Lunch as first date. Bad / good?

[mkivtt]

Hey. So I finally asked this girl I've been texting for a while out on a first date. She readily agreed.

Now that I'm thinking it over, I'm kind of punching myself. I suggested we meet for lunch. The more I think about it, the worse it sounds.

1. Time constraints. She'll probably need to be back at work soon, so we'll be "clock watching."
2. Public venue, no privacy. I won't be able to do much, even kino, except for a hug (I don't think she's the PDA type... cultural background).
3. Daytime, with a parking lot next to the restaurant, so walking her to her car "to make sure she's safe" is stupid and we'll probably be parting ways at the restaurant door... which brings me back to point 2.

I'd really like to invite her over to my place instead and make dinner together. Secluded, no time limit, more fun. The past girls I've dated were all girls from work, where we'd had plenty of time to hang out and do stuff, so there was never any question of "is it awkward to ask her over to my place now" like there is for a "new, unknown" person like this.

Should I ping her and suggest dinner instead? We've met in person 3x before, so it's not like she's going to a complete stranger's house. Opinions? Thoughts?

Note my goal here is not sex. It's a long term relationship (gasp).

 

[mountaingoat]

Just stick with it. Changing plans is annoying. When conversation is going good, propose another date. I dont know if that should be later that night or another day, but make sure its not the end when you do it. When she is all happy, propose something.

To be honest, I dont think much of this site is geared towards long term relationships. If you read the tone of the articles its about sex ASAP, which isnt always a bad thing, but I think it should be more clear than it is as to what is being advised. I know I already screwed up a few things by misusing the advice from here...but I know Ive also used stuff from here effectively.

 

[mkivtt]

Thanks. I thought it would be a bad idea to try to suggest changing the date. I'll just go with it and will have to engage her with real, meaningful conversation. On the plus side, she's in her early 30s and I get the feeling she'd like to settle... which means she might drag out the escalation stuff, and the lack of most kino or seclusion wouldn't be a big deal.

You're right about the PUA stuff. Most of the advice no this and other PUA sites is geared at getting laid ASAP and not toward LTR... but there are still many useful tips.

One thing though. You suggested asking for the 2nd date during the 1st? I know it's best to always ask on a high note to improve the odds of getting a "yes," but wouldn't it be needy to ask during the second? Of course I can hint at cooking dinner at my place "another time, if she's earned enough points later *wink*" (qualification, cocky) during the date but already making it clear I want to see her a 2nd time when the 1st date isn't even done, wouldn't that be too needy?

 

[Marty]

You're right about the PUA stuff. Most of the advice no this and other PUA sites is geared at getting laid ASAP and not toward LTR...

To be honest, I dont think much of this site is geared towards long term relationships. If you read the tone of the articles its about sex ASAP

Guys, I'm really sorry, but I think you have missed the point. MountainGoat I am especially inclined to think so in light of your other recent post on attraction expiration here: viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2717&p=12310#p12310.

Please read this if you haven't already. The logic does make intuitive sense if you open your mind to it:

https://www.girlschase.com/content/keepi ... hase-women

 

[mkivtt]

I'm not sure I agree. Maybe I'm just "not getting it" but the more I read the advice here, or on e.g. blackdragon's site, the more it seems to be summed up in 1 sentence: "ignore the bitches until you nail them, don't ever commit, just move on and nail another." Which is great if you are just looking for sex... but not for an LRT. Or am I really wrong? It seems to completely forget that there are many women out there who will never sleep with you on the 1st, 2nd or even 3rd date. Especially once they get past 30. The PUA stuff seems aimed at acting cocky toward 22 year olds, taking them on 1 cheap date, and magically screwing them immediately. Especially in my target market of south asian women, those things are out of the question.

In the article you linked, Chase briefly hints at the distinction mountaingoat and I make:

So, a guy who tries to take her home fast and rules himself out as a boyfriend and doesn't let her cry on his shoulder goes into the lover category. And the guy who wines her and dines her and sends her romantic messages and steals a kiss here and there goes into the boyfriend category. And the guy who talks to her and goes shopping with her and goes to do little activities with her but never makes a move goes into the friend category, or the "guy chasing after me that I might, someday, in a moment of desperation, be glad to still have around just in case of the off chance I might need him" category.

I'm not looking for the lover category and certainly not the friend... I maybe a late starter, but have learned enough to see what I did wrong in the past when I did always make myself available and fawned / placated girls. My approach for this particular girl is that of the bf category but with more cocky/funny/excitement.

Anyway, I'm not sure what you meant by posting that article in relation to my original question of whether I should change the date or not. So you think most of the articles are equally relevant to LTR as to to short term pickup? I agree on many of them, such as the deep diving, opening strategies, cocky/funny, making yourself available.... but the ones I don't agree with are the "escalate immediately and escalate hard, if you don't get sex by the 2nd date, next her" ones.

Thanks

 

[Franco]

To be honest, I dont think much of this site is geared towards long term relationships. If you read the tone of the articles its about sex ASAP, which isnt always a bad thing, but I think it should be more clear than it is as to what is being advised.

This sounds like a statement being made without any factual evidence to back it up. Usually the guys who make statements like this are the ones who have only gone on a handful of dates or have had a handful of women in their bed and have been unsuccessful converting those dates or lays into relationships.

As a matter of fact, this website has more useful information about relationships, both casual and long-term, than probably anything else on the other internet that I've come across. You just need to do some searching in the search bar on the main page to find what you're looking for.

I think this article will get you started in the right direction:

https://www.girlschase.com/content/long-term-relationship-mans-manual-getting-started

- Franco

 

[trashKENNUT]

To be honest, I dont think much of this site is geared towards long term relationships. If you read the tone of the articles its about sex ASAP, which isnt always a bad thing, but I think it should be more clear than it is as to what is being advised. I know I already screwed up a few things by misusing the advice from here...but I know Ive also used stuff from here effectively.

My thoughts,

Understand where you coming from but having intimacy with women is how most guys want to cement a base foundation to form a long term relationship. Given that most of the guys lose their potential to guys who are better, or they did not move fast or create comfort with women, it can be misunderstood as everyone is here, and they are totally in for sex.

Most of the guys out here are figuring it out, like you, even me too. So everyone objective is different but the foundation, is where you miss the point.

Zac

 

[Smurf]

Hey just thought it'd add on here:

I seen remember Chase saying that by first cementing a relationship with sex, it'll be easier to proceed into a long term relationship from there rather than having to try and do so without sex. By withholding it you can send Girls into auto rejection, and you'll never have your chance with her. That being said, I do think you should go through with this date, maybe cut it short, but make sure your intentions are clear and you have a sexy vibe, it'd you could come off as a platonic friend. If the date goes well it'd suggest a day two with something more intimate that can lead to you and her alone....

Just another point, sex definitely has emotions tied to it do it can strengthen a relationship if that's what you're looking for.

Hope that helped,
Jake.

 

[mountaingoat]

Please read this if you haven't already. The logic does make intuitive sense if you open your mind to it:

https://www.girlschase.com/content/keepi ... hase-women

See thats one thing I learned from this site and I strongly agree with now. Those who are woken up to the concept of Dont Chase. I decided to start applying that about two months ago, having had enough of searching, and knowing that there have been women interested in me. Then they can come to me and the onus is on them and then I can respond and know that I will probably be successful. Apathy, also, apparently is attractive, according to other articles.

However, that article also epitomizes the ridiculous notion that the only point of existence is sex, move on, sex, move on, when there is strong evidence that long relationships starting families are the principle reason we have advanced beyond hunter-gathering. This is all great advice for the hookup culture and can be somewhat incorporated into other ends, but there seems to be a strong putdown on what some men do want: a long stable relationship. I first thought this when reading articles, but now Ive seen PUA mentioned fairly prominently in a few threads as if this is all a game, which in this sense it is, and thats fine, but the site should be a bit more clear that this is not fully intended for guys seeking serious relationships.

Thats our issue. And it seems some think that women are simple once you get the theories down. The fact that for 30 something% of women no means yes, and the rest are split between persist more and no means no indicates that absolutely nothing is universal. Again, dont get me wrong, a lot of stuff here is great, makes sense, and Ive found useful.

 

[Franco]

MG,

However, that article also epitomizes the ridiculous notion that the only point of existence is sex, move on, sex, move on, when there is strong evidence that long relationships starting families are the principle reason we have advanced beyond hunter-gathering. This is all great advice for the hookup culture and can be somewhat incorporated into other ends, but there seems to be a strong putdown on what some men do want: a long stable relationship. I first thought this when reading articles, but now Ive seen PUA mentioned fairly prominently in a few threads as if this is all a game, which in this sense it is, and thats fine, but the site should be a bit more clear that this is not fully intended for guys seeking serious relationships.

I feel like you didn't read the article I linked above for mkivtt. Read this article first:

The Long Term Relationship: A Man's Manual On Getting Started

Also, I'd like to you copy and paste the part of the "Don't Chase Women" article where Chase emphasizes that "the only point of existence is sex, move on, sex, move on." That is nowhere to be found in that article. As a matter of fact, he does talk about how he's obtained both casual lovers and girlfriends by internalizing the advice that he gives there. One of his reference points in the article also includes a story of a girlfriend that he dated for over a year.

So please read the articles thoroughly and carefully before you begin making assertions that the article is emphasizing something that it is clearly not. If you are not a subscriber and you are out of free articles to read, then please wait until you can read the article I linked above before you continue to make these assertions.

Or you can subscribe and be enlightened. =)

- Franco

 

[Richard]

MG, perhaps a personal experience, and personal reason may help you to better understand what this site and these forums offer.

First off, I joined this website to find another great long-term relationship, my problem was, I didn't know how to approach women, and didn't know how to break my fear of talking to new people. This site, more specifically, Colt, Franco, Light, and Ross helped me to break my approach anxiety. Now I have the luxury of being able to talk to almost any girl, and thus have a higher chance of finding that girl for the relationship.

Your assertions are entirely wrong. Chase and the others may talk about how to end up having sex with women, they certainly do not glorify it, nor is that the motto that they push. Sex plays a crucial part in developing a long term relationship, and its best to start with sex sooner rather than later for that reason specifically.

What you learn on this site is yours to do with as you please. If you end up having sex every night for the rest of your life, so be it. Its your choice to make a girl a long term lover/girlfriend, that's the choice I have made. I've engaged in sex with girls who I only thought would make good girlfriends, girls who I only had some connection with. It is by no means a sex, move on, sex, move on business.

Please don't make accusations like that without reading more on the site, getting your facts down, and using this information. You'll never be able to back up your accusation unless you get into the world of women and find out how good this material really is. I suspect you haven't used many of these articles, and I recommend you do.

All in all, your decision to use what you learn is exactly that, your decision.
-Richard

 

[mountaingoat]

Franco, thanks for that article. Thats interesting in its own right and I dont necessarily disagree with. However, Im not convinced that quick to sex is the be all end all. Ive seen plenty of people in relationships that waited awhile and last years and years. There certainly is one benefit to moving fast, you dont get caught daydreaming. With the last one I mentioned in my thread, I noticed I was making future plans for us and started thinking "Oh crap." and I wasnt even really every interested in her! Even now, the quasi-rejection doesnt bite as much as the last ones. The general lacking is what hurts more.

I didnt mean that that article you linked to him said sex, move on,... but thats the general impression I get from a lot of posts here. "over a year" is nice (would be more than Ive gotten! ) but some of us are looking for longer than that. I suppose its better not to think like that, to just see every woman as a simple one night deal and after things get going, one can start thinking long term. But I have to be a bit critical of people who give the air that they have been with dozens and dozens of women, their idea of a long term relationship is a year, maybe two, when I know people who have had five years, who have gotten married, etc. Im not sure everything is this cut and dry, and there are exceptions and exceptions and exceptions.

Just recently I was with some male friends. One said he wanted sex by the third date, another said he wanted to take it slow, a third said the first was a man whore. I sat there wanting to agree with the latter two, but remembering that the first one might be right. But then, so many people, women even, complain about girls/women who have sex on the first date and say that is wrong. Maybe they say that, but then if they were in the position, they might do it.

Zphix, I used to have a fear of talking to people. That was the worst. I figured out how to break it. It just took practice and forcing myself to do it. I still have trouble, but I am not what I was. I have read a lot on this site, having been visiting it since April, when I was searching how to ask a girl out (and get a yes ). Again, I must say, a lot of the stuff is good, but a lot of stuff strikes me as not quite right. Maybe Im wrong about it. Im not sure sex on the first date is a good idea for many practical reasons. It can be very risky. It may provide more rewards and better success, but its a bit irresponsible to have sex with someone you barely know, just met a week ago, and just had dinner with...whether you are man or woman. You dont know where they have been in life. They dont know where you have been. One spur of the moment decision, while amazing, might change your life forever in a bad way. Additionally, people can be misinterpreted, emotions change, women rewrite their memories, and accusations fly. I have read other sites where women complain about men who were overly aggressive and move too fast and what they felt was inappropriate. And mind you I am no feminist, I argue with them more than I probably would argue with you. I think things are being simplified here a bit too much. Maybe Im inexperienced. Maybe Im wrong. Thats just my impression here. Sorry to ruffle feathers. I dont mean to. Im just very blunt and honest, which is probably what just screwed me over a few days ago.

 

[Richard]

MG, if you're looking for a relationship with a woman, take the advice Chase and everyone else here recommends and slow it down. I've asked this question myself, how to get girls to chase you as a boyfriend, or lover, you don't change any tactics, you just slow them down. You don't need to have sex on the first date, you can wait til the 3rd or 4th, take what everyone says and simply slow it down. That's what will get her to chase the relationship. Take everything you learn here and tweak it so it suits you, do what works best for you my friend.
-Richard

 

[Franco]

To follow up on my points in this thread, Chase has written the perfect article that supports my points, here:

Do You Really Need to Learn "Game" to Get Girls?

One of the points I'd like to emphasize is that "game" isn't just about picking up women. And just because you've finally ended up in a "relationship" with a girl you're crazy about doesn't mean your work is over. In fact, it is far from it. The men you see who have long-lasting relationships with women (even after marriage) are men in one of two categories:

• Men who have -- consciously or subconsciously -- learned "game" to give the women of their dreams what they want and need so that they can continue to be the men of their girls' dreams
• Men who settled for women who are sub-par and lower caliber than they are, and although these men may have been married to women like this for over a decade, they maintain a victim mentality and believe that they were just not dealt "a good hand" like all of the other men out there that worked hard to learn how to not only get their gorgeous, amazing women, but pass all of their tests to continue to hang on to them, too.

So when you're wondering whether or not the "game" presented here is just about hooking up or having short flings with women, consider the fact that game is much more than that at its highest level -- the level that Chase presents here. It's about learning to find the women you want, and in return, giving them what they really want so that they can continue to be as deeply in love with you as they were when they first fell for you.

I hope this article provides some deeper insight!

- Franco