Brilliant!

If I'm not seeing anyone and need a one night stand once in a while, I might humor the guy acting like a caveman for my own purposes. In terms of relationship material, however, I require someone respectful knowing that I too shall reciprocate with the same respect. My current boyfriend won me with his kindness, entertaining stories, and home cooking (not to mention he's completely adorable).

Immature assholes will attract other immature assholes. I actually don't mind if a few dudes suddenly feel they need to act this way, since it separates the wheat from the chaff and allows you to immediately ascertain if he's worth the time.

My friend just had an experience with a dude in his mid-30s who was very sexually attractive when he was kind, but after about a month he inexplicably started to insult and degrade her in strange ways. After that, the thought of interfacing with his "man parts" was pretty revolting to her.

You said: "She, being a typical shallow girl, goes for the one who charms her the most, rather than for the one she gets to know over time for his integrity, the way he treats others, his reputation. you know, all that USELESS stuff."

Just curious...exactly how is a woman supposed to discern this so-called integrity? "Charming" men, for instance, are generally charming with everyone, and treat waitstaff, grandparents, and everyone else well. They also often have great reputations. I am curious how you think a woman is supposed to tell genuine kind human qualities from what I assume you believe is just a show?

Also, the type of men that Kay Hymowitz originally wrote about (the men-children) do not read City Journal. They read Maxim, as she pointed out. And they often do quite well with women, as she also originally pointed out. So all the angry letters she received were not in fact from the men-children, they were from former (or current) nerdy men who have been repeatedly rejected by women and are therefore (understandably) hurt and angry. Being rejected by the opposite sex hurts for both genders. But her thesis is incorrect. The alleged "chaos" of modern dating has benefited the men-children quite nicely. It's actually the more grown-up men who have gotten screwed, and they're the ones who were writing to her.

Baloney. People have been giving the same "just be yourself" advice since time immemorial. It has never worked, because men and women tend to want certain traits in a mate, and the opposite sex attempts to fit that desire. If being yourself worked, the multi-billion dollar cosmetic industry would disolve. Cosmetic surgery wouldn't be a medical practice. Invest in yourself, take care of yourself, but don't think "being yourself" is getting you anywhere. And for the guys, the older you get, the easier it gets as long as you don't fall into loserdom.

This stuff is not as hard as everyone seems to want to make it.

I understand why everyone wants to fall back on cultural standards and societal cues to know how to act; I just don't think it's necessary. Like a growing number of 20-something males, I've learned that if you approach people with respect, these things are easy enough to sort out between consenting adults.

I think what I'm trying to say is: there never was an obligation for feminism to provide a dating guidebook. Nor should there be an expectation. Are we trying to say, "Sure, we [powers that be] will accept feminism, equal rights and all that includes, but only on the condition that you're clear about what you want so that we can [with our shriveled cave-man, really-just-tools-for-seed-sowing minds] can understand the new rules." I feel like this sort of article reenforces that notion.

Maybe other people my age feel the burden and baggage of tradition and traditional roles more than I do. But I can tell you that when you approach people with honest respect and conduct yourself continually with such respect you:

a) Are able to date more or less as often as you want with overwhelmingly—though luckily the future of indie-rock, not exclusively—positive results.

b) Find that each relationship you're in is a little bit different from the last in meaningful, often educational ways.

and c) Learn that traditional gender roles are good for a whole lot less than you thought they were.

And the best part is, it does not not matter whether you become "a husband, a co-parent, a sperm donor, a relationship, a threesome, or a temporary place to live," it's no body's business but your own.

A guy can be bright, buff, beautifully handsome, funny and extremely nice and sensitive, but, often this is still not good enough...if she's in some kind of independent phase in her life, and you are nice to her, she may give you the brush off, because she's looking for a brief hookup with an asshole. This is why some guys suspend the Mister Nice-guy persona, and just play the numbers game, meet as many women as they can, and a certain per centage will fall their way. It may be cold and ruthless but it works, and there's less hurt involved.

A mature person realizes this works both ways, and that any relationship is a gamble.

Both men and women can desire brief hookups, and I do believe they have their place. It's rough on anyone if you fall for someone who doesn't have the same set of feelings to return, but this is no reason to indefinitely suspend your sincerity for every possibility. If you think you want to pursue a relationship with a person, just take it slow and cautiously in the beginning.

By the same token, I have several good-looking, amazing friends (male and female) who are inexplicably still single. Just because they aren't in a serious relationship doesn't mean they are "not good enough" by any means. Ideally I'd match them with each other, but I have no control beyond making introductions, which is done in the sneakiest way possible (no one likes the pressure associated with fixups).