So desirable women have buck buddies, like how desirable men have fuck buddies.

Men and women are very different, yet very similar.

I wonder if buck buddies should be able to charge women with theft if he has ex post factor regrets? Pot, kettle feminists.

Amy, don't tell me you haven't heard: There's no such thing as a "friend zone." I am informed by feminists that the concept of the "friend zone" is a patriarchal construct protecting men who feel like they're owed sex from their women friends.

I'm not especially convinced, either.

I had several male friends in college who would pay when we went out. I always assumed it was just a man thing-they want to pay. But, I did know they wanted sex in an ideal world. I never acted like it was a possibility, in my mind at least.

I think a lot of women and men just are not cognizant of the monetary aspect of friendship.

I see just as many men, happy to have a sugar mama as girls taking advantage of their attractiveness.
Of course, my perspective is as a fifty something woman who is perceived as wealthy because I live in a very nice house.

A lot of people have been receiving government benefits for so long, or under their parents roof, that they are "money grows on trees types". It may not even occur to them, that the men are trying to buy, what they have no intention of selling.

Maybe instead of friend zone, you should call it "the daddy zone".

@: "the daddy zone"
_______

That's just an attempt to put the men in a negative light.

Yes, most these men are hoping for a sexual relationship. But most are probably also interested in a committed one. If it was only in pursuit of sex they would move on sooner.

For the most part, I don't date. You can't lose if you don't play. :-)

As much as I would love to say that I do it out of self-preservation, it's actually because I'm rather picky. I figured out the self-preservation part later on, so that was just an added bonus.

The last date I actually went out on was...a learning experience. AKA a disaster. But it was a relatively inexpensive way to learn a boatload of stuff about this particular psycho wench. So, money well spent!

From Chapter 13 of GWTW (when Rhett offers Scarlett a "gift" of a Parisian hat costing $2,000 in Confederate money):

http://ebooks.adelaide.edu.au/m/mitchell/margaret/gone/chapter13.html

.....Scarlett’s mouth dropped open. The line was so closely, so carefully drawn where gifts from men were concerned.

“Candy and flowers, dear,” Ellen (her mother) had said time and again, “and perhaps a book of poetry or an album or a small bottle of Florida water are the only things a lady may accept from a gentleman. Never, never any expensive gift, even from your fiance. And never any gift of jewelry or wearing apparel, not even gloves or handkerchiefs. Should you accept such gifts, men would know you were no lady and would try to take liberties.”

“Oh, dear,” thought Scarlett, looking first at herself in the mirror and then at Rhett’s unreadable face. “I simply can’t tell him I won’t accept it. It’s too darling. I’d — I’d almost rather he took a liberty, if it was a very small one.” Then she was horrified at herself for having such a thought and she turned pink......

(BTW, one thing no critic ever seems to talk about is that of COURSE Scarlett was going to take forever to feel truly romantic about Rhett, since before the war, she ONLY ever flirted with boys/men who were her age, and he was....almost old enough to be her father! That is, 17 years older. Who WOULDN'T take ages to be interested?)

I wish everyone would help to start a tradition of dating without spending money. At least that way, you'd only waste time and not money before finding the right person - and feel less bitter as a result. Besides, what is life but multiple advertising agencies' efforts to separate you from your money anyway? When you lead the frugal lifestyle, you are less likely to corrupt your attitudes, since it's one's actions that mold one's attitudes more often than the other way around. Also, we very much need to focus more on where our "goods" come from and act accordingly when we DO have to buy something.

E.g., people who have been to Seaworld more than once may feel awful after seeing this trailer for "Blackfish" (I admit, I don't understand the title):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8OEjYquyjcg

- but it doesn't necessarily mean they'll change their habits or long-term attitudes, since they're already set. However, I, at least, have never been in the habit of paying to see (normally wild) animals perform, and now I'm glad I haven't.

"...which, for me, is the most interesting part of this."

Amy, please don't tell me this is news to you!? A woman would manipulate a clueless and/or desperate beta-man to whom she is not sexually attracted? Then drop him to shag an alpha rascal? I'm shocked, SHOCKED, to learn some women do such things!!

Consciously and unconsciously, women have been doing this forever. I'm skeptical about the 26% estimate, my observations say that number would be higher. But then, I've been clueless and desperate quite often in the past; I'm in Darth Aggie's camp these days, less clueless (more clue-ful?), still a bit desperate some days tho!

The idea of not spending money makes some sense, as does the idea that I have been thinking about. If I ever date again, I woud like to do projects together for the first three or so dates.

If we can work together, then we could see if we are attracted to each other and sexually compatible.

I think more time in marriage is spent working on individual or mutual goals and less time is spend gazing into each others eyes, discussing lofty ideals, and sharing passion, so why aren't dating situations set up to discover compatibility in other areas.

It's easy to find a good kisser, but not so easy to find someone with whom I can remodel a bathroom.

Jen: "If I ever date again, I would like to do projects together for the first three or so dates... It's easy to find a good kisser, but not so easy to find someone with whom I can remodel a bathroom."

Whose bathroom? Yours or his? If yours, then this sounds like an example of what this blog post is talking about.

Three projects. One for him, one for me, and one for charity.

I could provide free labor for his project and vice-versa.

I'd learn about his competency, his taste, his ability to co-operate, his reaction when confronted with a challenge, etc

I could imagine someone who might be very helpful as long as we are at my place, that could reflect a bossy commanding tone on his "turf." Or vice-versa. I think I could learn a lot.

For example, I thought the deer butt in my future husband's room was cute. I liked the way he displayed his baseball caps so that there was some decor, however, when he tried to displace my numbered lithographs with such things, I just about died.

This occurs throughout the animal kingdom, so regardless of politically correct protests to the contrary, one should not be surprised that it also occurs between us animals of the two-legged variety.

Evolutionary biology, through genetic testing, has shattered the romantic notion of the faithful birds that mate for life. Turns out the females cheat regularly, finding genetically superior mating partners, giving preferential care to his eggs, while snagging the cuckolded male to help raise the other male's offspring. This makes perfect sense within an evolutionary biology framework, as not only superior genes but also support to enable the vehicle for those genes to reach reproductive age most certainly increases the likelihood of those genes persisting.

Wonderful and perverse! Win, win. :)

"Amy, please don't tell me this is news to you!?"

Not to speak for others, but knowing Amy, I'm guessing the more interesting part is that this seems to be a piece of actual science on the subject.

I wish everyone would help to start a tradition of dating without spending money.

Lenona, I think that would be difficult to start considering how many women seem to judge men by the amount of money they spend on a date.

Of the women surveyed, 26 percent reported having a guy like this in their lives, which, amusingly, Diana and colleagues called a "Resource Friend."

I like "Resource Friend" but I like Trust's "buck buddy" even more; an excellent play on "fuck buddy." Since guys who are a "buck buddies" are hoping their gifts and treats will lead to sex, I wonder if women who are "fuck buddies" are hoping that the sex will eventually lead to a relationship. I suspect that many are, although some are probably fine with just fucking.

bkmale I can see 26%, mainly because a large portion of the 74% are in obvious relationships, and she wouldn't want to explain to the bf who the guy is who bought her dinner last night. Also the buck buddy finds out she has a real bf/fiance/husband, would realize he doesn't have a chance and vanish.

Find a woman who makes more money than you do, who is not overly attractive, who has been screwed over by an alpha jerk, give her good sex and marry her. You will be set for life. Married 28 years. I have been retired for five years. She is still working and shares most of her money with me. Life is good.

Lenona, I think that would be difficult to start considering how many women seem to judge men by the amount of money they spend on a date.
___________________________

I can only hope that most of the women I know aren't like that (keep in mind the media love to focus on people who behave badly, not boring, polite people) - and that most men would politely demand that women spend as much money in return, if not in so many words.

But it should be too hard for both the frugality tradition and the reciprocity tradition to start if TEEN boys take the lead and continue doing it as they grow older - after all, no one expects THEM to be rich! (I also hope that a girl wouldn't consider a boy weird if he's skilled and creative enough to, say, invite her to a very nice picnic lunch that he cooked.)

I'd like to add that when you're in the habit of looking for the free alternative to costly entertainment - or doing chores yourself, like mending clothes, instead of outsourcing them, you have all the more money for goods that you truly need - and ones that, say, don't involve child labor.

From "The Simpsons" - Marge Simpson once said to Lisa:

"We can't afford to shop at any store that has a philosophy."

Whoops - I meant:

"But it shouldn't be too hard..."

@lenona - the problem is the ones who violate the rule get all the dates. Sure it is different in that you as a teen are buying dinner at McD's instead of Upscale Grill, but you are still paying.

Back in junior high my friends and I noticed our older brothers were all broke from dating so we decided we weren't going to spend money like they did - not that we wouldn't be paying, just less. We fell one by one as the guys spending more got more dates and with more socially desirable women.

"Guys, Are You Some Woman's Resource Friend?"

Nope. Unless you're doin' me, it's your turn to pick up the check half the time, and if you're doin' me, you should be showering me with gifts for my astounding prowess.

the problem is the ones who violate the rule get all the dates. Sure it is different in that you as a teen are buying dinner at McD's instead of Upscale Grill, but you are still paying.

Back in junior high my friends and I noticed our older brothers were all broke from dating so we decided we weren't going to spend money like they did - not that we wouldn't be paying, just less. We fell one by one as the guys spending more got more dates and with more socially desirable women.

Posted by: The Former Banker at July 20, 2013 1:17 PM
______________________________

You didn't claim that that unfair trend was just as common with couples in their 20s and 30s. Was it?

Sooner or later, a man is going to get fed up with a woman who doesn't reciprocate to a man's satisfaction even after marriage. It's sort of like smoking - you don't date a smoker in the hope that she'll be so grateful for your company that she'll give up smoking without being asked. Or, as Ann Landers once said: "If something annoys you before marriage, it will drive you crazy after marriage."

Just because nice girls might be scarce in your teens doesn't mean it's worth spending your money on the selfish ones - how are those girls "socially desirable" anyway?

Many would argue that, even if you're not the conservative type who believes in courting rather than dating, it's still not a great idea to date and break up with a hundred people, because all it does it scar your soul, even if you aren't quite sure you want to marry someday. Ergo, dating a lot in your teens - as opposed to meeting with friends in groups - isn't necessarily good.

And, I would add, if you know how to shop smartly for ingredients - and cook from scratch - a healthful picnic can cost the same as a smaller meal from McDonald's. That way, you're saying: "I'm generous - but I'm ALSO smart and frugal."

I definitely had some "back burner" friends when I was single. They weren't in the "I would never sleep with them camp", but they were in "They're not my top choice but I'll keep them around in case they grow on me."

They didn't. But my thought process wasn't "Ooo, maybe they'll fix my computer" but "Maybe it could work, I dunno"

Sorry, "Ladies", it's gettin' tougher and tougher to be a whore these days, what with the price of sex dropping so dramatically. What's a poor girl to do?