Your PhD Is His Eight-Pack

Everyone's talking about the whole "dadbod" thing, so it's been on my mind recently.

Before I say anything else, let me just make it clear that I resent having to reference something with such a retarded name. Modern American culture's tendency to come up with stupid names for stuff like this is almost as obnoxious as its ability to miss the point.

In any case, while on the surface the whole "dadbod" phenomenon looks like nothing more than a justification for men and women who want to be lazy about their appearance, I think there is something valuable in the idea, even if it lies a little beneath the surface. But in order to draw an important comparison to it, I first need to explain something else I've been thinking about recently, thanks to a recent podcast on Animus Empire and conversations with a couple girls I know...

These days, a lot of women out-perform men in the ostensible measures of "success." Whether this be with achievements in the workplace, academic degrees, financial earnings, or just the capability to make things happen, many women feel like they are better than men at their own game. And many women are.

But at the same time, a woman's physiology compels her to want to "marry up." In spite of the desire and ability to be successful by traditionally male standards, she also feels incapable of settling for a man who doesn't impress her with respect to those same standards.

Source: Snyder and Dillow, 2012

This is obviously problematic. When you as a woman are earning $100k + per year or have dual Bachelor's degrees and a Master's, it is going to be pretty tough feeling like you've found someone impressive, because the vast majority of men earn about $45k and drink their way through laughable degrees. I've met many girls in this situation – accomplished in all respects, but unhappy in their relationships and dissatisfied by their supposed success. (Perhaps unfulfilled is a better word, for reasons I explain in my new book.)

Most women don't intentionally choose this situation. They were raised in a culture that told them their personal worth was dictated by the position they could win in the office, or the degree they could earn in school. When they were too young to think for themselves and understand what their post-pubescent selves would want, they were pointed in the direction of traditionally masculine success, and told that they'd better work hard and marry their "equal" if they wanted to be happy in life. But anyone over the age of 30 knows that this is bullshit. Sure, no one wants to go back to 17th century and arranged marriages; but the idea that a woman can be happily married to a man who has no abilities in excess of her own is absurd. She might find a way to be content in that kind of marriage, sure, but content people take Zoloft.

This isn't something that only applies to women, by the way. Both sexes want spouses that are "better" than them; we just want the opposite sex to be better than us in very different and complimentary ways. Women typically want a man who is better than them when it comes to providing and protecting their family, while men typically want a woman who is better than them when it comes to raising children, creating a "home" (I mean this in the widest possible sense of the word) and keeping the family connected to the outside world. I discuss one small aspect of this dynamic in the post The Analogy Between Confidence and Beauty. If you haven't read yet, I suggest taking a minute to do so before finishing this one. The point is that women want men who are stable and capable ("confident"), while men want a woman who is fertile and a light in their life ("beautiful").

This is what your PhD or upper management position looks like.

Anyway that brings us to the "dadbod." As I said, at first glance, the claim that women like men with mediocre bodies looks like an excuse for men to be sloppy and for women to lower the standard of comparison for their own bodies. And for many people, this is exactly how the concept will be used, without further consideration. But for those of us who are willing to think and work, there is a lesson to take away from the "dadbod." After all, the article that started it all was only popular because it touched on an important yet controversial truth, namely, that women and men want different things in relationships. Both sexes want to be better at certain things than their partner, and both sexes want the other to be better than them in some ways. To some degree, it actually does makes sense for a woman to be "the pretty one." This doesn't excuse men from looking after themselves, but it does mean that men who think that they have to tone and sculpt themselves into a Greek God in order to get girls are missing something much more important than bodyfat.

As usual, the useful takeaway here is reached by flipping the comparison to the other side of the sexual divide. Most women struggle with the concept that men don't like them for their accomplishments. They see accomplished men and feel attracted, so they have a hard time understanding why that same standard doesn't apply to them too. At the same time, most women - even if they don't agree that "dadbods" are sexy - at least can identify with wanting to be the pretty one in the relationship and disliking feelings of competition with their own partner. By this point, you probably get what I am going to say: as a man, dating a woman who is highly accomplished in traditionally male arenas is a lot like being a woman and dating a man with a perfectly sculpted body. Or we could state it like this: guys feel the same way about dating women who are more accomplished than them as you feel about dating men who are sexier than you.

Now, by all means, the correct solution for a girl who feels inclined towards guys with "dadbods" is to hit the gym and learn how to present herself (so she can get guys without "dadbods"); just like a guy who feels tempted to date stupid girls should find his purpose in life and work his ass off (so he can feel confident dating smart and accomplished girls). The fact that the sexes want different things doesn't mean it is right for guys to stop working out any more than it means that it is right for women to intentionally dumb themselves down intellectually. As I've stated in a million different ways on this blog, the answer isn't a reduction of the other, it is an augmentation of the self.

No, the whole "dadbod" thing doesn't excuse laziness, but it does serve as a reminder (albeit an awkward one) that each sex is looking for reciprocal qualities in the other. So think twice before pouring several years into developing the very quality you are looking for in the opposite sex. You only have so much time and energy to spend in developing yourself - spend it wisely.


Related Posts
1. No, Your Intelligence Is Not Your Problem
2. Men Don't Care About Your Accomplishments
3. The Analogy Between Sex and Commitment
4. Human Energy Is Conserved

"I'm Not Like Other Girls"

Dating and relationships are rife with cliche lines and expressions. People hear them in movies or on television, and then rehash them because they seem like the appropriate thing to say when the narrative of their relationship starts to vaguely resemble the script of their favorite romantic comedy. You know what I am talking about - things like "Let's just be friends," "I had a really great time tonight," "It's not you it's me," etc. But one of the most overused lines comes up when a man makes a sexual advance with a girl he just started seeing. Every guy knows the line I am talking about here:

"I can't do that... I'm... I'm not like other girls."

If girls had any idea how often guys hear that line, they'd cringe at the mere thought of using it. I cringe every time I hear it, just because I've heard it so many times before, and hate cliches. But most girls probably didn't realize how common it is, because it is always said in private, out of earshot of other girls. Now you know.

Of course, the irony is that, in the very act of saying she is different, the girl saying so is being exactly the opposite of different. Perhaps the greater irony still is that, from a guy's perspective, her saying so is actually a pretty good sign that she is about to say yes to sex. Some guys realize this more than others, but the ones that do know that the girls who really are different (in the sense that they don't have sex very quickly) don't feel the need to verbalize that fact in order to convince anyone.

Now, if you are a normal American girl, you've probably said this yourself at some point. And that's OK. I've said just as stupid and equally cliche shit to girls before. Most guys have, so I'm not pointing fingers. And actually, I'm not even accusing you of being like every other girl. For that matter, I'm not even saying that you shouldn't be like every other girl when it comes to sex. I am just pointing out that, if what you say is true, then you don't need to say it; and you actually undermine your credibility in the very act of doing so.

So if you really want to prove to a guy that you are different from other girls, just be different from other girls, and leave it at that.

Related Posts

1. How to Turn Down a Guy for Sex

2. Don't Fuck on The First Date

3. Never Tell a Guy When You'll Have Sex with Him

4. Never Tell a Man Why He Shouldn't Want to Date You

Nice Guys Don't Exist

Everyone adapts their behavior to the people around them, and in response to the situation at hand. We are nice to people we like and mean or bitchy to people we don’t. We are friendly and cheerful when things go well and short-tempered or depressed when they don’t. Yeah, sure, there are some people who are generally more disposed to (for example) mean or more egocentric behavior than others, just as there are some people who are more disposed to (for example) kind or generous behavior than others; but even they are more mean or kind to some people, and less egocentric or generous to others. And of course there are some people whose behavior is less affected by circumstance than others, but not to the point that it isn't affected at all – and not even to the point that it isn't affected significantly. We like to think of personality as static and constant, intrinsic to each person. But the reality is that personality is merely a name we give to a set of behaviors coming from an individual; and those behaviors are very much mood-driven, situational and dynamic.

This misconception plays into our perception of the opposite sex significantly. Consider how frequently you change your behavior towards the men in your life…

If I approach a girl in a bar awkwardly, and then speak to her in a low voice because I am nervous, she isn't going to be attracted, and isn't going to respond well. The fact that she is short with me, or excuses herself immediately to go to the bathroom doesn't mean that she is a "bitch;" it just means that I didn't attract her enough. The next guy who approaches her might approach her confidently and genuinely, and have her wrapped around his finger the rest of the night.

If I have a dead-end job and lack ambition, my girlfriend isn't going to respond to me in the same way as the guy she dates next (i.e. after she dumps me), who is intentional in his career and gainfully employed in a position he truly enjoys. I might tell my friends that she was “cold” or “distant” but they'll know as well as I will that her next boyfriend probably has none of the same problems. Or maybe she is the one complaining that he is cold and distant.

The same kind of girls that ignored me when I was young and lacked confidence now treat me entirely differently, because I am older and far more sure of myself. At twenty years old, it was tempting to view those girls as stuck-up or bitchy; but the reality is that they were probably acting like angels towards some 30-year-old who was much more attractive due to his age, maturity and position in life.

I am not saying all of this to make a point about women, but to make a point about men – because men work exactly the same way. It is easy to believe that a certain guy is an asshole because he dumps you without an explanation, or that another is an authentically nice guy because he treats you well. But I am telling you: those men behave in entirely different ways with different girls.

The guy who you think is a player because he hits on three other girls before taking you home, then never calls you the next day – I guarantee that he is genuine and respectful and serious with other girls he dates. I know this because I've been that guy plenty of times. Some women I treat well and with respect, and others I don’t. If I see a girl I'm attracted to and whom I respect, I change my game completely. My male friends do the same.

The guy who is a dismissive asshole to you is a babbling, nervous idiot with the girl he is crazy about, and the guy who is such a gentleman to you absolutely crushes the hopes of girls that he doesn't find attractive, or doesn't respect. Likewise, the guy who never calls you back isn't “flaky,” he just doesn't care that much about you. I am sure there is a girl out there who has complained that he was needy and contacted her too much. And I am equally sure that the guy you were dating who seems to have “commitment anxiety” has at some point in his life practically begged to be in a relationship with a girl.

The thing is, nice guys don’t exist. “Douchebags” don’t exist. The behaviors we describe with these terms are not innate and static characteristics of any given person; they are behaviors that change depending on the other person involved and the circumstances surrounding the interaction. Of course there are men out there who are more disposed to certain types of behavior than others; but the degree of attraction a man feels for you will affect his behavior towards you far more than anything intrinsic to his personality, and the degree of attraction he feels for you is significantly affected by the kind of behavior you'll accept from him.

So instead of complaining about the dearth of nice guys or the abundance of douchebags, start thinking about what you can do to make then men in your life treat you the way you want. Because that is what is going to make the difference – not finding some "perfect guy" with some supposed personality type. You don't find perfect men, you elicit perfection from men.


Related Posts

1. The More Confident He Is, The Less He Likes You

2. The Importance of Personal Boundaries

3. You Are Responsible for Your Own Romantic Happiness

How to Set Up Your Friends

Most women I've met like the idea of setting up the single men in their lives with the single girls in their lives. In other words, they like match-making. Mothers seem to love this more than most, presumably because it puts them back in touch with the romantic spark that is often dead in their own relationships. Perpetually single girls love this too, probably because having influence over someone else’s love life is the next best thing to having control over your own. But normal girls like it too, and this is understandable because it is only human to want to have an influence on other people's lives (it is human to want to have influence in general). In the same way that it is empowering to know that you were the one who got your friend the job that was the springboard for her career, it is empowering to know that you introduced her to the guy that finally gave her confidence in her dating life, or even the guy that she eventually married.

Now, let me preface what I am about to say by pointing out that setups are usually a bad idea. In the vast majority of cases, the very fact that your friend needs help finding love is a good indication that your attempt to help is going to fail. This is because the problem is never one of "just not having met the right person yet." It always runs deeper. Maybe she is insecure, or too introverted, or overweight. Maybe she is trying to be masculine, or makes herself unapproachable. Whatever the case, her inability to take charge of her own romantic life isn't merely a matter of bad luck; it is a symptom of a deeper problem, which your attempt to introduce her to someone new isn't doing anything to solve. It's like giving another book to a child with a learning disability, and thinking "this time he'll get it." Exactly. It isn't going to happen.

So with that background, let's take a look at what most people do when they try to set up their friends (because this blog is for women I am going to use the example of a girl, but guys make the same mistake). Once a girl sees a potential match in her social circle, she goes to the girl and guy separately, and tells each of them that she knows "someone that they have to meet." She might tell each person a few things about the other, maybe show them some photos, and she gets them to agree to the setup. Then she arranges some kind of event at which the two people have the opportunity to meet each other. She's "really good at this" because she never lets either person know that the other one knows it's a set up. That way it won't feel forced or awkward. Perfect, right? Wrong.

The problem isn't that the person thinks that the other knows about the setup. The problem is that the person themselves knows they are being set up. And they knew this the very moment the girl told them there was "someone that they had to meet." This does two things: first, it generates expectations and makes both parties feel like they have to perform, which of course results in an encounter more awkward than a new graduate's first job interview. More importantly, however, and what I want to point out here, is that it destroys the single most important thing for someone who struggles with their dating life: autonomy.

Let's look at this from a the guy's perspective...

One of the hallmarks of masculinity is self-control: men want to be in control of their lives, and by extension, they want to be in control of their dating lives. A man will never feel good about himself if he can't initiate and perpetuate his own relationships. (Remember that his inability to do so is the reason his friends want to set him up in the first place.) By setting a guy up, you are essentially stepping in and putting training wheels on his bike - reminding him that he cannot handle himself. Yes, it might be true that he rides poorly (or not at all) without those training wheels; but by taking control of his dating life you are making him feel like a child, and he won't respect himself for any girl he "gets" with your help. He also won't respect any girl that he needs help to meet, because men know instinctively that women are attracted to men who don't need help: men who are in control and confident with their own capabilities. In other words, he knows he can get a better girl if he gets his shit together and deals with his lack of options himself.

You might argue that without some initial help, a guy (or girl) will never date anyone at all. To use the bike analogy, you might argue that, yes, a guy might not respect himself for using training wheels, but without training wheels he will never learn how to ride. But this argument assumes that his problem is balance. In real terms, your insistence on setting him up assumes that his problem is meeting girls. But as I pointed out at the beginning, this is never the case. His problem isn't one of balance, it is the fear of crashing. His problem isn't one of meeting girls, it is the fear of rejection; and setups do nothing to help him overcome that fear.

There is a feminine perspective on this too. When it comes to match-making, the feminine problem is that a girl will not respect a man who needed the help of a friend (i.e. you) to meet and attract her. This isn't only a matter of judging the man's courage, or the social abilities needed to make a connection with her. Women know that if a man is motivated enough, he will dig down and find that courage, and make something happen - or at least he will try. You want a man who desires you enough to push through a crowd to meet you, or takes some kind of initiative. At very least, you want a guy who does more than accept dates that are handed to him because his friends think he has no other options. A girl who finds herself in a relationship that started that way won't respect him, won't respect the relationship, and won't respect herself. So deep down, girls doesn't like being set up any more than guys do. They might like being single even less, but they'll be even less enthusiastic still about being dumped once their boyfriends wake up, and realize that they are only with those girls because they never had the balls to go for what they really wanted.

I am sure many readers know people who have had successful relationships after being set up, some of which might have even lead to marriage. My parents were set up, and they've been married more than 30 years. Maybe you were set up and are still with your boyfriend. And that's fine. But it doesn't mean that those cases are ideal or likely, or that they do anything to strengthen the inner core of the relationship.

So what do you do? How do you help facilitate a match that you think has potential? Well, you let both the guy and the girl ride without training wheels. You encourage them to take control of their own dating lives, and then you let them do so. This doesn't mean that you can't set them up, but it does mean that you can't tell either of them you are setting them up. Here is what you do: you invite them both to whatever event you've organized, then you sit back and see if they connect. Nothing more, nothing less. If he doesn't take the initiative on his own, nothing happens, and that's OK - or at least, it isn't something you can correct by stepping in and facilitating the connection any more than you already have.

Of course, it isn't always the case that the person you are trying to set up has any problems dating or attracting the opposite sex. Maybe they have plenty of options, and you just happen to know someone who would be a great match for them. But in these cases, you won't need to do anything other than introduce the two people anyway; they will be perfectly fine on their own if there is an attraction, so the strategy is the same: introduce, step back, and let it happen. Nothing more.


Related Posts
1. You Are Responsible For Your Own Romantic Happiness

2. No, You Aren't a Good Wing Woman

3. Don't Initiate Contact

Bars Are a Bad Place to Meet Women

I've met the majority of the women I've dated in bars. There have been plenty of girls that I've met through friends or randomly in public, but in bars, the sheer density of attractive, young, single women is enormously greater than it is on the street or beach or office (or anywhere else); and my dating history reflects that. I've made the point previously that the higher concentration of the opposite sex in nightlife venues is a good thing, and I stand by what I said. But as I've gotten older and come to know myself better, I've recognized two serious disadvantages to meeting women in this way.

1. Randomness

The first thing I've realized is that I don't value the way that I meet women I meet in bars – that is, I don’t value the process itself. I was telling this recently to a girl that I know, and she suggested that it was because meeting girls in bars is "too random." I think this is the common supposition - namely, that because you don't have any history or connection with the people that you meet in bars, there is no foundation for a relationship, and so any attempt at one is doomed. But this isn't the problem. A strong foundation for a relationship is just as much a function of personal compatibility as it is a function of common history or connections. Meeting the opposite sex in a bar isn't unsuccessful for lack of foundation, and it isn't unsuccessful because it is random. It is unsuccessful precisely because it isn't random.

Randomness is actually what we all want, in the sense that we all want our "how we met" story to be unique and unexpected. The more random it is that you met someone to whom you find yourself deeply attracted, the more special it feels, because you know that you were incredibly lucky for it to happen. It's the same phenomenon that makes people appreciate life so much after a near-death experience. You value what you have because you know that you almost didn't have it. As absurd as most romantic comedies are, it says something about our ideals of romance that so many of them start with some permutation of a girl hitting a guy on a bike with her car - randomly - and then falling in love with him. Things are romantic at least partially because they are unexpected, that is, seemingly impossible or unreal. I probably don't need to explain to most women how un-romantic it is to receive flowers on Valentine's Day. It might be nice, and it might be better than never receiving flowers, but it isn't romantic because it is too predictable. It isn't random at all.

Being picked up in a bar also isn't random at all. In fact, it is exactly the opposite of random; it is boring because it is too mechanical, too planned. Guys know that they want to meet girls, they know where to find them, and they go there to do so. Girls know that they want to meet men, they know where they will be hit on, and they go there for that reason. The encounter might take place in an exciting, fast-paced and sexually-charged atmosphere, but that's just superficial ornamentation. Underneath, those meetings are absolutely bland, because they are absolutely intentional.

Yes, obviously, not everyone in a bar is there with the conscious intention of meeting the opposite sex, but the percentage of people who are is infinitely higher in nightlife environments than it is in, say, a shopping mall. And following the train of thought described above, we project that intention onto every person we meet in a nightlife environment, then down-rate the value of those encounters accordingly. I don't value the women I meet in bars because there is nothing special about the way we met.

2. Difficulty

The second thing I realized is that I don't value the effort I make to meet girls in bars. There isn't necessarily anything wrong with the girls themselves, but I don't respect my relationships with them because I didn't have to work very hard to make those relationships happen. Men are very keenly aware that things of low value are easy to obtain, and so we assume (and in most cases are right) that things that are easy to obtain are low in value. A man might have the best job in the world, but he'll never feel good about it as long as he knows that he only got it because his father pulled strings with his professional contacts to make it happen. The same mentality applies in dating.

It hasn't always been this way for me. In my early twenties, approaching a random girl in a bar and attracting her enough to get her phone number took balls and felt like a real accomplishment - because at the time, for me, it was. I was able to have genuine relationships with girls that I met in bars because I respected myself for meeting girls in bars. But I don't anymore, because it has become too easy, too boring. Without the challenges that my adolescent social anxiety used to pose, all I see in bars is a social scene hugely facilitated by dark lighting, loud music, commotion and alcohol. They’re still a great place to have fun and get laid, but they’re not the kind of place where I expect to find a relationship anymore.

Now, does this mean that bars are a bad place to meet guys, or that you should stop going out?

Not necessarily. Despite the fairly categorical nature of this post's title, what I am really saying here is that bars are a bad place for me to meet women at this point in my life. I am no relativist, but the reasons explained above don’t apply to every guy, and they don't apply in every situation. If you meet a guy tomorrow who is the way I was at 22, for whom it is a big deal to meet a girl in a bar, then this isn't going to be an issue at all. And even if the guy you meet in a bar is exactly like me in the sense that it isn't a challenge for him, there is still the possibility of something working out; it just means that you are getting off on the wrong foot. If there is a strong enough connection, "how you met" probably won't be enough to prevent or disrupt it.

There is also the chance that there will be some other coincidence that makes the encounter incredibly random, despite the environment – maybe you find out that you both come from the same town on the other side of the country, or that you have identical ancestry, or that you are both obsessed with the same nerdy sci-fi movie, even though you met in a nightclub. And as I explained in previous posts, you still have to consider the disadvantages posed by what I've explained above, along-side the low probability of getting off on the right foot somewhere less intentional, like a shopping mall or at work.

No, I am not saying that you shouldn't go to bars. I am saying that you should be cognizant of the fact that men – just like women – will not respect or value what comes too easily, whether it comes too easily because (a) it is too mechanical or (b) because it requires very little effort. The converse of this is that men will value their encounter with you in proportion to how (a) unlikely or (b) difficult it was. While this doesn't mean that you should lock yourself in a steel cage and only accept men who are willing to tear it down to get to you, it does mean that you should avoid situations in which every man has easy access to you.

Incidentally, this post could also have been written about online dating, or anything else that dramatically facilitates meeting the opposite sex. You might think of bars and online dating as completely different – even opposites – but they share the strong similarity of taking the difficulty out of approaching (and therefore, being approached by) the opposite sex. Even though it seems like an ideal situation on the surface, the reality is that, for many men and women, bars and online dating are shortcuts. And no one wants to know that they got something important to them by taking a shortcut. Even if online dating or going to bars isn't a shortcut for you, be aware that it might be a shortcut for the guy, and that he is liable to respect himself and the relationship less because of it.


Related Posts
1. Bars Are a Good Place to Meet Guys – Part 1
2. How "Hard to Get" Should You Play?
3. Don’t Initiate Contact
4. Why You Don’t Get Approached by Men

There Is Nothing Modest About Loose Jeans

Every now and then I meet or see a girl wearing loose jeans. By "loose" I don't mean that the crotch is sagging around her knees, I just mean that there are places on her hips, ass and upper legs where the fabric is not touching her skin. I suspect that girls do this for one of three reasons:

(a) They think their figure isn't attractive enough to wear tight jeans.
(b) The think that tight jeans are immodest.
(c) They don't care about their appearance and loose jeans are more comfortable.

I realize I won't convince group (c) of anything, so I am only going to address (a) and (b). Let's start with group (a)...

No matter how fat you are, or how badly your ass is shaped, loose jeans make it look worse. Tight jeans might not make your ass or legs look good, but loose jeans will make you look like a man.

As for the group concerned with modesty: you need a reality check. Tight jeans are not provocative; they are normal. Despite what your parents probably raised you to believe, modesty is not something objective. What looks "appropriate" or "slutty" or "conservative" changes significantly depending on two things: context and social norms.

If you were to walk down the street of your city in a bikini in the middle of winter it would shock people and look slutty. Any man who saw it would be turned on. But on the beach, bikinis are normal. Men are much less turned on by them because they are expected. They don't look slutty at all. This is what I mean by context.

In Victorian times, swimsuits were less-revealing than most women's dresses are today. Today, swimsuits are more revealing than most women's underwear in Victorian times. Dress-like swimsuits didn't seen slutty or over-conservative in Victorian times, and neither do bikinis today. This is what I mean by social norms.

Here is the thing: modesty isn't a function of the quantity of skin you show, or the tightness of the clothes you wear; it is defined by how much your outfit makes men (or people in general) think that sex with you is imminent. The more you incite in men the thought that they can bang you easily, the less modest your outfit is. This is why short dresses are so much more sexual than pants. Men see you in a short dress and part of their subconscious recognizes that your vagina is essentially exposed (i.e. from the bottom). Sex seems much more accessible and immediate because there is only one thin layer of clothing covering the most sexually intimate part of your body.

But the threshold for triggering a man's thoughts of sexual proximity - the criterion for immodesty - is entirely relative to social norms and context. The man on the beach doesn't think sex is imminent when he sees you wearing a bikini, because every woman on the beach is wearing in a bikini, and he knows it is for swimming or sunbathing. But in 1910, if a man saw a woman on the beach in a bikini, he'd be sure that she was a woman of loose morals - and he'd probably be right.

Anyway, the point here is that wearing tight jeans in everyday American life is about as shocking as wearing a bikini on the beach in 2014. And wearing loose jeans in everyday American life is far more similar than you think to wearing a Victorian bathing costume to a Las Vegas pool party. Perhaps more importantly, when you use your clothes rather than your behavior to be modest, you are far more similar than you think to the girls who use their clothes rather than their behavior to get sexual attention. Don't be so sure that you are more intelligent just because you made the mistake about modesty rather than sexuality.

Is there an opposite extreme, where tight jeans start to look like a bikini on a Victorian-era beach (i.e. slutty)? Yeah, probably, but that's not the point - there are always excesses on both extremes. Today I happen to be calling out the conservatives.

So remember: wearing loose jeans doesn't avoid the wrong kind of attention; it just makes you look terrible.


Related Posts
1. "The Wrong Kind of Attention"
2. How to Get "The Right Kind of Attention"
3. Don't Wear Sneakers
4. The Most Important Time to Dress Well

You Don't Need to Like Sports

I've traveled a lot. I've lived in Europe twice, spent months at a time in Africa and India, and have visited dozens of other countries in south and central America, the Middle East and Europe (no, I am not in the military). I don't say this to brag or show off, but to lend a little more weight to the observation inspiring this post. The time I've spent abroad has given me a fairly good grasp on the differences between American women and foreigners. This understanding, in turn, helps me to recognize the characteristics that are universally feminine, as opposed to those that are specific to the women in the United States, or any other culture.

One thing that is unique to the United States is how much American women watch sports. Perhaps I am noticing this more recently because it is the middle of the American Football season, but in any case the trend is unmistakable. Women in the United States have favorite teams, know the names of all the players, and watch every game. They cheer with excitement when there is a good play, swear at the referees when they make a bad call, have opinions about who will beat whom, and generally invest a good deal of their identity as a fan of their chosen team.

This doesn't really happen outside the United States. I am sure there are some places where women care about sports more than others, but I have yet to go anywhere outside the U.S. and find women out-shouting men at a bar where a "big game" is being shown on TV. In the U.S. it happens regularly, so it is clear that this is a cultural (rather than sexual) phenomenon.

Most sports are inherently masculine. They are physical, aggressive, strategic and competitive. Perhaps more importantly, "scoring" is characterized in most sports by the same kind of build-up and break-through that occurs in the male orgasm (it isn't a coincidence that men use the same term to refer to getting laid), and in other traditionally masculine pursuits, like hunting and scientific investigation. And while this doesn't mean that women can't or shouldn't participate in sports, or even thoroughly enjoy them, it does mean that any pressure a woman feels to watch or participate in them is most likely external and cultural, rather than internal and authentic.

More to the point here, liking sports will not make you more attractive to men. As I have pointed out before, trying to be one of the guys is a bad dating strategy. There is nothing lamer than that girl at the bar on game-day, wearing face-paint and a team jersey, yelling at the players or referees on the screen in an attempt to prove to the guys around her how much she knows about the game. It is almost the definition of trying too hard, and it is a huge turn-off. While taking an interest the things he likes (sports) is a demonstration of good-will, admiration, and maybe even loyalty, being as obsessed about hockey as he is will not make him want to bang you or date you; it will (at most) make him want to be your friend.

I occasionally pick up Cosmopolitan to see what kind of advice they are giving, and I read there once that men said they like a girl who loves sports. I don't doubt that men have said this, but that doesn't mean it is any truer than the female claim to like men who are able to cry during movies. While both are kind of nice ideas in theory, the behaviors of both sexes in choosing partners betray their real preferences. And yes, of course, there are girls who are epic sports fans and still get guys, but I can promise you that this is because they are hot or fun to be around - not because they are sports fans. 

So if you are American girl, and feel like you aren't fitting in because you don't know the name of your local basketball team's point guard, or if you find yourself tempted to mimic that one girl you know that has men swarming over her as she spouts football statistics, take a moment to recognize that (a) it isn't her love of sports that is attracting those men, and (b) if it isn't something you genuinely like, you shouldn't be doing it anyway.

Related Posts

1. Don't Try to Be One of the Guys

2. Femininity, Authenticity and Compatibility

3. Are You Repressing Your Femininity?

Men and "Friends With Benefits"

While explaining her relationship with a guy she is interested in, a reader who recently wrote to me for advice reminded me of the difference between the typical male and female approach to being "friends with benefits":

I guess we're friends with benefits because there's no commitment on both parts. I also made a conscious choice that it was only purely physical with what happened between us (only twice by the way). But I liked his company and the flowing conversations we had. I didn't put any pressure on him either. I had no illusions, in other words. I was, however, hoping that we could learn more about each other slowly and establish a good foundation before going to the next level. But again, I had no illusions.

The simple fact is that men almost never fall in love this way, despite what you saw in the fictional movie (emphasis on fictional), No Strings Attached. The woman quoted above might not have had any illusions about the fact that the relationship was purely sexual, but I suspect she did have some illusions about just how unlikely it was that her love interest would change his perspective on the relationship. If she hadn't, she wouldn't have wasted her time.

It has been my experience - both personal and vicarious - that the vast majority of women view a casual sexual relationship as a potential stepping stone towards a relationship. Men, on the other hand, see it as nothing more than what it sounds like: sex with no emotional ties, no commitment, nothing. If anything, men treat it as a step away from a committed relationship, because if they wanted more from a woman, they wouldn't settle for mere sex; they'd want her exclusivity also. (If this sounds familiar, it is probably because it is almost identical to the difference between the male and female perspectives on moving in together before marriage.)

Any man who is mildly observant of the opposite sex will have a hunch in the back of his mind that this kind of relationship is bound to explode eventually. But he isn't going to turn down all of the commitment-free sex he'll get in the meantime just because of some "feeling." Men don't trust feelings the way women do. Men are hyper-rational, literal creatures. If it is called "no-strings-attached" relationship, that's exactly how he treats it, no matter how much cuddling and hanging out is involved.

Furthermore, a man will often be willing to engage in a relationship like this with a woman who is below his league, in the same way that many people will have lower standards for the quality of the house they lease, as opposed to the one they eventually buy.

Yes, of course, I know, there are occasional exceptions. There are always exceptions. Once in a while, a long-term relationship or even a marriage can grow out of something that started as friends-with-benefits. But the point is that, when it comes to casual sexual relationships, the exceptions are so rare that you'll be far better off avoiding them completely than taking a gamble on even the most apparently promising ones.

So before you jump at the opportunity to "get closer" to the man you want by making things sexual, recognize that his willingness to engage in a casual sexual relationship with you is actually a step away from commitment, not a step towards it.

Related Posts
1. Men Don't Fall in Love the Same Way Women Do
2. Men and Sexual Variety
3. Don't Fuck on The First Date

The Analogy Between Sexual and Emotional Support

Note: I've removed this post, for reasons that are philosophically similar to those described on the placeholder for the removed posts Never Say No to Sex. 

In general I don't think the analogy between sexual and emotional support is a perfect one. While there is an element of truth to the comparison, the focus on it masks the more important fact, which is that if you are in a relationship which you feel routinely reluctant to give yourself to your husband or boyfriend sexually, the solution is much more complicated - and much more effective - than both of you simply enduring perpetual misery for the other's sake (hint: it has a lot to do with you both coming to terms with yourselves).

This post allowed the reader to wander too far along a path of reasoning that led to the conclusion that real happiness in relationships is a sum-zero game. In fact, this is only true in troubled relationships. If you both reach a point of self-satisfaction in your personal lives and live vulnerably, the opposite is true.

The original text of the post (annotated) is here: The Analogy Between Sexual and Emotional Support

Related Posts
1. Never Say No To Sex
2. The Analogy Between Confidence and Beauty
3. We Have a Shared Responsibility

Misconceptions

The most recent post on Hooking Up Smart borrows a Venn diagram from a website called Doghouse Diaries. The diagram attempts to dispel a few myths about what men find attractive in women. While of course all men have different tastes, and projection is inevitable, I was still a little disappointed at what the author came up with.

Below is my take on the phenomenon he recognizes. You'll notice that I kept a couple of his points. I also used a list format so that the differences can be seen more clearly.

Related Posts

1. Why Women Don't Know What Men Want

2. Don't Try to Be One of The Guys

3. The Analogy Between Confidence and Beauty

Are Manicures Worth It?

Last year, two of my female cousins were in town, staying with me for a wedding we were all attending. When they arrived, they told me they had to find a place nearby to get manicures and pedicures. Since they'd only just arrived, but the salons would be closing soon, they invited me to come with them so we could catch up. "You can get your nails done with us" they suggested.

I'm mildly homophobic, so I balked a little; but I'd heard of straight guys getting them before, and I was also curious to see what these "manicure" things were all about. Eventually I decided that there had to be some boundaries, so I accepted their invitation but insisted on leaving my feet untouched - no pedicure, because that would be gay (ha!).

Now, I understand that some women get their nails painted with fairly ornate patterns at nail salons, others have fake nails applied very carefully, and I am sure there are some other practical reasons for a trip to the salon. And don't get me wrong - the hand massage was awesome and I got to catch up with my cousins while we were sitting there. But as I looked at my nails after the manicure was finished, I struggled to see any significant difference from how they would have looked if I'd spent ten minutes on them myself. And in that moment, I realized something: women do not go to nail salons to have their nails cleaned; you go to nail salons to be pampered. Lesson learned.

So are manicures worth it? Should you go to the salon before going out every weekend? Well, I can tell you with certainty that a manicure won't help you attract men any more than spending a few minutes clipping your nails an cuticles by yourself, and maybe painting your nails (which adds a nice effect when it is done tastefully, by the way). But if you think it is worth it to get your hands oiled and massaged, and to sit back and relax while small Vietnamese women attend to your every need, I say go for it. I get it. I'm not judging.


Related Posts
1. Feminine Beauty Is Highly Controllable
2. The Importance of Heels
3. The Importance of Hair
4. How To Avoid Looking Fake

Texting Tip 1 - Laughter

A lot of people use laughter in their texts to convey that they are just kidding, or only semi-serious, or just to be light-hearted. By laughter I mean "haha" or hahaha," rather than "lol."

Consider the text conversation in the screenshot from my phone on the right. Specifically, consider the girl's second text, "How do you guys feel about karaoke tonight? Haha"

The placement of the "haha" at the end of the text betrays insecurity. It makes the laughter sound like it was an after-thought, pinned on at the end to soften the text's meaning - because it was. In this instance, the girl wanted to invite me and my friends out, but was unsure about whether I would like her suggestion - hence the awkward laugh after her question. (It is worth noting that the karaoke suggestion text arrived about an hour after the one suggesting that we join them.)

In normal speech we laugh as an idea forms in our mind, and then we verbalize it - often while still laughing; but we almost never say something and laugh afterwards (one exception to this is when we tell a joke with a punch line). So the "haha" at the end of a text sounds forced and awkward, and therefore insecure. It is the text-equivalent of a person saying something sarcastically when they actually mean exactly what they are saying, but don't have the balls to say it to you straight.

Imagine if the same text, in the same conversation, were instead written with the laughter at the start:

"Haha how do you guys feel about karaoke tonight?"

Suddenly the laughter sounds genuine and the insecurity is gone. The text changes from connoting "I hope you will like the idea of karaoke but I am worried that you won't so I'm going to pretend it's only semi-serious" to "Here is a ridiculous but fun idea: let's go do karaoke tonight. Are you in?"

So this tip is simple: never place laughter at the end of a text, and certainly don't follow up a text with another that just says "haha" (this has the same bad effect but to a greater degree).

Sticking to this rule can help you save face when you are texting men. More importantly, it will force you to acknowledge and correct your insecurity each time you feel it: the act of fixing the laughter in your text will force you to internalize the more confident stance it conveys, and this confidence will gradually become a habit.


Related Posts
1. other Texting Tips (coming soon)
2. How to Improve Your Posture - Part 2
3. Learn How to Be Social

Men Care About How You Talk

Consider two ways that a girl can (and American girls often do) speak the same message:

[In a whiney, high-pitched voice] "Do you even KNOW how difficult it is being a girl in a bar? last night I WANTed to just, like, hang out, but then this suuuper weird guy, like, comes up to me or whatever, and just STANDS there and is all awkward, like, as if he was going to start a conversation or whatever, but like, then - I don't know - he just... looked at me... it was just, I don't know, weird. So then he just goes 'can I buy you a drink?' and I didn't know what to say because I felt bad, but then Jenna just steps in all of a sudden and goes like, 'what do you want? do you wanna to talk to her? why don't you just TALK to her? because buying her a drink is just like buying a conversation from her anyway.' I mean, like, the whole thing was sooooo. embarrassing. I should have just, like, never even gone out."

...compared to:

[In a normal female voice] "It's awkward sometimes being a girl in a bar. Last night I didn't particularly want to meet any guys, but I went out with some girlfriends anyway. One guy - who was more than a little strange - approached me, hesitated awkwardly for a few long seconds, then nervously asked if he could buy me a drink. I froze up because I didn't want to hurt his feelings by refusing. But then Jenna stepped in and rudely demanded to know what he really wanted from me. She even asked him why he didn't just start a conversation with me, rather than trying to 'buy' the opportunity with a drink. The whole situation was embarrassing; I wish I'd stayed home."

I am sure you don't need me to tell you which of the two is more attractive to men. But here is the interesting thing: I know plenty of genuinely smart women who talk like the first example. It isn't always so bad, but often it is. Rather than using their abilities to do otherwise, they subconsciously attempt to mimic stupid women. They do this because stupid women are usually also beautiful and popular. In other words, they emulate them out of insecurity and a desire to be more beautiful or popular. Smart, confident women - even if they aren't beautiful - do not talk like the first example.

Smart girls that do talk like idiots are right in one sense: men are attracted to the women who talk that way. But what they don't realize is that men like these women because they are beautiful - that is, in spite of their apparent lack of intelligence, not because of it.

You've seen the same phenomenon in men. Think about how many guys you know that are smart, but still talk like jocks or meat-heads (whose speech habits actually do represent their lack of intelligence) to some degree, in order to feign masculinity, "coolness" and confidence:

[In an exaggeratedly deep, "macho" voice] "Dude, so, after we hit the beach, do you wanna maybe... I don't know, hit up downtown tonight? I mean, but first we should grab something to eat or somethin' 'cause I'm gonna be starving. Gotta make sure we eat before we party, you know? Otherwise tomorrow morning will be suuuper painful man."

...compared to:

[In a normal male voice] "Hey, what do you think about going out downtown tonight after we get back from the beach? We should stop to eat first though; we don't want to drink on an empty stomach - that's like begging for a hangover."

Think about how much less attractive the first example of male speech is compared to the second. That is how ugly you sound to men when you talk like the first female example. I have met or seen a few gorgeous women that I was uncontrollably attracted to until they opened their mouths, and I've experienced the same loss of attraction in lesser degrees countless other times.

So stop and think for a moment about your speech habits:

• Do you articulate ideas or stories concisely?
• Do you say "like" or "you know" or "um" all the time?
• Do you over-emphasize modifiers rather than choosing ones with stronger meanings?
• Do you talk in run-on sentences?
• Do you hyperbolize your vocal tone into an obnoxious pseudo-feminine whine?

If you do any of these, stop. You are crushing your ability to attract a man on a personal level. Even if men don't need you to have a PhD, we are attracted to women who can think; and if this isn't evident in your speech, we will assume that you cannot.

The Female Mustache

Every once in a while I meet a girl who is cute, aside from a noticeable dusting of hair on her upper lip. Usually it isn't visible from several yards away (i.e. visible enough to prevent an approach or introduction), but can be seen clearly at conversational distance. What usually follows in these situations is a brief conversation, the earliest possible (and polite) exit, and then a comment between me and any other male I am with - out of earshot, of course:

"Dude, did you see that??"

"What, the hair? Yeah man, what a shame. She was cute otherwise, and pretty cool too, but that shit was creepy."

I've always been shocked that girls don't do something about it on their own initiative. It occurred to me that they might not realize it is unattractive - or maybe that they don't think it is noticeable. So if you have more hair than the average girl, get rid of it. I am not entirely sure what the best methods are, but it needs to be taken care of: wax it, get it removed by laser, or at very least, bleach it.

Below is a picture that illustrates the upper limit of what is acceptable. If you have less lip hair than this, you can probably get away with it unnoticed. If you have this much hair or more, take care of it.

How to Reject a Guy

If you aren't swooping up dudes by the dozens you might not give too much thought to this topic, but at some point it will become relevant. Whether you are getting asked by a guy for your phone number, or asked out on a date, or pressured for sex - or even if you are proposed to, if you don't want to say yes, remember the following:

1. He can handle it. At least, he should be able to. Any man who wants to stand even a modest chance of success in the dating world needs to learn how to handle rejection, so don't shy from the task. Your concern for his feelings should never stop you from being up-front with him.

2. He wants to know the truth. He wants to be with you, but only if you reciprocate that feeling. You wouldn't want to be with a guy who was apathetic about you. Likewise, he'd rather know your true feelings than have your insincere acceptance.

3. He doesn't want his time wasted. If you aren't interested, he wants to start looking elsewhere as soon as possible (just as you should).

4. His primary emotion will be anger if you've only just met him or haven't been dating very long. Men take longer than women to get emotionally involved, so in the early stages of a relationship, his pride will be hurt far more than his heart or soul. While women will usually respond to this kind of rejection with sadness, men much more likely to be offended and angered, regardless of how well they hide it. So say what you have to quickly, and get the fuck out of there to let him cool off.

5. There is no way to soften the blow. This is what women (and probably men, too) forget the most when they reject a guy. You're telling him he isn't good enough for you, and that salient point will break through any bullshit you try to pad it with, so don't try. Additions like "I really like you, but..." are unnecessary and only make you sound insincere. The best way to deal with the inevitable is to plow through it as quickly as possible.

6. Most guys will persist at least a little. Don't be surprised or act indignant if he tries to convince you to go out with him, or to give you his number, or to stay with him. Men are rational by nature, and this kind of reasoning works on us, so we assume it will work on you too. Humor his reasoning by politely repeating your reasons (if it is a break up) or simply your refusal (if he is asking for a date or your number).

With that background, you should be able to appreciate the general strategy for rejecting a man, which is to be clear, direct and brief. That is to say, make sure he knows you are rejecting him, suppress the urge to make excuses for why you don't want him, and reject him quickly.

To state the same things in negative terms:

• Don't be vague in an attempt to soften the blow. Make sure he knows that you are saying "no" or breaking up with him.
• Don't make excuses about why you can't give him your number, or go out with him, or date him anymore.
• Don't try to soften the rejection by adding all kinds of caveats or compliments or by "talking it through." If you are ending a relationship there is a good chance he will want to talk about it, probably in attempt to reason with you (see #6 above), but I suggest you avoid this as much as possible. You can always talk to him later after he's had time to think about it.

When it comes to being asked out or called, you do have the option of ignoring his text or call, but this is fairly rude. I do it to girls sometimes, but it is a better all-around policy to answer and follow the guidelines above. If you don't give your number to a guy or lead him on when you don't like him, this probably won't be an issue anyway, since you will be looking forward to hearing from him.


Related Posts
1. How to Reject a Guy at a Bar - Part 1
2. What it Is Like to Be Rejected By Girls
3. Get Used to Rejection
4. Why Rejection Is a Good Thing

How to Adapt Your Game According to Your Results

In the spirit of paying attention to what a guy does and not what he says, you can put yourself into one of the following categories by considering how men behave towards you, and then you can adjust your efforts accordingly. These are in no particular order, and the list is not necessarily comprehensive.

1. Men hit on you all the time, and you get dates, but you struggle to get (or keep) a boyfriend.

You are hot but your personality needs work. Men are attracted by your initial shine, but they soon discover your lack of substance. They don't like spending time with you because you are either boring, too high-maintenance, stupid, too insecure or annoying - or some combination of these. Be honest with yourself in determining which of these are the biggest problems, then re-focus your efforts and do whatever it takes to fix them.

2. You never get hit on by men you are attracted to, or else they hit on you but then make an excuse to leave and don't ask for your number. They ones that want you are always short, or fat, or ugly, or awkward. The hot guys that you want to hit on you never do. Or, you never get hit on at all.

This happens either because you aren't making yourself attractive enough or because you have unrealistic expectations about what kind of men you can attract. Assume the former first: lose weight, spend more time on your hair, or work on your appearance in some other way. Then, if things still aren't working out (and be patient because this takes time), lower your standards.

3. Your friends always get hit on and you don't, or you always get hit on by the less-attractive friend or the obvious "wing man." It happens so much that you just expect it now.

Same as #2, with the added suggestion that - if none of that works (and again, it takes time) - you should start going out with new people who are closer to your level of attractiveness, at least occasionally.

4. Men hit on you and ask (text) you to go out drinking, but not to go out on dates. Or they ask you on dates, try to sleep with you a couple times, then never call again.

You are projecting a slutty image by your behavior. Men immediately recognize that you are not girlfriend material so they just try to hook up with you. Tone down the drinking, leave bars earlier, and acknowledge that your lifestyle is not conducive to finding a guy who will respect you.

5. Men treat you like a friend, not like a girl they are interested in sexually or romantically.

Most of the time this is because you aren't very attractive but you have a great personality, and you aren't bad looking either (if you were, men wouldn't even be friends with you). You also probably allow men to treat you like one of the guys. This isn't actually that bad of a situation to be in, because with just a little effort, you can improve your looks to a point that men will look at you in a romantic and sexual light. And if you start acting more feminine you can break out of the "friends" mold.

6. Men hit on you and then text you, but never call.

This is the unfortunate way of the future. Get used to it. But, give a lot of credit to the few guys who do pick up the phone and call: they are either more interested in you than the others, or just more confident. Either way, they are a step ahead of the rest.

7. You know you are attractive and men always check you out, but you only get approached by cocky players.

This is a difficult situation. It means you are extremely hot, and you intimidate most men. However, your personality is more to blame than your appearance. There are plenty of hot girls that get hit on far more frequently than you. Adjust your look first, because this will be the easiest part: dress a little more cute and a little less sexy. More importantly: loosen up. The women that are most intimidating to men are the ones that are insecure themselves, and mask their insecurity by closing themselves to social interaction under a facade of "hard to get." I've met a few girls like this - drop-dead gorgeous but perpetually single. They are all the same in a nightclub or bar environment: they stand alone or with their friends, and don't have fun, or are too concerned with looking "cool" or like a celebrity to relax and enjoy themselves.


Let me know if I missed any categories, but I think that covers most scenarios.

Katy Perry is Brainwashing Women

I recently watched the music video for Katy Perry's song Part of Me (I was just hoping she would look hot in it).

I was sorely disappointed by her looks in the video, but more importantly, the story line also bothered me. It didn't take me long to realize why...

After apparently being cheated on, Katy Perry dumps her boyfriend (which is smart), and then decides to overcome the emotional pain by cutting her hair, joining the military and being "tough" and independent. I am hoping the not-so-subtle message of the video is less catchy than the song (which is still stuck in my goddamn head...), because it essentially says "if you are hurt by a man, an appropriate and liberating response is to de-feminize yourself."

Nothing could be further from the truth. No reaction to rejection will damage your chances with other men more (especially if you cut off your hair like she does in the video). A woman who responds to rejection by becoming more masculine is like an athlete who responds to a difficult loss in sports by intentionally injuring himself or skipping trainings and practices - it is absurd. The athlete damages the body or lose the skills that made him a competitive athlete in the first place, just as like Katy Perry throws away the disposition and looks that attract men the most. She gains her personal independence at the expense of attracting men. That is to say, by throwing away her femininity and closing herself to male companionship, she sacrifices the potential for long-term happiness in a good relationship (however difficult it might be to find) for the momentary happiness of personal "liberation."

When a message like this is surrounded by a catchy song and a flashy music video with a famous celebrity, it is inevitably romanticized, and the message can be difficult to divorce from its medium. Be careful about getting sucked in.

Smoking and Dating

There is nothing I hate more than people who are self-righteous about not smoking. Far too many Americans have fallen prey to the excesses of anti-smoking campaigns. They actually get genuinely upset or frustrated when they see someone else making a conscious and educated decision to smoke. So let me preface this post by pointing out that I don't give a shit if you smoke. Do what you want.

I don't smoke. A few months ago I met a European girl at a nightclub in San Diego. I got her number and we went out a couple times. I didn't know at first that she was a smoker, but I wasn't very surprised when I found out - after all, she was European. The first time we made out, I could taste the cigarettes in her mouth, even though it had been hours since she'd smoked one. Because I was trying to have sex with her, I didn't bring it up.

However, the next time I did point it out to her. It would have been dishonest to continue to pretend that I didn't notice it, or that it wasn't a big deal. So after kissing for a little while I stopped and said, "You know, your mouth tastes like cigarettes. I don't like it." She was clearly embarrassed, but I didn't dwell on it. The point was made; there was no need to prolong her embarrasment. We did stop kissing though.

The next time we went out, she informed me that she had quit. I honestly believe that - despite the brief embarrasment - the two sentences I uttered did more to help her chances with men than any other two that had fallen on her ears in her life.

If you are dating a non-smoker, you can be sure that he is repulsed by the taste of cigarette smoke, and probably the smell as well. While some non-smokers might tolerate it, they do not like it. If you are dating and he makes no mention of the fact that it bothers him, you can be sure he is very attracted to you. If he is willing to risk mentioning it, he is probably not very attracted to you.

If you only smoke a couple cigarettes a week, it probably isn't a big deal either way from a smell and taste perspective - assuming you brush your teeth afterwards. But there are many men (in the United States anyway) that are more repulsed by the idea of smoking than they are by STDs or dreadlocks. As absurd as this might be, it is the way it is.

Countless men have told me that they would never date a smoker, and a large number of guys have told me they think it is disgusting. I've never been told by a non-smoker that that he didn't really care if a girl smokes.

Again, I am referring only to guys that don't smoke. Guys that do smoke obviously are a different matter. Most of them don't care if a girl smokes or not. Some might prefer it.

It is worth noting that smoking does facilitate social interaction in bars and nightclubs. You can always go to the smoking area and strike up a converstion almost immediately. But the number of men that want a girl who smokes is negligible.

So like I said at the outset, do what you want. But if you are trying to attract men, smoking isn't helping you.

Men Don't Care About Your Accomplishments

A woman can brag endlessly about how much money she makes, the deals shes has closed, the celebrities she's rubbed elbows with, or the awards she's won: none of it matters to men. This might seem harsh, and it is perhaps slightly hyperbolic; after all, it is fairly interesting to know that a girl is successful at her job, or that she works with someone famous - and an award is always impressive. But none of these things translate into sexual or romantic attraction.

I am sure there are some women who grew up understanding otherwise. Or perhaps, having been dealt mediocre looks and a poor figure, others decided that they would pour their energy into their academic degrees or career rather than their beauty, and then proceeded (not without help) to dupe themselves into believing that men would like them for it. Unfortunately, this isn't the case, as many 30-something single career-women are currently realizing - the hard way.

I used to date a girl (older than me) who would always tell me about how she had just balanced some multi-million dollar budget, or how she was in the throes of closing an important project. And it was undeniably impressive that she reported directly to the CFO of the biggest hospital in the city. By all common standards she was successful. But every time she brought up work I got bored.

Women who try to attract men by being successful are like men who try to attract women by being sweet or gentle. While being sweet won't necessarily ruin a man's chances with women (in some cases it will), neither will it draw her in. Likewise, although a woman's business or academic success won't usually turn a man off (in some cases it will), neither will it attract him. Both of these misconceptions are examples of the sexes projecting their own desires onto the other. It is women, not men, who find career success attractive, because it demonstrates drive, focus, strength, initiative - masculine qualities. Likewise it is men, not women, who find gentleness attractive, because it is a symptom of openness, receptiveness, nuturing ability - feminine qualities. I got bored when the girl I was dating talked about work in the same way that women get turned off when a man starts smothering them with flowers and gifts, or constantly apologizes unnesessarily.

This isn't to say that women shouldn't earn PhDs, or become CEOs, or generally strive to achieve traditionally masculine goals. Whether or not women "should" do something is a separate question entirely from what will happen if they do. There are plenty of reasons that a woman might want to win an award or get a promotion; I am merely pointing out that she would be foolish to do so in an attempt to attract men.

Be Careful About Wearing Large-Shouldered Tops

Tops, dresses or jackets that make your shoulders look larger do two things: they diminish your waist and broaden your shoulders. You should always be cautious about wearing them because broad shoulders are unattractive on a woman. It is true that a small waist is attractive; but in the same way that wearing short hair to compliment your face shape is offset by the side-effect of making you look masculine, attempting to make your waist look thin by wearing tops with wider shoulders does more harm than good when it comes to attracting men.

Large-shouldered tops were popular in the United States in the 1980s because by that time the effects of feminism had trickled into professional environments, and women wanted clothes (specifically, suits) that made them look more commanding, more assertive - more traditionally masculine. Towards that end, I am sure they were successful; but I am equally sure that they did and still do make women much less attractive. And now, partially out of nostalgia for the fashions of a former generation, and partially due to social inertia, contemporary style calls tops with "puffy" or accentuated shoulders acceptable, "fun" or even attractive. Don't be sucked into the lie. The truth is that they are always risky, usually ugly and almost never a good idea.

If you think any of the women on the left look attractive, read the post titled "Because Of" vs. "In Spite Of". (All three are in good shape and their clothes fit well in all places but the shoulders.)

Clothes that slightly accentuate the shoulders might be mildly attractive on a girl that does not have a small waist-to-hip ratio; but in general, large shoulders make you look like a man and should be avoided.

Remember: whether consciously or subconsciously, men notice.