There you go jumping to conclusions. Katy, you are the perfect
example of a woman that does not use logical thinking. You
react emotionally to everything. Take yourself out of the picture
when you consider my comments. They are not directed at you.

Who said anything about a first date? My policy is high standards
and low expectations. I don't expect anything. And why do you
assume I chose women of little virtue? I assume what you call
virtue is what I call quality.

What is virtue anyway? Is a woman virtuous when she doesn't have
sex on the first date with a man she thinks could be a long term
possibility, while the same woman jumps into bed with another man
for a one night stand? If that is the case, then few women are virtuous
and if they are, it is only because their fathers kept them locked up.
Also, is a woman virtuous when she doesn't sleep with a man on the
first date, but has thousands of second dates? I think not!

Women need partners. I'm not like that. I'd rather be alone if I can't
find someone special. Also, I respect women who have sex with me on
the first date--because I'm overly selective. To get that far with me,
means
the woman is very high quality--smart, professional, good looking, and well
balanced. At my age, chances are she wants to have sex on the first date,
and I'm the one holding back because I ate or drank too much at dinner.

I feel it is important to set the tone of the relationship as physical not
platonic, immediately. My experience is that if things don't get hot by
the second date, it never does.

I typically only date women college graduates with professional jobs. I
don't mind if a woman has children provided the children don't make
dating impossible, and the woman is a good mother. I don't date flaky
women, and I won't pick a woman is too needy, who wants me to adopt
her children, or has huge financial or emotional problems. This eliminates
the bulk of the women out there.

Back to your comments. I've not at all surprised women vacillate and play
games, since women are not decisive decision makers. It's important for
men to set limits and boundaries for women, because women always test
boundaries with men. Women want to see what they can get away with.
It is part of their decision making process. If they don't get enough of
what
they want, they pick another man who allows them more freedom or control.

When I was young I pursued women, as many as possible, in the hopes of
finding just one. I'd spend a fortune dating with a poor return on
investment.
When women are young, after spending all their money on cloths, they seem to
feel it is their right to use men financially. The traditional date is to
take a woman
out to dinner. Many single women use men as open wallets for free dinners
--dating for food not companionship. Many years ago, I grew tired of this
and
decided I'd rather take my friends out for dinner instead.

At age 48, it's role reversal. Women my age that are unattached, are still
near
their sexual peak and desperate to find a man. To meet men, women join
clubs,
travel, take men out to dinner, and use all the methods I used when I was
young
to meet women.

Games are an interesting topic. Here is my definition and how I view them.

Games are manipulations that work towards a hidden agenda.

This is common in women. Because men are physically stronger, more
confident and thus more direct, they are less likely to play games. Women
are weaker physically, and compensate for this by using their "feminine
wiles"
which is basically a combination of deception and sex.

Women accuse men of playing games, when the men don't follow the
woman's unstated master plan. The big problem with a woman stating her
plan is that it's a trump card and once played either wins or ends the
relationship. It is far better for the women to lead the man down the
garden path--indirectly. So women avoid being direct and play games
instead. They test and probe for limits and quickly back off when they
have gone too far. And they complain when the men don't do what
they want them to do.

In my case, when a woman pushes past certain boundaries, I drop her.
Perhaps that is overly harsh of me, given that I know women often test
boundaries. I feel it is important to let them know the consequences of
pushing too far.

When a woman tells me she doesn't like game players, I immediately
know two things. First, that she herself is a game player, and second,
the men she dates do not follow her master plan. So I start to wonder
what it is about her that is causing her plan to fail. There is either a
psychological, financial, physical, or a combination of these reasons why
she is not achieving her goals.

I would not call my "10 pm strategy" a game. There is nothing hidden about
it. I don't use it much any more, since the women I date these days are
older, know what they want, and pursue me aggressively. None of them
are virgins, so none of them are "virtuous". They ask me out, travel great
distances to date me, often buy me dinner, want to spend more time with
me than I have to spare, and try real hard to make me happy.

I wish I had more time to date--I like the attention. My focus is working
on the boat, and I'd rather put my spare money into HOOT and ECHO than
buy expensive dinners.

"katysails" wrote
Bart,
Gamesmanship is all that is...something that many guys accuse women of
playing....Any woman that would putr out upon the first date without some
sort of other relationship there in the first place is, in my mind's eye,
a
person of little virtue. You obviously like women of little virtue, so
why
are you surprised when they vacillate and play games? Of what you're
looking for is a one or two or whatever night's stand, then your game is
valid...if you're looking for something longer term, you ain't gonna find
it...