Men win you over by giving to you. We ask you out. We call you. We pay for dates. We initiate sex. We ask for commitment. We propose marriage. We give. You receive. Reverse this order by asking him out, initiating sex, asking for commitment, or proposing marriage, and a masculine guy will feel, well, emasculated. Thus, if you want a masculine guy, your greatest move is to embrace your passive feminine side.So I checked in with Katz lately to see what mischief he's been getting up to and I had to LOL - apparently he has done a complete turn-around: it's no longer men who want passive women, as he has been claiming - it's women who are forcing men to be active so that they can be passive:
In my opinion, men can complain all they want about how unfair it is that they’re supposed to call, plan and pay for the first few dates, but you’ll find few women who prefer passive men...Whatever happened to women "choosing" to be passive in order to prevent a masculine guy from feeling emasculated? Apparently that's something that men don't really want. At least that's what Katz is saying now.
What more do you need to know to realize these dating advisors have no idea what they are talking about?
The concept of equality never occurs to Katz or any of his co-star hucksters - men and women trading off responsibilities and paying for things as equally as possible. There are actually men and women out there who believe in trying to achieve equality. We may not always be perfectly successful - we've all been raised in the cesspool of patriarchy and are influenced by it to some degree. But we have an ideal we are trying to achieve. We apparently don't exist as far as dating hucksters are concerned.
If somebody doesn't do a study on the insanely regressive, anti-feminist dating advice industry soon I will have to do it myself. I will have to talk to my friend Maxine Margolis, author of True to Her Nature: Changing Advice to American Women about how to begin.
More of my thoughts on Evan Marc Katz.