May 26, 2005

Your Dating Skills Are AVERAGE!

Oh heavens, but I love taking dating quizzes designed for the opposite sex:

You scored a 67 out of a possible 100 points. You’re pretty good with the ladies, but you can be intimidated by a woman who is exceptionally attractive. There are some women out there that you consider to be “out of your league”.

Sometimes when you see a woman you’d like to approach you become immobilized with fear, and by the time you figure out what to say, she's gone…

There have probably been several times in your life when a woman lost interest in you, and you just couldn’t figure out why. Maybe she gave you her phone number and then didn’t return your calls, or maybe you went out on a few dates with her and things seemed to be going good, when all of a sudden she became mysteriously unavailable.

These paragraphs make it sound like I did worse than I did (it's a "how to pick up chicks" quiz, for those of you in the slow lane who haven't figured that out). But 67%?

Do the math, guys: That means if you can only manage to meet 5 new women a week, your odds are you score with 3.33 of them.

Hey, it beats zero.

I got tipped to this quiz by the boyfriend, who thought the author recommended strategies that were "too aggressive."

He does, in a sense. For example, let's go back to that first paragraph:

. . . but you can be intimidated by a woman who is exceptionally attractive. There are some women out there that you consider to be “out of your league”.
There is nothing wrong with being intimidated. In fact, if you really think she's out of your league, work that. Now, don't overdo. Don't be a pussy. Don't apologize for asking her what time it is or anything stupid like that. Don't apologize for existing. Overly wimpy is always bad.

But deferential, when you're trying to trade up, is good. You should be deferential. A really good-looking woman knows who's in her class and who isn't. You're not gonna bluff her, unless you're totally over the top. And if you do happen to be totally over the top, she's going to think you're gay, because most guys who do over-the-top with any finesse are gay. In my humble, personal experience, that is.

My point is, you wouldn't go up to Nicole Kidman and lay it on thick, would you? You wouldn't push your luck. In fact, if you were really clever (and pardon the sexism in this aside, but few men are)--if you were really clever, you'd be sort of nonplussed by her, as best you could fake that. THAT would get Nicole Kidman's attention, because when's the last time a man made Nicole feel like she lacks it? Long long time ago, if ever--that's when.

Women want the surprise package. Women want something out of the ordinary. Women want the moon to come up where the sun should be--just for a change. Just for something different. Women bore easily. You know how y'all make those jokes about women changing their minds and how six kinds of dumb that is?--It's not that we don't know our damn minds, it's that we're bored with our damn minds. We like the change-up.

I hear a lot of men bitching, "Damn, that's a lot to ask of a fellow." Pardon, amigo, but not really. It just gives preference to the fellows with a little creativity, is all.

And is that such an unfair advantage? What if all the advantages went to the men with beefcake?--You know what we'd have? A bunch of stupid cavepeople who hadn't figured out the wheel yet, that's what. But we'd all have the means to smash elephant skulls into magickal Viagra-esque potency power, and we'd probably have invented futbol norteamericano centuries ago. Oh, hoo-ray. We could be on Superbowl MCCCLXIV by now.

I don't think this quiz has it quite right, because it seems to think that dating success equals going balls-out for a woman. In my experience, the guys who take this advice seriously end up talked about (and emailed about, and IM'd about, and, and, and . . . ) to no end. Oh, they get the discussion, but they don't get laid. They become this running joke, with the final punchline being that you ran into him in Starbucks and ohmigawd, girl, not only was he totally bald but he was with this chick that I swear I saw last week on Jerry Springer. You know, the one with them three potential baby daddies?

But hell, I'm a woman myself, so don't trust me. Try it your own damn way.

(Via the boyfriend, who won't stop reading World O'Crap.)

Posted by Ilyka at May 26, 2005 09:32 AM in trivia

I scored a 66. Average according to the test. Higher than I would have expected but I don't think much of the test. I think I was a below average dater.

I love this answer, "Casually say "I realize that most men probably judge you on your looks and think you're unapproachable... but I thought I'd give you the benefit of the doubt and see if you're friendly". "

My perspective (Or rationalization) - I fall back on my Bull Durham reference. Crash thought that having the minor league home run record was a "dubious honor" because it meant that he had been in the minors too long and never made it to the majors. Good dating skills are a bonus but honing your dating skills indefinitely is similar to being in the minors too long.

Posted by: Rob at May 26, 2005 11:48 AM

It's a good thing I'm married already. My pick-up artist skills have degraded to a 59. Yeesh.

Posted by: Jim at May 26, 2005 12:57 PM

As we said back in West Virginia, "lick the starfish and she'll never leave ya."

It's getting to that point that presents a challenge.

Posted by: Hubris at May 26, 2005 02:51 PM

51. Hmm.

Posted by: Pixy Misa at May 27, 2005 09:14 AM

What's "dating"?

Posted by: Andrea Harris at May 29, 2005 05:00 PM