3 minutes ago, connda said:

"However, an unsolicited request for contact information is harassment."

And therein lies the mine-field that men today must navigate. Btw, I would consider that to be a very "neo-liberal Western" view which is why attempting to date in the West nowadays is simply dangerous.

Courting used to be a thing in my day and age. Example:

In the 1950s and early 1960s (the "classic" era often nostalgically recalled), courtship was highly formalized with clear gender roles and etiquette rules:

• Men initiated everything — A man asked a woman out (women rarely made the first move, as it was seen as "forward" or improper). He called her home phone (often speaking to parents first), picked her up at her door, and met/chatted with her family.

• Chivalry and provider role — He opened doors, pulled out chairs, paid for the entire date (dinner, movies, soda fountains, dances), and walked her home. Splitting the bill or a woman paying was rare and could be seen as emasculating.

• Group activities and early stages — Many started with group hangouts (ice rinks, bowling, youth clubs, school dances, or soda shops) before one-on-one dates. First dates were often casual (movies, diners, drives) with limited physical contact—no kissing on the first date was common.

• "Going steady" — After several dates, couples often became exclusive ("going steady"), marked by tokens like a class ring, letterman jacket, or ID bracelet worn on a chain. This was like "play-marriage" with expectations of regular calls, dates, and monogamy, often aimed toward eventual marriage (people married young, often in their early 20s).

• Modesty and supervision — Physical intimacy was limited (petting might occur later, but premarital sex was taboo for most "respectable" couples). Parents or chaperones often supervised, especially for teens. Women were expected to be demure (e.g., not ordering food themselves at restaurants—the man ordered for her).

• Clear progression — Dating had stages toward commitment, with marriage as the goal. Breaking a date required a valid reason, and direct face-to-face communication ended things respectfully.

But in this "modern, liberal" era the playing field has changed. Examples:

Several behaviors common in courtship 50+ years ago (especially the 1950s–early 1960s era) would now frequently be viewed as harassing, inappropriate, sexist, controlling, or major red flags by many modern, liberal women (and their progressive male allies). This stems from shifts toward consent, equality, autonomy, and recognition of power dynamics—amplified by #MeToo, feminist critiques of "benevolent sexism," and emphasis on mutual respect.

Here's a breakdown of key ones from that era that often cross lines today:

• Men always initiating and pursuing (women rarely or never making the first move) — Seen as reinforcing outdated gender roles where women must be passive. A persistent pursuer ignoring signals of disinterest can now register as harassment or "not taking no for an answer," especially if it involves repeated unwanted advances.

• Showing up unannounced or unexpectedly (e.g., at her home, workplace, or without prior confirmation) — This would often be labeled stalking behavior or boundary violation today. Modern norms demand clear communication and consent for contact; surprise appearances feel intrusive or controlling.

• Ordering for her at restaurants (without asking her preference first) — Viewed as patronizing and assuming she can't speak for herself. Many see it as a subtle assertion of dominance ("benevolent sexism") rather than courtesy.

• Always paying for everything (and refusing to let her contribute) — Can signal financial control or an expectation of transactional dynamics. In progressive circles, insisting on paying every time is often critiqued as reinforcing inequality or creating obligation/power imbalance.

• Walking her to her door / offering his coat / heavy chivalry gestures — While some appreciate politeness, others interpret these as implying women are fragile/weak and need protection, which ties into benevolent sexism critiques. If done presumptively (without gauging comfort), it can feel condescending.

• Limited or no physical contact early on, but with strong expectations around "petting" or progression — The era's rigid "no sex before marriage" norm often came with pressure once exclusivity was established. Today, any non-consensual escalation (even mild) or shaming for boundaries is inappropriate/harassing.

• Parental/family supervision or heavy involvement (chaperones, meeting parents early, parental approval required) — In adult dating, this level of external oversight would feel infantilizing or controlling, violating personal autonomy.

• "Going steady" tokens (giving class ring, jacket, etc., as markers of possession/exclusivity) — Can resemble possessive or territorial behavior now. Modern equivalents (like demanding quick exclusivity or markers) often raise red flags for control.

• Honk from the car instead of coming to the door (or strict rules against it) — While minor, rigid etiquette enforcement around "respect" could feel performative or judgmental today.

Young men who were raised in conservative households now risk being labelled as "sexually aggressive," predatory, and a harasser for emulating the courting behaviors that were the norm 50 years ago. Example - "making a pass" was a legitimate way to make contact with a young woman and was considered a part of courtship. Nowadays it could get you thrown into jail.

One thing I have noticed in by family as well as the families of my conservative friends - there kids usually hook up with partners from other conservative families, and they tend to now be the exception where they actually want family and children.

Is it any wonder that the birth rate is declining in the collective West?

1 hour ago, Issan girl said:

Try actually listening to women.

I used to listen to women, but after the first 30 years of listening to women came to understand they never said anything worth hearing. Thank god for headphones!

3 hours ago, Issan girl said:

You just gave all the information about why any woman should never be involved with you. It's ok to force yourself on someone you must force intimate contact. No wonder many women choose to stay single these days.

Trust me. I'd have no interest in you as soon as you started spewing that sort of neo-liberal nonsense. So - I'd never "force myself on you" because I'd simply have no interest in you to start with. Not here in Thailand. Too many fish in the sea to worry about those wallowing in the shallows of modern, liberal misandry.

5 minutes ago, impulse said:

Is it any wonder that the birth rate is declining in the collective West?

Exactly! Or anywhere where Western values are being embraced.

17 minutes ago, impulse said:

Try that today and you'd better have a signed consent form. And even then, they may try to ruin your life if they change their mind after the deed.

I never told them my name or address, and I'm not famous.

In fact, these days, I hardly ever tell any social contacts my name, address or contact information. Too many nutters out there.

3 hours ago, Issan girl said:

No wonder many women choose to stay single these days.

they don't choose to be single, there are many women that men just don't find attractive, simple as that, those with blue hair for example

2 minutes ago, Bday Prang said:

they don't choose to be single, there are many women that men just don't find attractive, simple as that, those with blue hair for example

...or freaking nose rings. <gag> That's right up there in cosmetically enhanced lips <double-gag>

Just now, connda said:

...or freaking nose rings. <gag>

Don't forget duck lips.

3 minutes ago, impulse said:

Don't forget duck lips.

my favorite, especially when accessorised with multiple piercings , blue or green hair. and as a finishing touch a pair of doc-martins

2 hours ago, NanLaew said:

"Are known to be.. " Known to who? A citation would be handy.

Howard Stern used to discuss this on his morning radio show. He'd be admiring a young female tennis pro, make note of the horrific allegations and talk in detail of the types of things that might be done to her, and then make a plea to the older players: "please, ladies, go easy on her".

Unfortunately he scrubbed most of his shows from the internet and I can not provide a source.

3 hours ago, Issan girl said:

Try actually listening to women.

Personally I do listen to women, most of the time, but like most men I make exceptions for those who sound anything like you.

And of course all those hideous men in frocks claiming to be women , none of whom have anything to say that interests me or any other man, although the chance of any of those freaks being sexually harassed is less than zero

On 1/28/2026 at 10:46 AM, GammaGlobulin said:

When I was engaged in competitive rowing,

I was never sexually harassed,

Even though we wore VERY short, shorts,

With leather bottoms.

Interesting. Doesn't leather make one sweat a lot, and thus might not be a good choice in competitive sports ??

Anyway, on a relevant note, the factor of sexiness of clothing isn't necessarily the main factor in many cases of harassment. If a guy is on an harassing mission, he would probably harass even a long dress wearing woman.

8 hours ago, Bday Prang said:

Personally I do listen to women, most of the time, but like most men I make exceptions for those who sound anything like you.

And of course all those hideous men in frocks claiming to be women , none of whom have anything to say that interests me or any other man, although the chance of any of those freaks being sexually harassed is less than zero

'Men in frocks claiming to be women' ?

Hmmm. Dude, I am sure you know that there are many gorgeous trans women, especially in Thailand :) Gees, this is accepted worldwide. Overall I spent about 15 years in Thailand, and I know very well that a large number of men of various nationalities go for them. But of course, sadly, many of them won't admit this (to their friends, colleagues etc) due to certain taboos etc.

So, am I right or am I right ? :)

16 minutes ago, JemJem said:

Doesn't leather make one sweat a lot, and thus might not be a good choice in competitive sports ??

The main reason for the leather on the bottom of the shorts of rowers is to keep them from slipping off their seats, as they slide back and forth.

Now you know.

Thank you for asking.

Actually, the seats of the shell are made of polished wood, and rather slippery.

To slide off one's seat, mid-stroke, would be a disaster.

Not sure what type of leather is used.

Maybe they do not use leather, these days.

But, I loved wearing leather, back in the day.