Today, Are Women Asking Men Out on First Dates? No.
One might think that after decades of increasing equality between the sexes, women might be doing more of the asking. To see if this is the case, I recently conducted a study, along with two of my students, Agata Janiszewska and Leslie Zabala, to check on the frequency that each sex wanted to either be asked out, or wanted to do the asking, and the actual number of times each sex had done so in the last year. We administered an online survey to 87 heterosexuals (31 males, 55 females), most of whom were undergraduate college students (Mills, Janiszewska & Zabala, 2011). Most of the survey participants had been single in the past year, or, if they were in a relationship, they were asked to think back to the last year that they were single.
The first question we asked was whether they preferred to ask someone out, or would rather be asked out on a date.
Percentage of males and females who would prefer to be asked out, or ask someone out.
As noted in the histogram, a great majority of the women, 93%, preferred to be asked out — only 6% perferred to do the asking. The majority of men preferred to do the asking, 83%, while 16% preferred to be asked out on a date. It is interesting that more men preferred to be asked out (16%) than there were women who preferred to do the asking (6%). That difference suggests that 10% of men may be waiting quite a while for a woman to ask them out on a first date.
Preferences are one thing, but what about actual behavior? We asked the survey participants how many times they had asked someone out on a first date in the past year.
Number of times subjected asked someone out on a date in the last year
As can be seen in the histogram, males reported significantly more instances of asking someone out in the past year. On average males asked four women out on a first date in the past year. In contrast, most females did not ask anyone out on a first date in the past year.
. . . . .
So, if women have a natural tendency to avoid making direct, verbal first time relationship initiatives, should they be relieved of “equal responsibilities” in this area? That is an intriguing question. We certainly don’t let men use the “but it is only natural” excuse to justify some of their more antisocial behaviors. Should we give women “a sexual inequality pass” because it is just one part of a natural courtship script? Or, should we encourage women to make more risky initiatives? Should men go on a “risky initatives” strke? Should we ask women to “woman up” — put their fragile egos on the line, get some ovaries, get out there and start asking out men on first dates?
Here at Breitbart Tech, we’ve extensively covered the disastrous return of Jack Dorsey as CEO of Twitter, and the social media platform’s regrettable departure from its founding ideal as the “free speech wing of the free speech party.” But Dorsey isn’t the only big cheese behind Twitter’s abandonment of its principles.
Meet Omid Kordestani, the executive chair currently at the head of Twitter’s board of directors. Those who follow the tech scene closely may recognize that name from his admittedly stellar career history at Google and Netscape.
Since joining Twitter in mid-October, Kordestani has gone mostly under the radar, despite his stature and position at the company. Like other Twitter employees, Kordestani rarely uses the service himself and seems to have little appreciation for what keeps those who do coming back. But his tweet history, scant though it may be, is enough to paint a clear picture of a political agenda.
The attacks on Western women by Arab migrants in Cologne, Germany, on New Year’s Eve evoked the harassment of women in Tahrir Square itself during the heady days of the Egyptian revolution. The reminder has led people in the West to realize that one of the great miseries plaguing much of the so-called Arab world, and the Muslim world more generally, is its sick relationship with women. In some places, women are veiled, stoned and killed; at a minimum, they are blamed for sowing disorder in the ideal society. In response, some European countries have taken to producing guides of good conduct to refugees and migrants.
. . . . .
The West has long found comfort in exoticism, which exonerates differences. Orientalism has a way of normalizing cultural variations and of excusing any abuses: Scheherazade, the harem and belly dancing exempted some Westerners from considering the plight of Muslim women. But today, with the latest influx of migrants from the Middle East and Africa, the pathological relationship that some Arab countries have with women is bursting onto the scene in Europe.
What long seemed like the foreign spectacles of faraway places now feels like a clash of cultures playing out on the West’s very soil. Differences once defused by distance and a sense of superiority have become an imminent threat. People in the West are discovering, with anxiety and fear, that sex in the Muslim world is sick, and that the disease is spreading to their own lands.
Imagine an Alien visits America in 2015, and wants to figure out who’s in charge. He spends some time following our news cycle, our pop culture, and observing social interactions. In his report, he notes that:
Straight white males (SWMs) are subject to legal discrimination in hiring, promotion, and academic admission
SWMs are fair game for mockery and derision, while mockery of non-SWMs is socially unacceptable
SWMs are portrayed negatively in pop culture and in the news. Whenever a SWM commits a crime, their status as a SWM is a major feature of the story. When a non-SWM commits a crime, there identity is deliberately hidden
There seems to be a complex system and ranking of the various non-SWM classes. The Alien is still unsure of the exact delineations – does a black lesbian trump a chinese MtF transexual in a wheelchair? – but SWMs are clearly at the bottom of the totem pole
And here’s the most interesting part: despite all the legal, social, and cultural prejudice against SWMs, the pervading belief in our empire is that SWMs are actually in charge and are running things for their own benefit. SWMs are consumed with guilt, and have convinced themselves that they’re responsible for everything that’s wrong with the world.
At first the Alien is confused, but then he realizes: twenty-first century America is a historically unprecedented phenomenon. It is the world’s first Victimocracy.
What Is A Victimocracy?
A Victimocracy is a society in which the ruling class justifies its position through a mythos of victimhood.
Okay, that brings me back to the original question:
Would you rather have vast personal freedom in a society with lots of problems, or severely reduced freedom in much more orderly and successful society?
I would rather be a free man, living exactly how I choose, in a society full of stupid problems like today, than a thinly veiled drone-slave in a perfectly masculine, perfectly orderly society. (Emotionally I’d like to have both, but you can’t have both. It’s one or the other. You’ll have to pick one. Also I’d like a third option: a libertarian society, but most people hate libertarian core concepts so you’re not going to get that either.)
One of the many reasons the manosphere will never completely unite is because you have too many men on both sides of this question. Those who want to be free and happy in a somewhat screwed-up society or those who don’t mind suffering reduced happiness and freedom in a more masculine, orderly society.
Isn’t that interesting?
I’ve said this many times, and I’ll say it again. I don’t care about creating a movement. I don’t care about changing the world. I don’t care about saving the world. I don’t care about saving men. I don’t care about saving Western society.
I don’t care if men dumb enough to get married get financially raped in divorces.
I don’t care if men dumb enough to assume monogamy from a woman get cheated on by their wives or girlfriends.
I don’t care if men dumb enough to not manage their finances correctly get raped by their governments via taxes and/or oppressive regulations.
I don’t care if men dumb enough not to move out of their corrupt, collapsing countries get overrun by third-world immigrants (coughEuropecough).
I don’t care if men dumb enough to go to college get screwed by these insane “yes means yes” laws.
And so on.
I. Don’t. Care.
Western society is already fucked, economically and culturally, and there is no saving it at this point. I’ve discussed the numerous reasons for this many times over several different blogs. The last chance we had to save it was around the mid 1990s, and that was a long time ago. Your only option for long-term happiness as a man at this point is to radically change your lifestyle so that you aren’t affected by the West’s slow collapse into a left-wing shithole. This is what I teach.
. . . . .
Here’s the thing though. As a libertarian, I’m already accustomed to losing politically. When you’re a libertarian, you grow up your entire life never getting what you want and having everyone on both sides hate you. You get used to it. I’ve been a libertarian for over 20 years, and during that time (you libertarians can relate to this), you get accustomed to putting up with the left-wing’s secret hatred of money and the right-wing’s secret hatred of sex.
Right-wingers are now going to have to learn how to be out of favor like us libertarians have always been. It’s going to be a painful transition for them. You’re going to see a lot of right-wing screaming over the next decade or two, as the left-wing solidifies its control over the once great but now collapsing Western world.
I am also an individualist. Both left-wingers and right-wingers are collectivists. They believe that some greater authoritarian group (usually government, religion, or both) is perfectly justified in putting a gun in your face and forcing you to behave in ways that will make you less happy, but will theoretically be “good for society,” even if you’re perfectly innocent and aren’t doing anything to harm or infringe upon anyone.
I said 95% of women aren’t the problem. That does leave 5% who are. Yes, there are indeed women out there who really are evil. Some are women who are dedicated gold diggers who really are out for your wallet. Others are welfare queens looking for their next “accidental” baby so they can get more free money from government (i.e. the hardworking taxpayer). Others are extreme feminists who believe “all sex is rape” or similar insane things, and really do hate men with a passion. Others are just women in perpetual bitch mode for whatever reason.
I’ll say it again. This is only about 5% of women out there. 95% of women are normal, decent people who like men and don’t want to chop off anyone’s balls.
I have a very simple solution for you in regards to these evil 5%: Don’t hang around them.
Normally, when a topic is trending, Twitter allows you to quickly join the conversation by tweeting with the same hashtag, even helpfully autocompleting it as you type it in.
But presumably to pacify the likes of Feminist Frequency and the other left-wing crybabies on its new Trust and Safety Council, Twitter disabled the autocomplete feature on the trending hashtag #TheTriggering, thereby reducing the reach and impact these “subversive” tweets might have.
A trend on Twitter mocking the sensitivity of social justice warriors has gained major traction. Currently over 72,300 tweets have been sent with the hashtag #TheTriggering, and the number is continuing to grow.
Here’s a sample of some of the best tweets so far.