to less superficial reasons why it didn't work out -- he bought a coke on Sunday, or something.

I don't require that DT get help and achieve Zen enlightenment on mature relationships that most other people don't heave. Sure, if he wants to, would be the better route, but if you're losing the game everyone else is playing, then learn to play the game and get better at it. Some people are born rich, others have to work their asses off for money. The one thing guaranteed not to work is going on message boards trying to get people to feel sorry for you not being rich and admit society is wrong for not having made you rich.

I value a lot of what you have said. I do think though that the school girl saying she likes broad shoulders is an immature thing that young women do. It's part of development and eventually they move on from that. She probably had a crush on someone with those features.

But I agree in that assigning specifics and limiting yourself prevents you from meeting people that you could very well fall in love with. Especially views that go against relationships all together.

When I was hanging out with Jamie, my house mate suggested we date and I said no, he isn't my type. But I did fall in love with him. I married him. But he didn't fit in the bracket I created. But I still hung out with him. But if I shut him out because he wasn't my type we wouldn't be together. So sometimes, we need to broaden our horizons.

[Marcus]

First, I wouldn't define "masculinist energy...caused by dating trauma" as a "male version of feminist."...

Depends on how you view feminism... Some feminists are feminist because of trauma. They have a bad experience of men. But yes, I over simplified and gave a gross description...

Yes, I am aware some people "view feminism" in that manner.

Unfortunately, it's an oversimplification that devalues and trivializes the thought processes and experiences of, in my opinion, the vast majority of people who support feminism, as well as the actual concept of feminism.

[Marcus]

I think DT deserves at least a little bit of defending.

The bottom line is that romantic relationships in the real world don't happen mostly because the average persons has read the works of Immanuel Levinas and sees everyone as the other, has a healthy regard for the other, would never use another person, have never been sexist, and so most people have healthy, respectful, mature relationships while DT along with a few incels are immature little pervs.

No argument there.

I think the average person makes their decisions mostly on materialistic metrics exactly like DT does. I think most of us have made plenty of relationship decisions purely by biological drives and have gotten burned for it at least once but probably more. DT in my view has two specific problems. The first is that he has this "on the spectrum" thing going where he has no filter, very literal, and possibly doesn't comprehend how people wear facades in polite society. What I'm saying is that people fall in love for DT reasons more often than not, but they know how to talk about romance in dressed-up terms, to make themselves not sound as if they are being superficial. The second problem is that his interests border on if not cross the line on age differences. Combine the two, and it's a guaranteed epic fail for conversation in polite society.

I would argue they cross the line significantly, but again, good point.

[honorentheos]

I think DT deserves at least a little bit of defending.

The bottom line is that romantic relationships in the real world don't happen mostly because the average persons has read the works of Immanuel Levinas and sees everyone as the other, has a healthy regard for the other, would never use another person, have never been sexist, and so most people have healthy, respectful, mature relationships while DT along with a few incels are immature little pervs.

I think the average person makes their decisions mostly on materialistic metrics exactly like DT does.

Oh, no major disagreement here. Attraction isn't driven by reason nor are folks constantly engaging in sophisticated ethical reasoning with every interaction they have all the time.

But it's not about DT needing to learn masking skills (God forbid anyone assume masking is the same as having manners). I mean, in the 1980s folks laughed at movies where a nerd pretended to be a jock and have sex with the jock's girlfriend, and peeping on the girls in the gym shower were acceptable plot points. We actually have made a few major advancements in how society views consent and, more importantly, why it matters. It has to do with how we not only treat people as people, but how we no longer accept the ideas around boys being boys, how sexuality is rendered unhealthy when made both titular and taboo. Fact is, DT needs something he ain't gonna find here.

I was reminded of this bit from the old movie Good Will Hunting (yes, also has its aged problems) that comes to mind here:

https://youtu.be/dEIQSbul9Os?si=pH1LcmO15EcGFf54

[Gadianton]

But it's not about DT needing to learn masking skills (God forbid anyone assume masking is the same as having manners).

Sure on the parenthetical, and when I say "polite society" I don't mean to imply polite society is really polite.

I guess my point is, if DT had the masking skills of a normal person, he could probably get away with much toward his end game and not raise an eyebrow. Because he doesn't, he raises disproportional outrage to his offenses. The opposite of DT would be a sociopath who wins everyone over and people are slow to see that lines are being crossed.

I forgot his third problem, which is atrocious argumentation; add to the other two problems some of the worst reasoning on the planet and it blows up even more.

[Res Ipsa]

First, I wouldn't define "masculinist energy...caused by dating trauma" as a "male version of feminist."

And second, there are over a thousand posts in that thread, of which you said you read ten, not to mention the second thread which has over 1300 posts. I don't think anyone, especially in this case, would be able to see a complete picture by only reading 10.

Depends on how you view feminism... Some feminists are feminist because of trauma. They have a bad experience of men. But yes, I over simplified and gave a gross description. I was trying to portray an energy. But that's ok.

And yes you are correct. I haven't seen DTs conversations over the years. I am basing my opinion of everything I have seen him post which is not everything he has posted. I do feel that if he has a better experience with relationships then his view of dating would be very different. If he was in a relationship that was long-term and settled he wouldn't be expressing what he is expressing. He wouldn't even be thinking about it. We are out experiences.

I'm not sure how he can be guided but I know fighting against it is getting his back up and everyone else's in turn. He just needs to be brave and go experience the world. Have dates with people and put his assumptions aside. Love is not something you can expect to find in a particular look or age. It's about finding the person that understands you and you understand, who is available for love. But DT needs to be available for that too. And not looking for reasons to fortify the wall. A bit of kindness wouldn't go amiss.

But yes I do admit that there are lots that I might have missed and might not be seeing. But ultimately, as humans, when we hyper focus on something it is usually something we need support with or something we are struggling with.

From what I had read he said specifically that he wasn't interested in dating teens. He also said he didn't want to date people with children and older women. The way he words things does make an eye brow raise but from his recent posts, he does outright say he isn't interested in young people. I think he is limiting himself from opportunities and he would benefit from building his own confidence and just having fun with people.

But maybe I am seeing things wrong. I know I'm not always right and often tend to see the better.

I haven't got the energy to be researching to argue my point. I may be wrong but I'm inclined to give the benefit of the doubt from my perspective and say he needs a chance to develop positive relationships with women and the only way he will be able to do that is to put aside his views that society is against him.

I doubt I'm making sense.

I think your last sentence is spot on. His problem is not an unusual one: his biggest obstacle to doing that is himself. His second biggest obstacle is that he sees his biggest obstacle as bad choices that women make in dating and mating. His solution to his problem is for women to make different choices or for society to train or pressure or force them to make "better" choices.

Many people have spent considerable time and effort trying to help him learn how to help himself rather than expect women or society to change in a way that accommodates his romantic/sexual desires. Although he claims he has changed, I don't see it. In addition, his narcissitic self-aggrandizement (EA defended me; I have superior reasoning powers) and disparagement of others (people on the board who disagree with me are senile old grandpas) understandably rubs people the wrong way.

Personally, I think he has always had issues that prevent him from having a meaningful, satisfying relationship that we here are simply not capable of addressing. What he has always needed is some combination of therapy and life coaching rather than advice from randos on the internet. (And, to be clear, a significant chunk of the advice he has received here is exactly that.) I suspect that he has used interactions on this board to reinforce some of the very attitudes and behaviors that have prevented him from having the relationship he wants.

I also think he's gotten old enough that the age of the women he wants to date now and going forward is not an issue anyone really cares about. I don't give a crap about 20 year olds hooking up with or marrying folks older than them. I think what folks are reacting to is the fact that he's using the exact same arguments about dating 20 year olds that he made with respect to dating 16 year olds. He's still blaming "society" and women's choices for his situation.

I'm simply out of Fs to give on the subject of his romantic/sexual relationships.

by the way, your posts make much more sense than you seem to think they do.