I hate to sound like an insensitive jerk, but I’m starting to think my girl friend is a bad lay. We’ve been sexually active for about a month now, and so far she has not climaxed. She also doesn’t seem to know what to do when she gets on top. I know she’s not a virgin, and to be honest I’d heard that was a demon in the sack. Maybe she’s just been with inexperienced guys before, but I didn’t think so. I’d hate to dump her just for being bad at sex, but that’s how much it’s frustrating me. What do you think is wrong? What should I do?
Good Lord. There are really endless possibilities when it comes to what could be behind your girlfriend’s sexual conduct.
I’ll start with the most cut and dry: it might have something to do with the physical combination of your member and her plumbing. If it seems like she doesn’t know what to do when she gets on top, it could be because she’s being surprised and confused by a painful and/or uncomfortable and/or plainly strange sensation that she hasn't experienced with any of her other sexual partners. If her vagina is more on the shallow side and you have a longish penis (in comparison to her short passage), it might cause her some discomfort in the cervical area to be experiencing entry at such an angle. If her vagina tips at an angle or veers off to the side (these things weren’t designed by Frank Lloyd Wright, people), and you have a bit of a curve to you yourself in an opposing direction, that may also feel strangely to her. She may not realize that with you she needs to try a different type of motion than she’s used to using while on top, and maybe the whole situation will be remedied when she is more accustomed to your physique.
Now, possibly the most obvious possibility: Maybe she doesn’t feel all that comfortable with you. Not all women need to have your respect and devotion in order to use your body to make themselves feel good, just like it is with some men. But this one may need some semblance of security in order to become uninhibited enough to climax, let alone climb on top of you and give you a full view of her body at the mercy of motion and gravity. She may not be sure enough of her feelings for you and your feelings for her. Maybe she really likes you and is still nervous. Maybe you just like different things and she has to get more used to your habits and preferences. This potential situation may also be fixed with time and increased familiarity.
And now, here’s my customary stab at being psychic:
People change their sexual behaviour as their lives go on, sometimes whether they want to or not. What works for you at 15 will not necessarily work for you at 20, what works for you at 20 may not work for you at 25. Et cetera and so on. I don’t know what you heard from your, uh, friends, but maybe your girlfriend has started a ‘lay there and moan’ phase since the time she knew… them.
There’s no one reason why this happens. In this case, whether you meant to or not, you’ve inferred here that she has been promiscuous in the past, by kind of saying that she came with great recommendations. I know that when some women go through periods of feeling antagonized, they can become very passive about sex, craving contact and validation from another human being, but retreating into themselves for the duration of the actual act, because other people have been hurting them and they are afraid to feel anything remotely like humiliation or rejection. Maybe she gets that guys are talking about her. Maybe she perceived on some level that you’re expecting something of her based on some kind of reputation she’s built, or just had imposed upon her, and maybe she is fighting that by demanding that you do all the work. Maybe you need to examine the way you think of her, and consider the likelihood that you are unwittingly giving her the message that you are only valuing her for what you’ve heard she’s capable of.
In summary, the only thing that I am absolutely sure would help in all scenarios, including the three I just presented, is, you guessed it, yes, yes, TALKING.
How do you know she’s not climaxing? If you’ve talked about this at all, you’re on the right track, but maybe she’s not being as vocal about her orgasms as you’re expecting she would be, and that can be a problem, too.
And what are you like during sex? Are you being encouraging? Do you tell her she’s beautiful and make it audible that you’re having a good time? Or do you just lay there, soundless and expectant? It works both ways: sullen is rarely sexy to anybody.
And, another thing: if you feel like you know better what she should be doing on top, have you thought to just tell her?
I ALMOST FORGOT: the HOW. HOW do you talk to her. Well, nicely, for starters. This type of concern is often brought up in the heat of frustration. You really risk putting it off until you can't stand the situation any more, creating the perfect conditions for a volcanic eruption of stupid.
Don't try a point blank question like, 'what is wrong with you?' Bring it up casually, perhaps right after sex when you're laying around together, and ask her questions like, 'does it make you uncomfortable to be on top?' Or make an observation like, 'sometimes when we're having sex, you don't look like you're enjoying yourself,' and follow it up with, 'are you enjoying yourself?' And try thinking of it like something you may have control over, as opposed to some poor service you're getting from some kind of wait staff, and ask her, 'is there anything I can do differently?'
I’m glad you wrote, and I'm glad to respond, but you really need to talk to her, for the love of God.
Friday, February 27, 2009
Thursday, February 26, 2009
All I wanted was a sweet distraction for an hour or two/ Had no intention to do the things we've done...
So, I’m kind of obsessed with Nadya Suleman (a.k.a. Natalie Denise Suleman, a.k.a. Nadya Soloman, a.k.a. Octomom, a.k.a. Octopussy, a.k.a. Crazy Eyes, depending on what news site or internet gossip rag you subscribe to). Me and the rest of the world? I don’t know, actually. I’m not sure just how much media coverage is proportional to actual public interest in certain issues. I think I started reading about her because there was suddenly a surplus of print items on her available on the Internet.
Anyway, those of you who have not been paying attention: my boyfriend won’t listen to me talk about this issue any more, so please be patient with my interpretation, because I don’t watch a lot of T.V.
Ahem! Nadya Suleman is a 33-year-old unemployed student and mother of 14. While her latest pregnancy yielded eight children, she states that she has not had sex in eight years. All of her children, aged two months to seven-years-old, were conceived via in-vitro fertilization -- a medical procedure that I don't wish to appear to express any problem with or opposition to. People who want to have kids and can afford them and can afford to undergo in-vitro can do it without any protest or opposition from me.
But in this case, it means that she has somehow afforded seven $10,000 to $15,000 cycles of treatment (along with cosmetic surgery apparently performed on her nose, lips and chin, which has created in her a striking resemblance to Angelina Jolie -- it has been reported that Suleman attempted to contact Jolie several times in 2008, but she has denied an obsession with the star). Her parents say the money came from an accident claim settlement with her former workplace, and a few sources have reported that the settlement, awarded sometime after 2000, totaled around $120,000.
The angle a lot of news agencies are taking with this story is the financial aspect of the situation, because we are not allowed to forget for one minute that the stock market is a piece of shit. Our fears about our own financial well-being and that of our families is kind of being played upon, here. I admit it was the first thing I thought of, before I knew Suleman’s particular lifestyle situation, again, because the credit crunch is all over the damn news.
Another angle that’s been ran with is that of Suleman’s supposed reality television aspirations. One site was reporting early on that she was hoping for her own show and an insinuated job as a ‘parenting expert.’
TLC, the network no longer marketed as The Learning Channel and now home to such gross and disturbing parenting/reality shows as John and Kate Plus Eight (about a neurotic and mostly unemployed couple and their eight children conceived with the help of science), made it a point to state publicly that while they were initially interested in Suleman’s situation for a show, they definitely aren’t anymore.
Now Suleman’s telephone conversations with T.V. psychiatrist and Oprah protégé Dr. Phil McGraw are being reported on. In case you don’t want to click on the link, Suleman has voiced fears that she will not be granted custody of her eight infants when the time comes for them to leave hospital care, unless her financial and habitual situation becomes stable enough, though these possible imposed standards have not been made public. I guess she was on his late afternoon talk show today but again: I don’t watch T.V., and I was probably having a life when it aired.
I’m not obsessed because I love thinking about the impending depression, or because I like reality T.V. that much or at all. I actually want to know how this all ends up, and that everybody is going to be O.K.
Who knows for sure why this woman is compelled to have children. I’ve read that she has been obsessed with being a Mom since her teens and that she is motivated by the belief that her childhood as an only child was incomplete. I’ve read that she was married at 21 and divorced at 25, and suffered several miscarriages after this separation while trying to get pregnant. It’s hard, when you’ve believed that you’ve found someone you love, to be disillusioned with divorce. You think to yourself, wow, if it didn’t work with this person, how can it ever work with anybody else? Maybe she believed that she could only truly relate to people who come directly from her own womb, and that only the love of a child is enough love to cure her emptiness. Maybe her failed marriage left her feeling that alone. Or maybe her marriage failed because she only really wanted to be a Mom and her husband required her to be a wife.
Regardless, Cher and Perez Hilton and the handful of people who have sent the Sulemans death threats really seem to want us to punish her for what has happened. True, if the world steps in to help a woman who has done something really financially and emotionally irresponsible – I do think that putting so many tiny lives in motion without the immediate means to care for and nurture them was really freaking irresponsible and, dare I say it? Yes? Selfish as Hell – who can tell the next woman who wants to try it that she shouldn’t?
The fact remains, though, that these children didn’t ask to be born, and I would really hate to see them punished for the sake of proving a point to their weird Mom. I hope they get some help. Like, some real help, and not just an opportunity to sell more of themselves to people who would dole it out to people who would like to read about it.
What do you think?
Anyway, those of you who have not been paying attention: my boyfriend won’t listen to me talk about this issue any more, so please be patient with my interpretation, because I don’t watch a lot of T.V.
Ahem! Nadya Suleman is a 33-year-old unemployed student and mother of 14. While her latest pregnancy yielded eight children, she states that she has not had sex in eight years. All of her children, aged two months to seven-years-old, were conceived via in-vitro fertilization -- a medical procedure that I don't wish to appear to express any problem with or opposition to. People who want to have kids and can afford them and can afford to undergo in-vitro can do it without any protest or opposition from me.
But in this case, it means that she has somehow afforded seven $10,000 to $15,000 cycles of treatment (along with cosmetic surgery apparently performed on her nose, lips and chin, which has created in her a striking resemblance to Angelina Jolie -- it has been reported that Suleman attempted to contact Jolie several times in 2008, but she has denied an obsession with the star). Her parents say the money came from an accident claim settlement with her former workplace, and a few sources have reported that the settlement, awarded sometime after 2000, totaled around $120,000.
The angle a lot of news agencies are taking with this story is the financial aspect of the situation, because we are not allowed to forget for one minute that the stock market is a piece of shit. Our fears about our own financial well-being and that of our families is kind of being played upon, here. I admit it was the first thing I thought of, before I knew Suleman’s particular lifestyle situation, again, because the credit crunch is all over the damn news.
Another angle that’s been ran with is that of Suleman’s supposed reality television aspirations. One site was reporting early on that she was hoping for her own show and an insinuated job as a ‘parenting expert.’
TLC, the network no longer marketed as The Learning Channel and now home to such gross and disturbing parenting/reality shows as John and Kate Plus Eight (about a neurotic and mostly unemployed couple and their eight children conceived with the help of science), made it a point to state publicly that while they were initially interested in Suleman’s situation for a show, they definitely aren’t anymore.
Now Suleman’s telephone conversations with T.V. psychiatrist and Oprah protégé Dr. Phil McGraw are being reported on. In case you don’t want to click on the link, Suleman has voiced fears that she will not be granted custody of her eight infants when the time comes for them to leave hospital care, unless her financial and habitual situation becomes stable enough, though these possible imposed standards have not been made public. I guess she was on his late afternoon talk show today but again: I don’t watch T.V., and I was probably having a life when it aired.
I’m not obsessed because I love thinking about the impending depression, or because I like reality T.V. that much or at all. I actually want to know how this all ends up, and that everybody is going to be O.K.
Who knows for sure why this woman is compelled to have children. I’ve read that she has been obsessed with being a Mom since her teens and that she is motivated by the belief that her childhood as an only child was incomplete. I’ve read that she was married at 21 and divorced at 25, and suffered several miscarriages after this separation while trying to get pregnant. It’s hard, when you’ve believed that you’ve found someone you love, to be disillusioned with divorce. You think to yourself, wow, if it didn’t work with this person, how can it ever work with anybody else? Maybe she believed that she could only truly relate to people who come directly from her own womb, and that only the love of a child is enough love to cure her emptiness. Maybe her failed marriage left her feeling that alone. Or maybe her marriage failed because she only really wanted to be a Mom and her husband required her to be a wife.
Regardless, Cher and Perez Hilton and the handful of people who have sent the Sulemans death threats really seem to want us to punish her for what has happened. True, if the world steps in to help a woman who has done something really financially and emotionally irresponsible – I do think that putting so many tiny lives in motion without the immediate means to care for and nurture them was really freaking irresponsible and, dare I say it? Yes? Selfish as Hell – who can tell the next woman who wants to try it that she shouldn’t?
The fact remains, though, that these children didn’t ask to be born, and I would really hate to see them punished for the sake of proving a point to their weird Mom. I hope they get some help. Like, some real help, and not just an opportunity to sell more of themselves to people who would dole it out to people who would like to read about it.
What do you think?
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Usurper as sister: a reader’s response
One lady saw a red flag in Tuesday’s letter (about a girl who doesn’t like seeing her idiot ex spreading his idiot self to other potential idiots and then feeling like she’s watching them being idiots together), that she just could not ignore.
1) Love your use of Turd Ferguson
2) Love the t-t-t-tambourine.
3) I am real quick to feel bad for the new girlfriend in this situation! Not only is she potentially dating a well, Turd Ferguson, who would go after someone while still involved with someone else (does not bode well for the future, frankly), but also, the writer says that she doesn't know how much New Girlfriend knows about what went on. It is very likely that she didn't know about Old Girlfriend's very current status when Turd came on her scene. I'd like to give her the benefit of the doubt because I have been in that situation myself, and have found out later - it is super awkward (and makes you feel very guilty). I've also been the new GF getting the evil eye from the old GF during social occassions, and damnit if it doesn't freak a person out. She says she was never actually introduced to the girl, and actually, there is a reasonable possibility that the new girl doesn't know who she is, and was only looking her over because our dear question writer was throwing off hostile vibes. I guess it just weirds me out that she said she's so angry at the two of them, when as far as the letter indicates, this was really the guy's doing (harsh way to break up with her btw!). She doesn't have to be best friends with the new lady, but hating her just screams of girl-on-girl crime to me.
(And so, Wednesday is devoted to the following hypothetical situation: a girl is completely unaware of the circumstances of her boyfriend’s last breakup, in which he actually didn’t bother to make things final with the other girl until well after things were underway with the new girl, and the old girl is pissed.)
Yeah! Like I said, don’t be mad at the two of them. It’s easy to project the personality and attitude of the ex onto someone who will touch him after he’s done what he’s done, but the fact remains that she may not be privy to all of his shit. It happens, lots of us have been there, and if that is what has happened here, it sucks that he has put the new girl in that position… the one where a part in some drama she may not even understand is forced on her.
By the time a victim of this kind of shit can know what’s going on, everybody in town may have decided she’s a slag. All of a sudden, this woman is on par with our original Tuesday letter writer, with a similar compulsion to clear her name, and with only a faint notion of what she’s actually done, let alone what to do about it.
So, was my advice to the ex-girlfriend, to leave it alone and let her ex-boyfriend’s new romance take its course, wrong? Should she actually try to warn this girl about this guy’s character? One reader seemed to think so:
girlfriend needs to let the new girl know what she’s getting into. i wish my ex’s ex would have done the same for me, because then maybe i would have dumped him before he cheated on me. i just know that i would have appreciated it.
I don’t know. Maybe now you say you would have appreciated it, but there’s a lot to be said for perspective, a la, you didn’t feel then what you feel now, because you didn’t know then what you know now. I think it’s actually a rare woman who will trust another woman, especially an ex-girlfriend (and potential rival, in their eyes), criticizing somebody she really likes, to have their best interests at heart. But maybe you didn't feel all that strongly about the guy at first, and those feelings grew later on before you could find out the truth. In general, I’d say it’s best to stay out of the lives of exes, not antagonize new girlfriends, and let them learn their own lessons -- especially considering it's more useful for someone to hear information of this nature from someone they feel they can trust, i.e., not their romantic interest's ex -- but I suppose I will make this allowance: some girls do like to think they would like a heads-up.
I really think that anybody who finds out they’ve been tricked into dating somebody who will move on before he’s ended a relationship can either embark on a vigorous, conspicuous, inappropriate innocence campaign, and risk looking guilty and graceless… and really really weird… or! Try to forget about the whole thing and trust that people will get to know her well enough to know she’s not mean, or maybe that people will notice a pattern of deception in the ex’s behaviour that could explain the whole thing. Kind of like what I recommended for ex-girlfriend.
So yeah! I stand by my previous assessment: I still think the ex-girlfriend needs to stop the vicious cycle of giving a damn and resist the fear of judgment of others and live a nice life. Now! For the sake of all womankind, and that is how she can be fair to the new girl.
1) Love your use of Turd Ferguson
2) Love the t-t-t-tambourine.
3) I am real quick to feel bad for the new girlfriend in this situation! Not only is she potentially dating a well, Turd Ferguson, who would go after someone while still involved with someone else (does not bode well for the future, frankly), but also, the writer says that she doesn't know how much New Girlfriend knows about what went on. It is very likely that she didn't know about Old Girlfriend's very current status when Turd came on her scene. I'd like to give her the benefit of the doubt because I have been in that situation myself, and have found out later - it is super awkward (and makes you feel very guilty). I've also been the new GF getting the evil eye from the old GF during social occassions, and damnit if it doesn't freak a person out. She says she was never actually introduced to the girl, and actually, there is a reasonable possibility that the new girl doesn't know who she is, and was only looking her over because our dear question writer was throwing off hostile vibes. I guess it just weirds me out that she said she's so angry at the two of them, when as far as the letter indicates, this was really the guy's doing (harsh way to break up with her btw!). She doesn't have to be best friends with the new lady, but hating her just screams of girl-on-girl crime to me.
(And so, Wednesday is devoted to the following hypothetical situation: a girl is completely unaware of the circumstances of her boyfriend’s last breakup, in which he actually didn’t bother to make things final with the other girl until well after things were underway with the new girl, and the old girl is pissed.)
Yeah! Like I said, don’t be mad at the two of them. It’s easy to project the personality and attitude of the ex onto someone who will touch him after he’s done what he’s done, but the fact remains that she may not be privy to all of his shit. It happens, lots of us have been there, and if that is what has happened here, it sucks that he has put the new girl in that position… the one where a part in some drama she may not even understand is forced on her.
By the time a victim of this kind of shit can know what’s going on, everybody in town may have decided she’s a slag. All of a sudden, this woman is on par with our original Tuesday letter writer, with a similar compulsion to clear her name, and with only a faint notion of what she’s actually done, let alone what to do about it.
So, was my advice to the ex-girlfriend, to leave it alone and let her ex-boyfriend’s new romance take its course, wrong? Should she actually try to warn this girl about this guy’s character? One reader seemed to think so:
girlfriend needs to let the new girl know what she’s getting into. i wish my ex’s ex would have done the same for me, because then maybe i would have dumped him before he cheated on me. i just know that i would have appreciated it.
I don’t know. Maybe now you say you would have appreciated it, but there’s a lot to be said for perspective, a la, you didn’t feel then what you feel now, because you didn’t know then what you know now. I think it’s actually a rare woman who will trust another woman, especially an ex-girlfriend (and potential rival, in their eyes), criticizing somebody she really likes, to have their best interests at heart. But maybe you didn't feel all that strongly about the guy at first, and those feelings grew later on before you could find out the truth. In general, I’d say it’s best to stay out of the lives of exes, not antagonize new girlfriends, and let them learn their own lessons -- especially considering it's more useful for someone to hear information of this nature from someone they feel they can trust, i.e., not their romantic interest's ex -- but I suppose I will make this allowance: some girls do like to think they would like a heads-up.
I really think that anybody who finds out they’ve been tricked into dating somebody who will move on before he’s ended a relationship can either embark on a vigorous, conspicuous, inappropriate innocence campaign, and risk looking guilty and graceless… and really really weird… or! Try to forget about the whole thing and trust that people will get to know her well enough to know she’s not mean, or maybe that people will notice a pattern of deception in the ex’s behaviour that could explain the whole thing. Kind of like what I recommended for ex-girlfriend.
So yeah! I stand by my previous assessment: I still think the ex-girlfriend needs to stop the vicious cycle of giving a damn and resist the fear of judgment of others and live a nice life. Now! For the sake of all womankind, and that is how she can be fair to the new girl.
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Love is a battlefield; keep this one a Cold War
I recently attended a party. My ex-boyfriend and his girlfriend were there. I'm still angry at the two of them because he pursued her before breaking it off with me [I hadn't any idea that things were going so badly, he just cut off all communication and left me in the dark on that one for nearly a month, but i digress].
I didn't say anything to them, because there were others around that I could talk to, and to be fair, they hadn't made any attempt to be friendly with me. She kept looking me over, which intrigues me because I haven't any idea what he's told her about me, and yet I'm concerned that she hasn't heard the full story.
I suppose if it ever comes up, I could plead "Well, you never introduced us" (which is true-- he never made an effort to introduce her to me or vice-versa) or "Well, what did you expect? To greet and be BFF with the girl you were pursuing while you were still with me PISS OFF" or something like that. Either way, I'm concerned that my name won't be clear in this situation, and I somehow come off looking like a crazy bitch because I have no desire to know and talk with either of them. It becomes difficult because my ex and I are within the same circle of friends, and will be invited to (and probably attend) the same gatherings.
It hurts enough to see them together-- if I can't protect my heart, is there any way I can protect my dignity and reputation?
The dynamic between the ex-girlfriend and the now-girlfriend can be one of the lumpiest, foggiest, most passive-aggressive things, especially if you’re not on speaking terms with your old flame, things didn’t end well, and you stand to see them around with any frequency at all.
Chances are only slim that he has been kind to your memory. People vent to others about their exes, or anybody else they share any disputes with. It’s an immature impulse that stays with many people all their lives. What’s good is mutual friends and acquaintances will decide for themselves if any criticism of an ex is valid.
True, a person who vents more and to more people may appear to be the more wounded and slighted in the relationship/bloodshed, but they’re perhaps more likely to appear bitter and vengeful if they’re going off on an ex with regularity, and for a period of time disproportionate to the gripes (i.e., if you’re still raving about fair comments an ex made about you in 2002, let me do you the favour of letting you know that you look like jackass. Ahem. ‘You look like a jackass.’ And, you’re welcome). Have you ever heard the expression, ‘give them enough rope and they’ll hang themselves’? Basically, it means that in some situations you should let bitches bitch all they want because it’ll just drive people to side with the silent.
But, it tends to be in a current girlfriend (or boyfriend’s) interest to side with their S.O. when it comes to anything said about a predecessor. They want to please their new romantic interest, they want to come off the winner in any comparison/contest, and they likely don’t want to believe they’re with someone who would say something unfair, or, God forbid, untrue!
It’s better if a girlfriend can be a voice of reason; It's better to discourage pettiness and help him be realistic and reasonable, and see any error in his own actions, because then he can be a better person for her. A guy with any brain at all would come to appreciate and respect a girl who could act so genuinely and intelligently, because those are marks of a truly good person.
But you can’t trust that she’s like that. And you really can't take it upon yourself to try to enlighten her about this guy and your past relationship with him. It'll look crazy, and she's not likely to listen due to all the stuff I said above. Even if you make sense, it will not compute.
So, even though it might make you feel a little helpless, you should probably resign yourself to the fact that your ex has probably said something about his past relationship with you to his new girl, and that unless they’re already in the thick of a really frank and candid meeting-of-the-minds kind of match, she’s not seeing any crack in his reasoning. Yet.
All actual names, places and professions have been replaced with just as believable ones in the following anecdote:
My friend Minnie hooked up with Stevie, who had been recently dumped by Francie. One night, Minnie sat in the light of a single pine-scented candle in Stevie’s basement apartment, and listened to him pronounce all the emotional hardships that Francie had put him through, as a very serious, insensitive girl, always pressuring him to get a better job and go to the gym and stop making his clever clever fart jokes. Minnie laughed as Stevie dubbed Francie ‘beaver-teeth’ or some such rude name. And then they probably did it. You know. It.
A year later, a disillusioned Minnie left Stevie for Dickie, a very serious guy indeed, because, as Minnie found out, all of the criticisms Stevie rhymed off about himself as coming from Francie were pretty valid. Serious Francie is now an investment banker, and to my knowledge Single, Aging Stevie is working the graveyard shift at a KFC in rural Nova Scotia. Jealous?
People who date can’t help but learn a lot about each other. If your ex is not a great guy and if he is not saying fair things about you to this girl, she’ll realize it someday, and she might end up in the same boat you are in now, with a spectacular marine view of what an ass he is. Don’t be angry at the two of them because she might be completely oblivious. She wouldn’t be the first oblivious woman to carry on with a man for a while before things have been officially resolved with another one, for example.
By the time she’s in the boat you are in now, you will be in a different boat. A speedboat on the French Riviera, perhaps. Not giving a damn. You know that’s the outcome, right? In the future, likely the near future, whatever Turd Ferguson is telling his chick about you now won’t matter a whole lot. It’s not even important now (which is why it would look weird for you to try to talk to her about him, another reason to not bother trying to get your story out there).
I think it only hurts you to see them together because you feel like they're conspiring against you, and that you give undue weight to the issue when you think like this. Like you said, they are only two people that you don’t care to know or speak to. So take what I’ve said here, about the inevitable, and don’t know or speak to them (by this I mean, don't seek them out, and just smile and nod when you make eye contact), and don’t care about it. From here it looks like you only risk looking like a crazy bitch if you let yourself feel and act like a crazy bitch now.
Continue to be polite and fun to be around. If you’re cool and they’re jerks, people will notice. If you can’t feel cool, i.e. actualize to yourself the fact that it's not reasonable to care: think cool and act cool, and you’ll find the sensation will be along. If you have trouble smiling at them, just think of this. Always worked for me.
I didn't say anything to them, because there were others around that I could talk to, and to be fair, they hadn't made any attempt to be friendly with me. She kept looking me over, which intrigues me because I haven't any idea what he's told her about me, and yet I'm concerned that she hasn't heard the full story.
I suppose if it ever comes up, I could plead "Well, you never introduced us" (which is true-- he never made an effort to introduce her to me or vice-versa) or "Well, what did you expect? To greet and be BFF with the girl you were pursuing while you were still with me PISS OFF" or something like that. Either way, I'm concerned that my name won't be clear in this situation, and I somehow come off looking like a crazy bitch because I have no desire to know and talk with either of them. It becomes difficult because my ex and I are within the same circle of friends, and will be invited to (and probably attend) the same gatherings.
It hurts enough to see them together-- if I can't protect my heart, is there any way I can protect my dignity and reputation?
The dynamic between the ex-girlfriend and the now-girlfriend can be one of the lumpiest, foggiest, most passive-aggressive things, especially if you’re not on speaking terms with your old flame, things didn’t end well, and you stand to see them around with any frequency at all.
Chances are only slim that he has been kind to your memory. People vent to others about their exes, or anybody else they share any disputes with. It’s an immature impulse that stays with many people all their lives. What’s good is mutual friends and acquaintances will decide for themselves if any criticism of an ex is valid.
True, a person who vents more and to more people may appear to be the more wounded and slighted in the relationship/bloodshed, but they’re perhaps more likely to appear bitter and vengeful if they’re going off on an ex with regularity, and for a period of time disproportionate to the gripes (i.e., if you’re still raving about fair comments an ex made about you in 2002, let me do you the favour of letting you know that you look like jackass. Ahem. ‘You look like a jackass.’ And, you’re welcome). Have you ever heard the expression, ‘give them enough rope and they’ll hang themselves’? Basically, it means that in some situations you should let bitches bitch all they want because it’ll just drive people to side with the silent.
But, it tends to be in a current girlfriend (or boyfriend’s) interest to side with their S.O. when it comes to anything said about a predecessor. They want to please their new romantic interest, they want to come off the winner in any comparison/contest, and they likely don’t want to believe they’re with someone who would say something unfair, or, God forbid, untrue!
It’s better if a girlfriend can be a voice of reason; It's better to discourage pettiness and help him be realistic and reasonable, and see any error in his own actions, because then he can be a better person for her. A guy with any brain at all would come to appreciate and respect a girl who could act so genuinely and intelligently, because those are marks of a truly good person.
But you can’t trust that she’s like that. And you really can't take it upon yourself to try to enlighten her about this guy and your past relationship with him. It'll look crazy, and she's not likely to listen due to all the stuff I said above. Even if you make sense, it will not compute.
So, even though it might make you feel a little helpless, you should probably resign yourself to the fact that your ex has probably said something about his past relationship with you to his new girl, and that unless they’re already in the thick of a really frank and candid meeting-of-the-minds kind of match, she’s not seeing any crack in his reasoning. Yet.
All actual names, places and professions have been replaced with just as believable ones in the following anecdote:
My friend Minnie hooked up with Stevie, who had been recently dumped by Francie. One night, Minnie sat in the light of a single pine-scented candle in Stevie’s basement apartment, and listened to him pronounce all the emotional hardships that Francie had put him through, as a very serious, insensitive girl, always pressuring him to get a better job and go to the gym and stop making his clever clever fart jokes. Minnie laughed as Stevie dubbed Francie ‘beaver-teeth’ or some such rude name. And then they probably did it. You know. It.
A year later, a disillusioned Minnie left Stevie for Dickie, a very serious guy indeed, because, as Minnie found out, all of the criticisms Stevie rhymed off about himself as coming from Francie were pretty valid. Serious Francie is now an investment banker, and to my knowledge Single, Aging Stevie is working the graveyard shift at a KFC in rural Nova Scotia. Jealous?
People who date can’t help but learn a lot about each other. If your ex is not a great guy and if he is not saying fair things about you to this girl, she’ll realize it someday, and she might end up in the same boat you are in now, with a spectacular marine view of what an ass he is. Don’t be angry at the two of them because she might be completely oblivious. She wouldn’t be the first oblivious woman to carry on with a man for a while before things have been officially resolved with another one, for example.
By the time she’s in the boat you are in now, you will be in a different boat. A speedboat on the French Riviera, perhaps. Not giving a damn. You know that’s the outcome, right? In the future, likely the near future, whatever Turd Ferguson is telling his chick about you now won’t matter a whole lot. It’s not even important now (which is why it would look weird for you to try to talk to her about him, another reason to not bother trying to get your story out there).
I think it only hurts you to see them together because you feel like they're conspiring against you, and that you give undue weight to the issue when you think like this. Like you said, they are only two people that you don’t care to know or speak to. So take what I’ve said here, about the inevitable, and don’t know or speak to them (by this I mean, don't seek them out, and just smile and nod when you make eye contact), and don’t care about it. From here it looks like you only risk looking like a crazy bitch if you let yourself feel and act like a crazy bitch now.
Continue to be polite and fun to be around. If you’re cool and they’re jerks, people will notice. If you can’t feel cool, i.e. actualize to yourself the fact that it's not reasonable to care: think cool and act cool, and you’ll find the sensation will be along. If you have trouble smiling at them, just think of this. Always worked for me.
Monday, February 23, 2009
Monday mail makes marvelous
Lots of people had stuff to say about Friday’s letter, on the girl who appears to be smitten with her gay roommate.
One articulate reader took time out of their busy schedule to share:
good luck with that.
How minimalist. In a way that kind of says it all. It’s an extremely sticky situation, and there is likely no perfect solution. I had to offer two potential options in my reply, emphasizing my love for the honesty angle. My gay friend Johnny wrote in to express his preference for the behaviour modification angle:
This line struck me as being very odd: "She likes sleeping in his bed, as opposed to her own."
Dude lets her sleep in his bed? With him?
Perhaps Hernando is in this mess because he likes the attention and enables it? God knows, he wouldn't be the first homo to do something dumb like that.
But setting aside that, I don't think I'd confront her about this as it will only serve to make her upset and paranoid and probably a lousy roommate at the same time.
I like the advice of cutting the strings. Part of the reason she's attracted to him is undoubtedly due to all the attention he gives her.
And, for heaven's sake, tell her to sleep in her own god damn bed.
You’re right, Johnny. I think I should have advised Hernando’s friend to advise him to be more reserved with Janice regardless of whether he decided to tell her how her attention had been making him feel. True, I did say he should have been able to be affectionate with his new, suddenly close female friend, but I should have said that's O.K. provided she was well-adjusted enough to not take it as something it wasn’t, and that does not seem to be Janice, so it follows that his friendliness does seem to have gotten him into trouble here. Live and learn, better late than never… etc.
So I modify my advice. Cut the apron strings a bit, maybe little by little, and see what happens. If nothing improves, I still strongly recommend talking to her, because you know he risks making her upset and paranoid and a lousy roommate if he changes his behaviour with her and she notices and is hurt and confused by that, too. If Hernando ‘confronts’ Janice (though I think that’s a really strong word for what should happen here), there’s a chance it’ll not go well, but there’s a chance she’ll realize how intense she’s being and ease up. It’s kind of an optimistic choice, I think; their friendship (not to mention home life), should it continue, would be more genuine and healthy and relaxed than if he just started avoiding her.
Neither solution is fail proof, and there’s going to be some discomfort no matter what. Sucks!
Somebody agrees an advice alteration was needed:
I think cutting the stings little by little is definitely a smarter choice, especially since she's his roommate and that complicated things quite a bit.
I really do think that Janice is just taking the loose rope Hernando gives her and now he realizes he gave her a bit too much and he's no longer comfortable with that.
I also think he should backtrack one step at the time: start doing things without her, take time away from home to breathe, stop telling her everything, etc.
Truth is, it's sort of like the overbearing friend you were talking about earlier. The fact that he hasn't pushed her away earlier is because a part of him needs or enjoys that closeness as well, so I think both of them are troubled in this and not just the slightly delusional Janice. It seems to me like both of them need the affection and stability. Just now, Hernando feels the need to peel himself away and fly on his own for a bit, and that's exactly what he should do, allthewhile communicating with Janice so she won't double her efforts to try to get closer while he's trying to pull away. Hernando needs to learn how to respect himself and how to communicate so that others respect him as well.
That could all be helpful to consider.
Somebody wrote in to criticize my assessment of Janice:
How can you say you know all this stuff about someone you don’t know? Maybe she’s just awkward. You can’t say for sure she’s in love with the guy.
Hey, sure, it’s definitely possible she just has no idea how to be a friend, if that’s what you mean by ‘awkward.’ I could totally see that. But you know, these blog entries get pretty long anyway without me trying to catch every single possibility for a situation. And, the meat of my advice -- for Hernando to talk to her and/or cool down his involvement a bit -- would work in the situation that you pose, too.
You know, if nobody felt the freedom to make calls in situations concerning people they don’t know, the advice column, as a model, could not be sustained. I DO NOT WANT TO LIVE IN THAT WORLD.
Tune in Tuesday for my thoughts on the dynamic between ex-girlfriends and now-girlfriends, as one girl struggles to not send her ex and his chick mind bullets every time she sees them.
One articulate reader took time out of their busy schedule to share:
good luck with that.
How minimalist. In a way that kind of says it all. It’s an extremely sticky situation, and there is likely no perfect solution. I had to offer two potential options in my reply, emphasizing my love for the honesty angle. My gay friend Johnny wrote in to express his preference for the behaviour modification angle:
This line struck me as being very odd: "She likes sleeping in his bed, as opposed to her own."
Dude lets her sleep in his bed? With him?
Perhaps Hernando is in this mess because he likes the attention and enables it? God knows, he wouldn't be the first homo to do something dumb like that.
But setting aside that, I don't think I'd confront her about this as it will only serve to make her upset and paranoid and probably a lousy roommate at the same time.
I like the advice of cutting the strings. Part of the reason she's attracted to him is undoubtedly due to all the attention he gives her.
And, for heaven's sake, tell her to sleep in her own god damn bed.
You’re right, Johnny. I think I should have advised Hernando’s friend to advise him to be more reserved with Janice regardless of whether he decided to tell her how her attention had been making him feel. True, I did say he should have been able to be affectionate with his new, suddenly close female friend, but I should have said that's O.K. provided she was well-adjusted enough to not take it as something it wasn’t, and that does not seem to be Janice, so it follows that his friendliness does seem to have gotten him into trouble here. Live and learn, better late than never… etc.
So I modify my advice. Cut the apron strings a bit, maybe little by little, and see what happens. If nothing improves, I still strongly recommend talking to her, because you know he risks making her upset and paranoid and a lousy roommate if he changes his behaviour with her and she notices and is hurt and confused by that, too. If Hernando ‘confronts’ Janice (though I think that’s a really strong word for what should happen here), there’s a chance it’ll not go well, but there’s a chance she’ll realize how intense she’s being and ease up. It’s kind of an optimistic choice, I think; their friendship (not to mention home life), should it continue, would be more genuine and healthy and relaxed than if he just started avoiding her.
Neither solution is fail proof, and there’s going to be some discomfort no matter what. Sucks!
Somebody agrees an advice alteration was needed:
I think cutting the stings little by little is definitely a smarter choice, especially since she's his roommate and that complicated things quite a bit.
I really do think that Janice is just taking the loose rope Hernando gives her and now he realizes he gave her a bit too much and he's no longer comfortable with that.
I also think he should backtrack one step at the time: start doing things without her, take time away from home to breathe, stop telling her everything, etc.
Truth is, it's sort of like the overbearing friend you were talking about earlier. The fact that he hasn't pushed her away earlier is because a part of him needs or enjoys that closeness as well, so I think both of them are troubled in this and not just the slightly delusional Janice. It seems to me like both of them need the affection and stability. Just now, Hernando feels the need to peel himself away and fly on his own for a bit, and that's exactly what he should do, allthewhile communicating with Janice so she won't double her efforts to try to get closer while he's trying to pull away. Hernando needs to learn how to respect himself and how to communicate so that others respect him as well.
That could all be helpful to consider.
Somebody wrote in to criticize my assessment of Janice:
How can you say you know all this stuff about someone you don’t know? Maybe she’s just awkward. You can’t say for sure she’s in love with the guy.
Hey, sure, it’s definitely possible she just has no idea how to be a friend, if that’s what you mean by ‘awkward.’ I could totally see that. But you know, these blog entries get pretty long anyway without me trying to catch every single possibility for a situation. And, the meat of my advice -- for Hernando to talk to her and/or cool down his involvement a bit -- would work in the situation that you pose, too.
You know, if nobody felt the freedom to make calls in situations concerning people they don’t know, the advice column, as a model, could not be sustained. I DO NOT WANT TO LIVE IN THAT WORLD.
Tune in Tuesday for my thoughts on the dynamic between ex-girlfriends and now-girlfriends, as one girl struggles to not send her ex and his chick mind bullets every time she sees them.
Friday, February 20, 2009
Barking up the gay tree
Dear They Said What?,
Yay! Not another (romantic) relationship question! Here's my issue: My best friend just moved in with a girl. In keeping with using fake names to protect privacy, I'll call him Hernando and her Janice. Our close knit group of friends only really started hanging out with Janice a few months ago, and she and Hernando really hit it off. Although we all found her to be kind of annoying, they did seem to have a lot of fun together, and it could be fun partying with them. When they announced they were moving in together though, that is when everyone really started to worry. See, Janice seems to be madly in love with Hernando. And Hernando is openly gay.
Janice talks about Hernando constantly when they are apart. She raves about him and never expresses any interest in hanging out with anyone else. On his part, I know that he liked the attention at first, especially since the rest of our group had an autumn full of schoolwork and late shifts, and weren't really able to party all the time, which is what she loves to do. At the start of it all, he thought maybe we were being jealous, because she wanted to occupy all his time, but really, he works hard to make sure that all his friends know how much he cares for us, so that was never an issue.
What is an issue is that we all pretty much think she is delusional, and think that she sees their friendship and roommatehood as having the potential for much much more. It has gotten to the point were even Hernando (since moving in with her for financial reasons) has even told me "I don't know what to do, I think she actually might have feelings for me" to which I of course replied "Well, yeah. I told you that." She keeps constant tabs on him, always wanting to know where he is and who he is with. She likes sleeping in his bed, as opposed to her own. She buys him presents all the time, and makes plans for the long-distant future as though really planning a life with him. Hernando told me that once when they were both drunk, she propositioned him, and then pretended it was just a joke. To top it all off, one day as Janice was telling me "I need a boyfriend. It is just so hard, living with this beautiful man, and he's just so amazing, and I need to get laid!" and I said, "Janice, don't fall in love with Hernando, okay?" and she said "What?... Oh my god, I know. Why would you say that... wait, has he said anything?" in a very lady-doth-protest-too-much sort of way.
I feel like this is getting really long, so I will try to wrap up. Basically, since moving in with this girl, Hernando has finally become creeped out by her behaviour enough to ask me for advice, but I am just no good at giving advice. He doesn't want to hurt her feelings, but she does know that he has no romantic interest in women, and he doesn't know what else he can tell her. He can't move out because they have a lease, and he still wants to be her friend of course. As his friend, I don't like to see him in this situation mainly because it has the potential to get really awkward. So, um, any thoughts?
We say things all the time for the sake of sensitivity. They're often truthful, but they also don't risk hurting anybody's feelings. There have been many a drunken Saturday night when I've been all too happy to utter the words, 'I have a boyfriend' to some physically unappealing or otherwise offensive man or woman. Hernando has: 'I'm gay.' With options like these, the trick is often done without having to call attention to what is underlying in these scenarios: a lack of attraction. The hit-on-er is left thinking, 'she/he isn't able,' and they move on without having to acknowledge the that the hit-on-ee's answer ALSO likely means he or she is not willing, either.
In Janice's head, the problem is 'just' Hernando’s homosexuality. She seems to have mentally reduced it to the single thing standing in the way of her happiness with someone she really likes and gets along with, so really she needs to come to see it in terms of utter lack of attraction in order to get it. We, along with Janice, risk forgetting that this business here with Hernando is equal to any other unwanted sexual advance.
Why might Janice need this extra dose of reality? Not all hags are alike, but at least some of the heterosexual ones are hungry for love, and some of that subset are into gays because straights aren't into them. They seek validation from those whom they may see as non-threatening eunuchs, because they don’t actually understand homosexuality. Sure, they don’t live in a vacuum, they’ve been told that some men love men like other men love women, and they know that men manage to have sex with each other somehow, but the whole thing has not been actualized to them. They are accepting of homosexuality in an unthinking way. They like gay men, but they don’t actually get what they do, beyond, ‘hey, I like boys, too.’ Deep down they might even believe a gay boy may just need the right woman to come along. Shudder with me: Ugh!
Unwittingly, some of the cuddlier homos oblige them; gay men would be well within their rights to think that they can be as verbally and physically affectionate as they like with their willing female friends because they don’t risk sending mixed messages; their proclaimed orientation should speak for itself. But hormonally, when a friendship with a gay man turns a certain shade of warm, women like Janice embark on a simulated romantic relationship. Companionship, light physical contact -- sometimes intermediate physical affection if you're dealing with some of the Ted Homosexuals I've rubbed up against in my day – from someone who, let's face it, probably works out, with no sexual tension or heartbreak. Friendship is the romance that never has to end. Right?
As we see here in the case of Janice and Hernando, oh Hell no. The sexual tension kicks in real good and one-sided, and in the words of The Marvelettes: Danger, Heartbreak Dead Ahead. "If only he wasn't gay."
Here's a question for you and H-man to ponder: how has he dealt with the fact that he's gay? I am by no means suggesting that this is his fault for not looking gay enough. But perhaps a key to understanding lonely Janice's delusion lies in what she may be able give her brain to fantasize/scheme with. How recently openly gay is he? Is he out to his family? Did he try out bisexuality as a label before warming up to public homosexuality? Has he had girlfriends? Is he dating men now? Is he bringing any boys home? I gather from your mention of school and partying that you guys are kind of young. Maybe Janice, in her naïve, kind of disrespectful internalization of gayness, doesn’t believe Hernando, who may just still be learning to be comfortable with himself, is walking the walk enough.
If that’s what she’s thinking, she hasn’t got a right. People are gay or straight in their own ways, and Hernando shouldn’t feel pressure to conduct himself in a way he wouldn’t usually, and especially not in his own home. It’s not an excuse for her behaviour, but it’s a reason, and maybe that can give you guys some insight as to how to proceed.
Unfortunately, I am not completely certain about how to communicate lack of attraction to someone without risking an air of the confrontational in this scenario, in which reality would be a clear enough indication of what is reasonable behaviour for most people. If he’s not comfortable about leveling with her yet, things obviously haven’t gotten weird enough. Trust me, that’ll happen. I would actually put money on my suspicion that it has happened and attachments like these form a pattern in Janice’s life. You guys may have only been hanging out with her a few months, but she didn’t come out of nowhere, and you have to wonder what she did with her time before you and Hernando came along.
Hernando can’t live like this, and he certainly can’t let it get worse, for his sake and for Janice’s. If he really doesn’t want to beat her over the head with how much he does not want to do the sex with her because he cares about her, and doesn’t want to hurt her feelings, and wants to keep her friendship, tell him to think of it this way: Friends don’t let friends make themselves ridiculous and miserable. If Janice is his friend, she is his friend who has a problem, and he does her no favours by pretending everything is fine. To make it known, in a caring and genuine way, that she is making him uncomfortable, and to try to talk to her about why she is so very, very inappropriately focusing her energy on him, is to be a true friend.
If she doesn’t respond well to this -- and a poor response encompasses everything between disproportionate anger to groveling, disproportionate repentance. Huge reactions are sometimes ploys to take the focus off of the situation at hand and make the other party feel bad -- her problem may not be one that Hernando is equipped to help her iron out, especially if she’s not willing to confront it herself, and especially if my pattern theory is true. Sometimes you have to quietly break a lease and let crazy sort itself out.
If all of that is still not an option for him, he could just try cutting the apron strings a bit. Start making it a point to not divulge everything about his life to her, start consciously making plans that do not include her… does his bedroom door have a lock on it?
Readers, you can chime in at any time. I'll post your advice on Monday!
Yay! Not another (romantic) relationship question! Here's my issue: My best friend just moved in with a girl. In keeping with using fake names to protect privacy, I'll call him Hernando and her Janice. Our close knit group of friends only really started hanging out with Janice a few months ago, and she and Hernando really hit it off. Although we all found her to be kind of annoying, they did seem to have a lot of fun together, and it could be fun partying with them. When they announced they were moving in together though, that is when everyone really started to worry. See, Janice seems to be madly in love with Hernando. And Hernando is openly gay.
Janice talks about Hernando constantly when they are apart. She raves about him and never expresses any interest in hanging out with anyone else. On his part, I know that he liked the attention at first, especially since the rest of our group had an autumn full of schoolwork and late shifts, and weren't really able to party all the time, which is what she loves to do. At the start of it all, he thought maybe we were being jealous, because she wanted to occupy all his time, but really, he works hard to make sure that all his friends know how much he cares for us, so that was never an issue.
What is an issue is that we all pretty much think she is delusional, and think that she sees their friendship and roommatehood as having the potential for much much more. It has gotten to the point were even Hernando (since moving in with her for financial reasons) has even told me "I don't know what to do, I think she actually might have feelings for me" to which I of course replied "Well, yeah. I told you that." She keeps constant tabs on him, always wanting to know where he is and who he is with. She likes sleeping in his bed, as opposed to her own. She buys him presents all the time, and makes plans for the long-distant future as though really planning a life with him. Hernando told me that once when they were both drunk, she propositioned him, and then pretended it was just a joke. To top it all off, one day as Janice was telling me "I need a boyfriend. It is just so hard, living with this beautiful man, and he's just so amazing, and I need to get laid!" and I said, "Janice, don't fall in love with Hernando, okay?" and she said "What?... Oh my god, I know. Why would you say that... wait, has he said anything?" in a very lady-doth-protest-too-much sort of way.
I feel like this is getting really long, so I will try to wrap up. Basically, since moving in with this girl, Hernando has finally become creeped out by her behaviour enough to ask me for advice, but I am just no good at giving advice. He doesn't want to hurt her feelings, but she does know that he has no romantic interest in women, and he doesn't know what else he can tell her. He can't move out because they have a lease, and he still wants to be her friend of course. As his friend, I don't like to see him in this situation mainly because it has the potential to get really awkward. So, um, any thoughts?
We say things all the time for the sake of sensitivity. They're often truthful, but they also don't risk hurting anybody's feelings. There have been many a drunken Saturday night when I've been all too happy to utter the words, 'I have a boyfriend' to some physically unappealing or otherwise offensive man or woman. Hernando has: 'I'm gay.' With options like these, the trick is often done without having to call attention to what is underlying in these scenarios: a lack of attraction. The hit-on-er is left thinking, 'she/he isn't able,' and they move on without having to acknowledge the that the hit-on-ee's answer ALSO likely means he or she is not willing, either.
In Janice's head, the problem is 'just' Hernando’s homosexuality. She seems to have mentally reduced it to the single thing standing in the way of her happiness with someone she really likes and gets along with, so really she needs to come to see it in terms of utter lack of attraction in order to get it. We, along with Janice, risk forgetting that this business here with Hernando is equal to any other unwanted sexual advance.
Why might Janice need this extra dose of reality? Not all hags are alike, but at least some of the heterosexual ones are hungry for love, and some of that subset are into gays because straights aren't into them. They seek validation from those whom they may see as non-threatening eunuchs, because they don’t actually understand homosexuality. Sure, they don’t live in a vacuum, they’ve been told that some men love men like other men love women, and they know that men manage to have sex with each other somehow, but the whole thing has not been actualized to them. They are accepting of homosexuality in an unthinking way. They like gay men, but they don’t actually get what they do, beyond, ‘hey, I like boys, too.’ Deep down they might even believe a gay boy may just need the right woman to come along. Shudder with me: Ugh!
Unwittingly, some of the cuddlier homos oblige them; gay men would be well within their rights to think that they can be as verbally and physically affectionate as they like with their willing female friends because they don’t risk sending mixed messages; their proclaimed orientation should speak for itself. But hormonally, when a friendship with a gay man turns a certain shade of warm, women like Janice embark on a simulated romantic relationship. Companionship, light physical contact -- sometimes intermediate physical affection if you're dealing with some of the Ted Homosexuals I've rubbed up against in my day – from someone who, let's face it, probably works out, with no sexual tension or heartbreak. Friendship is the romance that never has to end. Right?
As we see here in the case of Janice and Hernando, oh Hell no. The sexual tension kicks in real good and one-sided, and in the words of The Marvelettes: Danger, Heartbreak Dead Ahead. "If only he wasn't gay."
Here's a question for you and H-man to ponder: how has he dealt with the fact that he's gay? I am by no means suggesting that this is his fault for not looking gay enough. But perhaps a key to understanding lonely Janice's delusion lies in what she may be able give her brain to fantasize/scheme with. How recently openly gay is he? Is he out to his family? Did he try out bisexuality as a label before warming up to public homosexuality? Has he had girlfriends? Is he dating men now? Is he bringing any boys home? I gather from your mention of school and partying that you guys are kind of young. Maybe Janice, in her naïve, kind of disrespectful internalization of gayness, doesn’t believe Hernando, who may just still be learning to be comfortable with himself, is walking the walk enough.
If that’s what she’s thinking, she hasn’t got a right. People are gay or straight in their own ways, and Hernando shouldn’t feel pressure to conduct himself in a way he wouldn’t usually, and especially not in his own home. It’s not an excuse for her behaviour, but it’s a reason, and maybe that can give you guys some insight as to how to proceed.
Unfortunately, I am not completely certain about how to communicate lack of attraction to someone without risking an air of the confrontational in this scenario, in which reality would be a clear enough indication of what is reasonable behaviour for most people. If he’s not comfortable about leveling with her yet, things obviously haven’t gotten weird enough. Trust me, that’ll happen. I would actually put money on my suspicion that it has happened and attachments like these form a pattern in Janice’s life. You guys may have only been hanging out with her a few months, but she didn’t come out of nowhere, and you have to wonder what she did with her time before you and Hernando came along.
Hernando can’t live like this, and he certainly can’t let it get worse, for his sake and for Janice’s. If he really doesn’t want to beat her over the head with how much he does not want to do the sex with her because he cares about her, and doesn’t want to hurt her feelings, and wants to keep her friendship, tell him to think of it this way: Friends don’t let friends make themselves ridiculous and miserable. If Janice is his friend, she is his friend who has a problem, and he does her no favours by pretending everything is fine. To make it known, in a caring and genuine way, that she is making him uncomfortable, and to try to talk to her about why she is so very, very inappropriately focusing her energy on him, is to be a true friend.
If she doesn’t respond well to this -- and a poor response encompasses everything between disproportionate anger to groveling, disproportionate repentance. Huge reactions are sometimes ploys to take the focus off of the situation at hand and make the other party feel bad -- her problem may not be one that Hernando is equipped to help her iron out, especially if she’s not willing to confront it herself, and especially if my pattern theory is true. Sometimes you have to quietly break a lease and let crazy sort itself out.
If all of that is still not an option for him, he could just try cutting the apron strings a bit. Start making it a point to not divulge everything about his life to her, start consciously making plans that do not include her… does his bedroom door have a lock on it?
Readers, you can chime in at any time. I'll post your advice on Monday!
Thursday, February 19, 2009
PERSONAL DAY.
I maded this to show you that midterms be bein' a handful and I'm doing myself a solid on a Thursday.
But on Friday: A straight woman may just be in love with her openly-gay male roommate. Tune in tomorrow to see what a concerned friend has to tell me. And you, I guess.
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Do unto ME, O.K.?
I think many of us have the same problem with forgiveness as we have with generosity...
My own actions of giving freely, I find, are always saddled with the expectation of future return, an unsatiated desire for reciprocal gratitude...which makes my 'generosity' more like one half of an unspoken and later unfulfilled barter.
How often do we create and cling to our own misery without even realising it?
Well, you sound sad. What you’ve written here reminds me of this anecdote:
I knew a girl once -- I will call her... Oprah (NOT HER REAL NAME) -- who was always doing things for a small group of female friends. Calling them to check in, making plans with them, picking them up, driving them around, buying them thoughtful little gifts.
After a few months to a year of this, these ladies began to feel a little freaked out by Oprah and her special attention, if not at least slightly annoyed. Oprah was making herself the opposite of scarce, calling several times a day, showing up randomly on people’s lawns. She wasn’t a great conversationalist, but she insisted on dominating and controlling group interactions, vetoing topics she didn’t have an interest in and trying to anticipate and intercept comments that might offend others. You can't make this stuff up.
She was also getting to be quite demanding. She had the courtesy to notify her friends of her every single move; why couldn’t they show her the same 'sensitivity'? She knew their birthdays, shoe-sizes, allergies and bedtimes; why didn’t they put the same effort in where she was concerned? Some of the girls in her circle of friends didn’t appreciate the guilt-trip, some of them didn’t appreciate the crawliness they’d feel when her name showed up on their phones. To my knowledge, everybody stopped talking to Oprah, but she found a new circle of friends and used what she learned in her past life about the nature of entitlement and restraining orders to not alienate them, and she’s finally happy with a group of people who aren’t constantly hurting her feelings and/or making her angry.
Oprah is an example of what can happen to people who don’t get the nuances of how to apply the Golden Rule. Some people think, “ok, surefire way to get what I want from people is to give them what I want. Wicked, let’s go.” It isn’t surefire, and it isn’t right to go about doing kindnesses thinking there should be a payoff of some kind (other kindnesses, respect, loyalty) in the end. To answer your question, I think people create and cling to their own misery VERY OFTEN, and I think at least some of them do this by clinging to their own ideas of justice and what is fair and not leaving room for the fact other people won’t necessarily subscribe to them. Maybe you’re really smart and everybody should think the way you do, but that doesn’t mean that they have to, and the more you live in your own head, the more likely you are to fail at life.
Empirically, undoubtedly: the decent thing is to be nice to people who are nice to you. For example, if you want to be friendly to an acquaintance and wave and say hi or whatever, and they’d rather snub you and be cold with you or otherwise make you feel uncomfortable for trying to be civil, this acquaintance may just be a piece of shit, and you likely need to accept that there’s nothing you can do about it, and that there is nothing you should do about it. Don’t try harder to make them like you, and don’t sink to their level of bitchery. They can be as crappy as they want to be, barring harassment and violence, because there is no niceness police. It might help you to passive-aggressively remember that people do notice and many of them do not approve when someone is shitty to someone who doesn’t deserve it, and that a person’s poor treatment of you could come back to bite them on the ass or cause them to lose the respect of a witness, but again: no real niceness police, and few people will support attempts to exact your own brand of vigilante justice over stuff like rudeness.
It’s kind of the same in the case of a romantic relationship. The decent thing is to treat your S.O. just as well as they treat you. If any of you find your boyfriend or girlfriend is not returning the favour, it could be for a variety of reasons. Maybe they’re clueless and/or inexperienced, and maybe you need to let them know that you don’t feel like they’re being fair to you. Maybe you’re overdoing it; maybe your affection is not proportional to the seriousness of your relationship, and that could mean you’re asking for too much and that you have to cool it down. And, there’s the obvious: if you’re not getting what you want from them, he or she may not right for you.
The decent thing is to treat your S.O. just as well as they treat you, but you can only legally prosecute someone for abuse if you can prove it, and no court of law is going to order your girlfriend to bake you a cake just because you baked her one.
Besides the fact that it’ll make you pretty unpopular, it’s not good for your mental health, martyring yourself out of a desire for gratitude. You risk getting to the point where you’re going around resenting ingrates as complete idiots and thinking of yourself as the world’s best person, cultivating the kind of scary arrogance that a lot of insane dudes rock so well.
Giving freely is great, but if it’s making you expect a lot of other people, to the point that you’re feeling miserable and disregarded by those you care about, and you suspect it may be due to a tendency you have to seek gratitude and reward, maybe it’s better – for everyone involved – if you learn to be little ‘selfish.’
My own actions of giving freely, I find, are always saddled with the expectation of future return, an unsatiated desire for reciprocal gratitude...which makes my 'generosity' more like one half of an unspoken and later unfulfilled barter.
How often do we create and cling to our own misery without even realising it?
Well, you sound sad. What you’ve written here reminds me of this anecdote:
I knew a girl once -- I will call her... Oprah (NOT HER REAL NAME) -- who was always doing things for a small group of female friends. Calling them to check in, making plans with them, picking them up, driving them around, buying them thoughtful little gifts.
After a few months to a year of this, these ladies began to feel a little freaked out by Oprah and her special attention, if not at least slightly annoyed. Oprah was making herself the opposite of scarce, calling several times a day, showing up randomly on people’s lawns. She wasn’t a great conversationalist, but she insisted on dominating and controlling group interactions, vetoing topics she didn’t have an interest in and trying to anticipate and intercept comments that might offend others. You can't make this stuff up.
She was also getting to be quite demanding. She had the courtesy to notify her friends of her every single move; why couldn’t they show her the same 'sensitivity'? She knew their birthdays, shoe-sizes, allergies and bedtimes; why didn’t they put the same effort in where she was concerned? Some of the girls in her circle of friends didn’t appreciate the guilt-trip, some of them didn’t appreciate the crawliness they’d feel when her name showed up on their phones. To my knowledge, everybody stopped talking to Oprah, but she found a new circle of friends and used what she learned in her past life about the nature of entitlement and restraining orders to not alienate them, and she’s finally happy with a group of people who aren’t constantly hurting her feelings and/or making her angry.
Oprah is an example of what can happen to people who don’t get the nuances of how to apply the Golden Rule. Some people think, “ok, surefire way to get what I want from people is to give them what I want. Wicked, let’s go.” It isn’t surefire, and it isn’t right to go about doing kindnesses thinking there should be a payoff of some kind (other kindnesses, respect, loyalty) in the end. To answer your question, I think people create and cling to their own misery VERY OFTEN, and I think at least some of them do this by clinging to their own ideas of justice and what is fair and not leaving room for the fact other people won’t necessarily subscribe to them. Maybe you’re really smart and everybody should think the way you do, but that doesn’t mean that they have to, and the more you live in your own head, the more likely you are to fail at life.
Empirically, undoubtedly: the decent thing is to be nice to people who are nice to you. For example, if you want to be friendly to an acquaintance and wave and say hi or whatever, and they’d rather snub you and be cold with you or otherwise make you feel uncomfortable for trying to be civil, this acquaintance may just be a piece of shit, and you likely need to accept that there’s nothing you can do about it, and that there is nothing you should do about it. Don’t try harder to make them like you, and don’t sink to their level of bitchery. They can be as crappy as they want to be, barring harassment and violence, because there is no niceness police. It might help you to passive-aggressively remember that people do notice and many of them do not approve when someone is shitty to someone who doesn’t deserve it, and that a person’s poor treatment of you could come back to bite them on the ass or cause them to lose the respect of a witness, but again: no real niceness police, and few people will support attempts to exact your own brand of vigilante justice over stuff like rudeness.
It’s kind of the same in the case of a romantic relationship. The decent thing is to treat your S.O. just as well as they treat you. If any of you find your boyfriend or girlfriend is not returning the favour, it could be for a variety of reasons. Maybe they’re clueless and/or inexperienced, and maybe you need to let them know that you don’t feel like they’re being fair to you. Maybe you’re overdoing it; maybe your affection is not proportional to the seriousness of your relationship, and that could mean you’re asking for too much and that you have to cool it down. And, there’s the obvious: if you’re not getting what you want from them, he or she may not right for you.
The decent thing is to treat your S.O. just as well as they treat you, but you can only legally prosecute someone for abuse if you can prove it, and no court of law is going to order your girlfriend to bake you a cake just because you baked her one.
Besides the fact that it’ll make you pretty unpopular, it’s not good for your mental health, martyring yourself out of a desire for gratitude. You risk getting to the point where you’re going around resenting ingrates as complete idiots and thinking of yourself as the world’s best person, cultivating the kind of scary arrogance that a lot of insane dudes rock so well.
Giving freely is great, but if it’s making you expect a lot of other people, to the point that you’re feeling miserable and disregarded by those you care about, and you suspect it may be due to a tendency you have to seek gratitude and reward, maybe it’s better – for everyone involved – if you learn to be little ‘selfish.’
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
It's all over your face
O hai. I have a non-relationship question, if you please. I want to know about skin care because I'm decidedly challenged in almost all aspects of womanly body maintenance.
So, about a year ago I stopped taking birth control pills after over a decade of hormone consumption. I'm enjoying this except that it has resulted in some mild acne, especially on my cheeks and temples. I blame this on the fact that I tend to sleep on my side with one half of my face jammed hard into the pillow. I've tried making a point of falling asleep on my back, but I always seem to end up on my side by the time I wake up.
My current beauty regimen involves using an exfoliant "for oily and acne-prone skin" in the shower in the morning followed by some toner applied with cotton balls. Before bed, I wash my face using just warm water and a clean wash cloth, and then I wipe it with some medicated pads. All of this is so far not very effective. Also I have combination skin featuring an oily T-zone and normal-to-dry rest-of-face. My acne's not crazy like it was when I was a teenager, but I'm pretty self-conscious about it, to the point that I avoid putting my hair in a ponytail. This is a terrible shame because I otherwise look really cute with my hair in a ponytail. HALP.
I, too, recently took a break from hormonal contraceptives.
(Sidenote: A lot of doctors tell you there’s no reason for you to do this, and some will say you can use the pill or the patch or what have you to avoid having periods, uh, period, because your body doesn’t need to have a period when it isn’t trying to conceive a child. There’s apparently not much risk in taking these hormones as long as you’re a non-smoker without heart problems and you have your doctor’s approval. O.K.: I’m not a doctor, but I feel that I may benefit from a one or two-month break every now and then. That’s just a personal choice, I don’t necessarily encourage everyone else to do it, and I don’t pretend to be qualified to dispense medical advice.)
I, too, noticed an increase in facial acne, mostly on my forehead. Mine was pretty much explosive though, because besides being off hormones for the first time in a year, it was also around Christmas, meaning I was eating a lot of junk, and also meaning that the weather was super harsh. Terrible.
The fact that your current beauty regimen does not include a moisturizer pretty much shocks me. Not because I’m disgusted by your manliness, but because I’m pretty sure my own face would fall off if I did what you’re doing without regular moisturizing.
Your skin will produce an excess of oil when it’s fooled into thinking it’s too dry, -- rough weather, hormones and excessive cleansing are things that can fool it -- and this will produce stuff like acne and/or greasy hair. Being vigilant about washing the oil off (i.e., washing your face and hair often and avoiding things like moisturizer and conditioner) doesn’t really help that much, because it just provokes the skin into greasing itself some more.
For your acne, you can try washing your face less and washing your hair every second day and using conditioner, because hair and scalp health can be a factor in breakouts (I try to shampoo and condition every third day, myself, and I only heat style twice a week at the most, and you'll find a lot of the high end hairdressers and colourists think this way too), but moisturizer sounds like what you need. It might not work right away, and your spottiness might even worsen for a day or two or three because your skin will need some time to stabilize, deal with the new moisture and ease up on producing its own, but you’d likely notice a difference of the good kind in a week or two.
You can’t just put any old moisturizer on a face, let alone a broken-out one. The store-brand body lotion you find at Wal-Mart or whatever and even the more expensive body lotion you might have from like The Body Shop would likely have a comedogenic (pore-screwing) effect on your face. This is my usual stuff, and I would recommend this version for what you’re telling me about your skin. If you’d rather not spend $30 on this stuff (though I find it lasts me three months), there’s this stuff, for combination skin, which you can get at pretty much any pharmacy for not much money. There is a moisturizer out there for everyone. I'm a pretty big tightwad these days, but I think face cream is something people of all conceivable genders and ages need to invest in.
And, you may not find these helpful, but I just want to express my love for these damn things. They’re little packet facials, $2 at pharmacies everywhere, and after one of them my skin looks about a million times better than normal. They are most definitely not meant for regular use, but when you want your skin to look extra dewy once in a while, why the Hell not?
Someone else wrote in to comment:
so another problem with this girl's skin routine might be her over-exfoliation, especially if she is doing it every day in the shower like she said. That's far too often, and basically her skin is going to be producing even more oil not only because it is dried out, but because it is trying to protect itself after being rubbed raw daily.
I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that she's using St. Ives Apricot Scrub, just because it is quite popular. It's a great product, but not for every day use. I'd recommend some of their regular face washes, if she's looking for something that isn't too harsh.
Another good and economical moisturizer I'd recomend is Garnier's Fresh series - they make a really nice eye make-up remover too :)
Good call, stranger! Over-exfoliation can be a problem, too! I tend to forget about that possibility for others because I am the very rare person who needs to exfoliate nearly every day. Some people find even just using a wash cloth has enough of an exfoliating effect for them. Definitely look into a non-scratchy cleanser. I use this foamy one.
And another adds:
In picking a moisturizer, it's important to look for something that's water based and ph balanced.
Balanced ph is mega important, especially for people who tend to break out a lot.
Yup! Try that, if you like! That info will be on the label.
Other than that, I don’t know if your sleeping position would affect things much. Change/wash your pillowcase once a week if you feel like it, and definitely see if you can sleep in a ponytail, as it could be your hair between your face and the pillow causing things.
Something else to consider: What is your diet like? When you had the hormone crutch keeping your acne in check, you might have been able to get away with more vitamin imbalance. When I’m eating a lot of B12-heavy foods (bacon, eggs, cheese, most good things) and not balancing it out with green veg and antioxidants, I acne up real good, especially on my temples. I don’t think I’d recommend trying to reduce your B12 intake unless acne is not your only problem, because it’s very important for your immune system, but make sure you’re eating your damn broccoli and red, blue and purple fruits and berries (pretty sure RED WINE COUNTS, if you’re into that sort of thing), and drink a lot of water. I don’t really buy into the 12 glasses a day thing, and some experts do say the amount people need will vary. I’ve read more than once that you should drink so often that you never let yourself feel thirsty. So, there you go? Drink that much?
Thanks for being my first non-dating/relationship question asker ever! Glad to suspect your love life is probably O.K.!
So, about a year ago I stopped taking birth control pills after over a decade of hormone consumption. I'm enjoying this except that it has resulted in some mild acne, especially on my cheeks and temples. I blame this on the fact that I tend to sleep on my side with one half of my face jammed hard into the pillow. I've tried making a point of falling asleep on my back, but I always seem to end up on my side by the time I wake up.
My current beauty regimen involves using an exfoliant "for oily and acne-prone skin" in the shower in the morning followed by some toner applied with cotton balls. Before bed, I wash my face using just warm water and a clean wash cloth, and then I wipe it with some medicated pads. All of this is so far not very effective. Also I have combination skin featuring an oily T-zone and normal-to-dry rest-of-face. My acne's not crazy like it was when I was a teenager, but I'm pretty self-conscious about it, to the point that I avoid putting my hair in a ponytail. This is a terrible shame because I otherwise look really cute with my hair in a ponytail. HALP.
I, too, recently took a break from hormonal contraceptives.
(Sidenote: A lot of doctors tell you there’s no reason for you to do this, and some will say you can use the pill or the patch or what have you to avoid having periods, uh, period, because your body doesn’t need to have a period when it isn’t trying to conceive a child. There’s apparently not much risk in taking these hormones as long as you’re a non-smoker without heart problems and you have your doctor’s approval. O.K.: I’m not a doctor, but I feel that I may benefit from a one or two-month break every now and then. That’s just a personal choice, I don’t necessarily encourage everyone else to do it, and I don’t pretend to be qualified to dispense medical advice.)
I, too, noticed an increase in facial acne, mostly on my forehead. Mine was pretty much explosive though, because besides being off hormones for the first time in a year, it was also around Christmas, meaning I was eating a lot of junk, and also meaning that the weather was super harsh. Terrible.
The fact that your current beauty regimen does not include a moisturizer pretty much shocks me. Not because I’m disgusted by your manliness, but because I’m pretty sure my own face would fall off if I did what you’re doing without regular moisturizing.
Your skin will produce an excess of oil when it’s fooled into thinking it’s too dry, -- rough weather, hormones and excessive cleansing are things that can fool it -- and this will produce stuff like acne and/or greasy hair. Being vigilant about washing the oil off (i.e., washing your face and hair often and avoiding things like moisturizer and conditioner) doesn’t really help that much, because it just provokes the skin into greasing itself some more.
For your acne, you can try washing your face less and washing your hair every second day and using conditioner, because hair and scalp health can be a factor in breakouts (I try to shampoo and condition every third day, myself, and I only heat style twice a week at the most, and you'll find a lot of the high end hairdressers and colourists think this way too), but moisturizer sounds like what you need. It might not work right away, and your spottiness might even worsen for a day or two or three because your skin will need some time to stabilize, deal with the new moisture and ease up on producing its own, but you’d likely notice a difference of the good kind in a week or two.
You can’t just put any old moisturizer on a face, let alone a broken-out one. The store-brand body lotion you find at Wal-Mart or whatever and even the more expensive body lotion you might have from like The Body Shop would likely have a comedogenic (pore-screwing) effect on your face. This is my usual stuff, and I would recommend this version for what you’re telling me about your skin. If you’d rather not spend $30 on this stuff (though I find it lasts me three months), there’s this stuff, for combination skin, which you can get at pretty much any pharmacy for not much money. There is a moisturizer out there for everyone. I'm a pretty big tightwad these days, but I think face cream is something people of all conceivable genders and ages need to invest in.
And, you may not find these helpful, but I just want to express my love for these damn things. They’re little packet facials, $2 at pharmacies everywhere, and after one of them my skin looks about a million times better than normal. They are most definitely not meant for regular use, but when you want your skin to look extra dewy once in a while, why the Hell not?
Someone else wrote in to comment:
so another problem with this girl's skin routine might be her over-exfoliation, especially if she is doing it every day in the shower like she said. That's far too often, and basically her skin is going to be producing even more oil not only because it is dried out, but because it is trying to protect itself after being rubbed raw daily.
I'm going to go out on a limb and guess that she's using St. Ives Apricot Scrub, just because it is quite popular. It's a great product, but not for every day use. I'd recommend some of their regular face washes, if she's looking for something that isn't too harsh.
Another good and economical moisturizer I'd recomend is Garnier's Fresh series - they make a really nice eye make-up remover too :)
Good call, stranger! Over-exfoliation can be a problem, too! I tend to forget about that possibility for others because I am the very rare person who needs to exfoliate nearly every day. Some people find even just using a wash cloth has enough of an exfoliating effect for them. Definitely look into a non-scratchy cleanser. I use this foamy one.
And another adds:
In picking a moisturizer, it's important to look for something that's water based and ph balanced.
Balanced ph is mega important, especially for people who tend to break out a lot.
Yup! Try that, if you like! That info will be on the label.
Other than that, I don’t know if your sleeping position would affect things much. Change/wash your pillowcase once a week if you feel like it, and definitely see if you can sleep in a ponytail, as it could be your hair between your face and the pillow causing things.
Something else to consider: What is your diet like? When you had the hormone crutch keeping your acne in check, you might have been able to get away with more vitamin imbalance. When I’m eating a lot of B12-heavy foods (bacon, eggs, cheese, most good things) and not balancing it out with green veg and antioxidants, I acne up real good, especially on my temples. I don’t think I’d recommend trying to reduce your B12 intake unless acne is not your only problem, because it’s very important for your immune system, but make sure you’re eating your damn broccoli and red, blue and purple fruits and berries (pretty sure RED WINE COUNTS, if you’re into that sort of thing), and drink a lot of water. I don’t really buy into the 12 glasses a day thing, and some experts do say the amount people need will vary. I’ve read more than once that you should drink so often that you never let yourself feel thirsty. So, there you go? Drink that much?
Thanks for being my first non-dating/relationship question asker ever! Glad to suspect your love life is probably O.K.!
Monday, February 16, 2009
Just one more, until 02/14/10
It's Monday so I got some mailllllll. This message is from my friend and yours, Mary of The Mary Report.
I resent the implication that I am well-adjusted and/or satisfied with my life (har har), but really? We just ignore all this business at my house. We don't even acknowledge the day and I like it this way. The first year we were together I was all, "I'm not into Valentine's day, and we're both broke, so let's please not do anything," and he agreed. But then he got me a gift anyway! And it was a really nice gift! But then I felt awful because I didn't get him anything! Ugh!
Anyway. I'm totally going to hit the SuperStore for cheap chocolate on Sunday. Hooray! And Sorry Mom is the best ever.
Mary’s got some good sense.
Know what I did for Valentine’s Day? I shaved my legs. My live-in brought me a Kit-Kat when he got off work, because I called him and asked him to bring me one. We made bacon and eggs, had a bath, and then went to bed at 8 p.m. with a bottle of red wine. Verdict: Best V-Day of all time.
Sidenote: What is with the whole, somebody getting you something for Valentine’s day, or whatever other holiday, after you’ve both agreed to not make a big deal about it? It’s O.K., as long as he or she is like Mary's S.O. and not expecting you to surprise them, too, I guess.
Some people have gotten into real trouble believing Valentine’s Day was not going to be an issue to find their partner was expecting some kind of jewelry commercial-esque plot twist.
Exhibit A:
i made the mistake of starting something casual with a girl in late january. we were each other’s dates to a few rock shows, we had a few “slumber-parties.” i don’t know if i thought i was having a fling, but i wasn’t thinking too hard about it. i just thought we were having fun and seeing where it would go. i didn’t want to do something too big for valentine’s in case it scared her off, because we aren’t all that mush, and really we’ve only been seeing each other a few weeks, and i wouldve felt like an insincere knob. i gave her a little spiderman valentine from my nephew’s set, dropped it in her mailbox because we hadn’t made plans to see each other and i figured she’d be busy. cute, right? i guess not! she called me all, ‘wtf is this shit?’ she wanted me to come over uninvited to ‘surprise’ her (even though that’s what she was expecting? surprise? wtf, right?), and she’s pretty pissed because of what her roommates got from their boyfriends and because she stayed home by herself while they were all out doing something. now i don’t know what kind of shape we’re in. i don’t know if she hates me, i don’t know if i’m supposed to make it up to her, i don’t even know if i want to do that because if i wasn’t sure how i felt about her before i’m def not sure now. and i wonder if we’d be in this shape if only valentines hadn’t happened a few weeks after we started seeing each other. what the hell do i do now?
A kids' Spiderman valentine? That IS pretty cute, and pretty safe, and it looks like this situation called for safe. A few weeks is rarely enough time to know well enough how you feel about someone in order to make crazy declarations. You know, an insincere knob is a dangerous thing to be. People in love with being in love are just the freaking worst. Their relationships have nothing to do with the other party. They just get off on making grand gestures for other people to see –- they’re not having fun with just the person they're with, they have to have everybody else watching -- and its too bad those grand gestures fool unwitting girls and boys into believing they’re onto the real thing with someone.
This girl may in fact watch too many movies, if she doesn’t see the danger of a person who is too lovey too fast. It’s not like you did nothing, which, even given my own relaxed attitude about the 14th, I don't recommend when you're very early into a thing with somebody, unless you make sure there's nothing expected. Because there are varying stances on this stuff, you don't know if you risk hurting somebody's feelings.
Maybe you should have talked to her instead of coming up with your own solution (though I think it was pretty good). In the same breath, what about her? What did she get you for Valentine's Day? It does kind of suck that she didn't have a good night sitting at home while her roomies went out, but she could have suggested you come over or that you do something.
Maybe things would have played out differently if you had gotten together at a different time in the year. It might be telling about her character and maturity that she’s had this reaction. Maybe it’s lucky you got Valentine’s Day out of the way early, because now you’ve seen this side of her. Like I said on Friday, Valentine’s Day doesn’t really create problems, but it can identify them. In relationships, in situations, in people.
But on Valentine's Day sometimes people put pressure on themselves and their partners, crushes, what have you, to make conclusions and statements about their romantic situations, when ordinarily these thoughts and words and actions would just come about with time. The whole thing may be fixed with some talking.
Talk to her about why what you did was right for you. Tell her you didn’t want to scare her off, and tell her you didn’t want to do something you couldn’t possibly mean yet. Listen to what she has to say. Hopefully she makes sense to you, and she appreciates your logic. If you can’t make her understand that you were just doing the most genuine thing you could, and if you decide it was just some dumb-ass cinematic encounter she was looking for, good riddance.
And that does it for V.D. 2009. Tomorrow: a non-relationship question. My range of expertise is broad.
I resent the implication that I am well-adjusted and/or satisfied with my life (har har), but really? We just ignore all this business at my house. We don't even acknowledge the day and I like it this way. The first year we were together I was all, "I'm not into Valentine's day, and we're both broke, so let's please not do anything," and he agreed. But then he got me a gift anyway! And it was a really nice gift! But then I felt awful because I didn't get him anything! Ugh!
Anyway. I'm totally going to hit the SuperStore for cheap chocolate on Sunday. Hooray! And Sorry Mom is the best ever.
Mary’s got some good sense.
Know what I did for Valentine’s Day? I shaved my legs. My live-in brought me a Kit-Kat when he got off work, because I called him and asked him to bring me one. We made bacon and eggs, had a bath, and then went to bed at 8 p.m. with a bottle of red wine. Verdict: Best V-Day of all time.
Sidenote: What is with the whole, somebody getting you something for Valentine’s day, or whatever other holiday, after you’ve both agreed to not make a big deal about it? It’s O.K., as long as he or she is like Mary's S.O. and not expecting you to surprise them, too, I guess.
Some people have gotten into real trouble believing Valentine’s Day was not going to be an issue to find their partner was expecting some kind of jewelry commercial-esque plot twist.
Exhibit A:
i made the mistake of starting something casual with a girl in late january. we were each other’s dates to a few rock shows, we had a few “slumber-parties.” i don’t know if i thought i was having a fling, but i wasn’t thinking too hard about it. i just thought we were having fun and seeing where it would go. i didn’t want to do something too big for valentine’s in case it scared her off, because we aren’t all that mush, and really we’ve only been seeing each other a few weeks, and i wouldve felt like an insincere knob. i gave her a little spiderman valentine from my nephew’s set, dropped it in her mailbox because we hadn’t made plans to see each other and i figured she’d be busy. cute, right? i guess not! she called me all, ‘wtf is this shit?’ she wanted me to come over uninvited to ‘surprise’ her (even though that’s what she was expecting? surprise? wtf, right?), and she’s pretty pissed because of what her roommates got from their boyfriends and because she stayed home by herself while they were all out doing something. now i don’t know what kind of shape we’re in. i don’t know if she hates me, i don’t know if i’m supposed to make it up to her, i don’t even know if i want to do that because if i wasn’t sure how i felt about her before i’m def not sure now. and i wonder if we’d be in this shape if only valentines hadn’t happened a few weeks after we started seeing each other. what the hell do i do now?
A kids' Spiderman valentine? That IS pretty cute, and pretty safe, and it looks like this situation called for safe. A few weeks is rarely enough time to know well enough how you feel about someone in order to make crazy declarations. You know, an insincere knob is a dangerous thing to be. People in love with being in love are just the freaking worst. Their relationships have nothing to do with the other party. They just get off on making grand gestures for other people to see –- they’re not having fun with just the person they're with, they have to have everybody else watching -- and its too bad those grand gestures fool unwitting girls and boys into believing they’re onto the real thing with someone.
This girl may in fact watch too many movies, if she doesn’t see the danger of a person who is too lovey too fast. It’s not like you did nothing, which, even given my own relaxed attitude about the 14th, I don't recommend when you're very early into a thing with somebody, unless you make sure there's nothing expected. Because there are varying stances on this stuff, you don't know if you risk hurting somebody's feelings.
Maybe you should have talked to her instead of coming up with your own solution (though I think it was pretty good). In the same breath, what about her? What did she get you for Valentine's Day? It does kind of suck that she didn't have a good night sitting at home while her roomies went out, but she could have suggested you come over or that you do something.
Maybe things would have played out differently if you had gotten together at a different time in the year. It might be telling about her character and maturity that she’s had this reaction. Maybe it’s lucky you got Valentine’s Day out of the way early, because now you’ve seen this side of her. Like I said on Friday, Valentine’s Day doesn’t really create problems, but it can identify them. In relationships, in situations, in people.
But on Valentine's Day sometimes people put pressure on themselves and their partners, crushes, what have you, to make conclusions and statements about their romantic situations, when ordinarily these thoughts and words and actions would just come about with time. The whole thing may be fixed with some talking.
Talk to her about why what you did was right for you. Tell her you didn’t want to scare her off, and tell her you didn’t want to do something you couldn’t possibly mean yet. Listen to what she has to say. Hopefully she makes sense to you, and she appreciates your logic. If you can’t make her understand that you were just doing the most genuine thing you could, and if you decide it was just some dumb-ass cinematic encounter she was looking for, good riddance.
And that does it for V.D. 2009. Tomorrow: a non-relationship question. My range of expertise is broad.
Friday, February 13, 2009
The pink and red elephant in the room
So it's Friday, February 13th. Somewhat predictably, I got a ton of Valentine’s Day-related mail towards the end of this week. I don’t have room to run all of the letters, and because they also somewhat predictably bring up the same main issues, I couldn’t really pick one to use over the others.
Consensus is: people be stressin’ over a Hallmark holiday. Sure, there are the little sweetie pies who are racking their brains trying to come up with something that is enough for their treasured ones (cuuuuute), but then there are people who are going to burn down the candy store.
Some people don’t have an S.O. so they feel left out or even rage-filled. Some people are spoken for but they’re a little afraid to be disappointed. Some people are resenting the obligation to behave differently or more extravagantly tomorrow. It goes on. Whatever.
There’s a lot of anti-Valentine’s Day sentiment out there, a la “it sucks that there’s this social construction geared towards making money for corporations by making people feel bad about themselves.” Valid! I’m not going to take anybody who wants to criticize consumption and commercial manipulation to court because I am on that train like nobody’s business these days.
But, sociology and economics aside, in a purely psychological and existential sense: well-adjusted people who are satisfied in their lives don’t give a damn.
Valentine’s Day triggers an introspective sentiment in a lot of people; it doesn’t create problems, it simply draws attention to problems. Personally, I like cupcakes and chocolate and flowers and crafts and will do low key things for platonic friends and romantic partners alike if the mood strikes and I have the time and resources. But I’ve noticed that Valentine’s Day finds me a little more self-conscious than usual, and intentionally or not I’ve ended up in meditations on the nature of the relationship in the public sphere, and on my relationship in particular, if I was in one. My mood this time of year is always very telling, and I can only assume the case is the same with others. It's the definition of idiotic to resent something just because it makes you think.
If Valentine’s Day gives you a bad feeling about being single, for example, a feeling so bad that it drives you to waste energy being incredulous or very depressed about it: It’s quite possible you’re not happy about being single.
Some people are insistent. “I’m perfectly satisfied when not attached, it’s my parents/friends/coworkers/ex-lovers who make me feel worthless about it with their showing off and shit.” Well, either you’re too easily convinced to feel worthless and therefore not happy about being single, or you require too much validation from others in this area of your life, or your non-romantic relationships with or attitudes about these people need work. All of these are issues deserving of attention, and pre-existing February 14th 2009. Do something about it. Don’t blame Cupid. He’s imaginary. It's not productive.
And don’t despair. For, there is this, my paper lace and macaroni heart to you:
http://sorry-mom.com/
There is much comfort to be drawn, perspective to be gained and lessons to be learned from reading the hook-up horror stories of others. He doesn’t bring you flowers anymore? At least he’s not this guy. Dude, you think you don’t have the first clue about how to handle women? You’re probably in better shape than this guy. And so on.
And don't forget: discount chocolate next week! I can't wait.
Consensus is: people be stressin’ over a Hallmark holiday. Sure, there are the little sweetie pies who are racking their brains trying to come up with something that is enough for their treasured ones (cuuuuute), but then there are people who are going to burn down the candy store.
Some people don’t have an S.O. so they feel left out or even rage-filled. Some people are spoken for but they’re a little afraid to be disappointed. Some people are resenting the obligation to behave differently or more extravagantly tomorrow. It goes on. Whatever.
There’s a lot of anti-Valentine’s Day sentiment out there, a la “it sucks that there’s this social construction geared towards making money for corporations by making people feel bad about themselves.” Valid! I’m not going to take anybody who wants to criticize consumption and commercial manipulation to court because I am on that train like nobody’s business these days.
But, sociology and economics aside, in a purely psychological and existential sense: well-adjusted people who are satisfied in their lives don’t give a damn.
Valentine’s Day triggers an introspective sentiment in a lot of people; it doesn’t create problems, it simply draws attention to problems. Personally, I like cupcakes and chocolate and flowers and crafts and will do low key things for platonic friends and romantic partners alike if the mood strikes and I have the time and resources. But I’ve noticed that Valentine’s Day finds me a little more self-conscious than usual, and intentionally or not I’ve ended up in meditations on the nature of the relationship in the public sphere, and on my relationship in particular, if I was in one. My mood this time of year is always very telling, and I can only assume the case is the same with others. It's the definition of idiotic to resent something just because it makes you think.
If Valentine’s Day gives you a bad feeling about being single, for example, a feeling so bad that it drives you to waste energy being incredulous or very depressed about it: It’s quite possible you’re not happy about being single.
Some people are insistent. “I’m perfectly satisfied when not attached, it’s my parents/friends/coworkers/ex-lovers who make me feel worthless about it with their showing off and shit.” Well, either you’re too easily convinced to feel worthless and therefore not happy about being single, or you require too much validation from others in this area of your life, or your non-romantic relationships with or attitudes about these people need work. All of these are issues deserving of attention, and pre-existing February 14th 2009. Do something about it. Don’t blame Cupid. He’s imaginary. It's not productive.
And don’t despair. For, there is this, my paper lace and macaroni heart to you:
http://sorry-mom.com/
There is much comfort to be drawn, perspective to be gained and lessons to be learned from reading the hook-up horror stories of others. He doesn’t bring you flowers anymore? At least he’s not this guy. Dude, you think you don’t have the first clue about how to handle women? You’re probably in better shape than this guy. And so on.
And don't forget: discount chocolate next week! I can't wait.
Thursday, February 12, 2009
Happy, uh, Valentine's Day... I'm sorry
I am dating someone who I really care about. We have our issues as any couple does, but we are really determined to discuss them and to work towards solutions. We both aim to be as honest with each other as possible and are usually successful at that. There is something however that I have not been able to effectively express to him, and it is causing me quite a bit of emotional turmoil.
In the past, my boyfriend has had a bad habit of essentially acting almost ambivilant to my feelings. He would act surprised if I was upset when he broke longstanding plans at the last second. If I dared to complain, he would accuse me of being selfish. Now, I have been upfront with him about how both those actions made me feel, and though some soul-baring conversations, I think we have addressed the underlying issues related to his behaviour in those situations (and mine, as well).
Here is the current issue, though. Basically, I cannot shake the feeling that he is always going to let me down like that, even when he hasn't in quite a long time. If we are meeting up for coffee, and he is a few minutes late, I become convinced that he isn't coming. If he invites me to dinner, until I'm sitting across from him at the table, I am always sure that he will break the date. Valentines Day is coming up, and I'm not at all excited at the prospect of a romantic (cliched, I am aware) night, because I don't think that it will happen. I don't know how to be honest with him about these feelings, because how can you tell someone that you are pretty sure they are going to act like a dick even if they don't deserve it? History does tend to repeat itself, but I want to trust him enough that in this case it won't. I don't know how I can do that though.
It’s really funny how we can come to regard our partner as our worst enemy. We are most vulnerable to them, both because they have a certain access to our lives, and because they are our loved ones and we care so much about what they think and how they feel about us.
When the time comes for him to do something -- or a series of things -- hugely hurtful to you, this emotional power he has over you becomes apparent, and it starts to hang over your relationship like a big awful ugly… hanging… thing… and it can lead you to close yourself off and guard against hurt more and more, effectively reducing your emotional investment in the relationship until it dries up and blows away, completely bloodless.
You know that’s kind of what risks happening here, right? Besides feeling quite miserable yourself, you’re damaging your relationship by expecting the worst, and you stand to hurt it even more if you give him the impression that the strides he’s made don’t matter because you’re still not happy.
You want to know how to express this feeling to him? Here's a very unpopular stance for an advice blogger to take, what with all the honesty and openness rhetoric to be absorbed out there: you should actually button it. I think if you want to continue to see this person romantically, this feeling you have, about how you’re scared he’s going to let you down again, is not worth feeling, and therefore not worth discussing with him.
‘You are such a bitch,' some shocked person is saying out there. 'They are her feelings. How can she help what she feels?'
Well, not easily, but you know what? Anybody can feel a feeling. Just because you feel something doesn’t mean there’s anything very special or inherently right about it. She tells her boyfriend that she’s still waiting for him to let her down. Great. What does he do with that? What does he say to that?
“O.K. lovernut, I’ll just keep doing what I’m doing but with this big old useless bad feeling you just gave me to make everything harder! Way to spread the pessimism you’re feeling to me! Hope it made you feel better! See you at dinner! NOT THAT YOU'RE EXPECTING ME TO MAKE IT. THANKS FOR HAVING NO FAITH IN ME.”
Back to you: as you have written here yourself, despite this unpleasant apprehension you feel saddled with, there is currently nothing for you to correct about his behaviour that has not already been corrected. If he's doing alright so far, it doesn’t help him to hear what you’ve already said, it may just hurt him and discourage him, and you don’t have any guarantee that if you tell him what you’re thinking it’ll even help you all that much. Really: Just don’t, O.K.? Not unless a) he actually screws up again and he needs another reminder of how this makes you feel, or b) you're ready to dump him. It sounds like he's doing his best so far, and that you're not planning to dump him, so it's on you now.
How do you shake the feeling? Consider this:
If he does manage to disappoint you someday down the road (and I see that you know that there is a chance he will. Lots of people want to say that life is short but from where I sit, it’s pretty long actually, and there’s no limit to the shit that can go down in this span of time), it actually will not kill you to be disappointed again. That’s life, and that's what forgiveness is for, and if he's worth anything he will not abuse the forgiveness principle.
And that's another thing: Have you forgiven him for what happened before? Do you know what it means to truly forgive? It isn't a matter of just deciding to not exact revenge on him for disservices rendered. It's deciding that his intentions are the best, and trusting that he wants to do what he says he will, and having faith that he will do what he says he will. You should not be with someone you can’t forgive.
I understand that it’s not your fault he hurt you in the first place, and you’re justified in feeling a little bit guarded after the shit time you’ve had with him in the past, but do you want to be justified, or do you want things to work out with him? If you don’t have faith in him, you don’t have much of a relationship. If you cannot let his past behaviour go and trust in his good intentions, if you cannot tolerate any more screw-ups in the future, things may be ruined between you, and you might as well go your separate ways.
Maybe that'll motivate you.
In the past, my boyfriend has had a bad habit of essentially acting almost ambivilant to my feelings. He would act surprised if I was upset when he broke longstanding plans at the last second. If I dared to complain, he would accuse me of being selfish. Now, I have been upfront with him about how both those actions made me feel, and though some soul-baring conversations, I think we have addressed the underlying issues related to his behaviour in those situations (and mine, as well).
Here is the current issue, though. Basically, I cannot shake the feeling that he is always going to let me down like that, even when he hasn't in quite a long time. If we are meeting up for coffee, and he is a few minutes late, I become convinced that he isn't coming. If he invites me to dinner, until I'm sitting across from him at the table, I am always sure that he will break the date. Valentines Day is coming up, and I'm not at all excited at the prospect of a romantic (cliched, I am aware) night, because I don't think that it will happen. I don't know how to be honest with him about these feelings, because how can you tell someone that you are pretty sure they are going to act like a dick even if they don't deserve it? History does tend to repeat itself, but I want to trust him enough that in this case it won't. I don't know how I can do that though.
It’s really funny how we can come to regard our partner as our worst enemy. We are most vulnerable to them, both because they have a certain access to our lives, and because they are our loved ones and we care so much about what they think and how they feel about us.
When the time comes for him to do something -- or a series of things -- hugely hurtful to you, this emotional power he has over you becomes apparent, and it starts to hang over your relationship like a big awful ugly… hanging… thing… and it can lead you to close yourself off and guard against hurt more and more, effectively reducing your emotional investment in the relationship until it dries up and blows away, completely bloodless.
You know that’s kind of what risks happening here, right? Besides feeling quite miserable yourself, you’re damaging your relationship by expecting the worst, and you stand to hurt it even more if you give him the impression that the strides he’s made don’t matter because you’re still not happy.
You want to know how to express this feeling to him? Here's a very unpopular stance for an advice blogger to take, what with all the honesty and openness rhetoric to be absorbed out there: you should actually button it. I think if you want to continue to see this person romantically, this feeling you have, about how you’re scared he’s going to let you down again, is not worth feeling, and therefore not worth discussing with him.
‘You are such a bitch,' some shocked person is saying out there. 'They are her feelings. How can she help what she feels?'
Well, not easily, but you know what? Anybody can feel a feeling. Just because you feel something doesn’t mean there’s anything very special or inherently right about it. She tells her boyfriend that she’s still waiting for him to let her down. Great. What does he do with that? What does he say to that?
“O.K. lovernut, I’ll just keep doing what I’m doing but with this big old useless bad feeling you just gave me to make everything harder! Way to spread the pessimism you’re feeling to me! Hope it made you feel better! See you at dinner! NOT THAT YOU'RE EXPECTING ME TO MAKE IT. THANKS FOR HAVING NO FAITH IN ME.”
Back to you: as you have written here yourself, despite this unpleasant apprehension you feel saddled with, there is currently nothing for you to correct about his behaviour that has not already been corrected. If he's doing alright so far, it doesn’t help him to hear what you’ve already said, it may just hurt him and discourage him, and you don’t have any guarantee that if you tell him what you’re thinking it’ll even help you all that much. Really: Just don’t, O.K.? Not unless a) he actually screws up again and he needs another reminder of how this makes you feel, or b) you're ready to dump him. It sounds like he's doing his best so far, and that you're not planning to dump him, so it's on you now.
How do you shake the feeling? Consider this:
If he does manage to disappoint you someday down the road (and I see that you know that there is a chance he will. Lots of people want to say that life is short but from where I sit, it’s pretty long actually, and there’s no limit to the shit that can go down in this span of time), it actually will not kill you to be disappointed again. That’s life, and that's what forgiveness is for, and if he's worth anything he will not abuse the forgiveness principle.
And that's another thing: Have you forgiven him for what happened before? Do you know what it means to truly forgive? It isn't a matter of just deciding to not exact revenge on him for disservices rendered. It's deciding that his intentions are the best, and trusting that he wants to do what he says he will, and having faith that he will do what he says he will. You should not be with someone you can’t forgive.
I understand that it’s not your fault he hurt you in the first place, and you’re justified in feeling a little bit guarded after the shit time you’ve had with him in the past, but do you want to be justified, or do you want things to work out with him? If you don’t have faith in him, you don’t have much of a relationship. If you cannot let his past behaviour go and trust in his good intentions, if you cannot tolerate any more screw-ups in the future, things may be ruined between you, and you might as well go your separate ways.
Maybe that'll motivate you.
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
I wanna be your dog
So I open up your blog and the first submission I see is about rules. No offense to the person who submitted it because I was wondering the same thing. But why are women so freaking obsessed with rules? I'm not surprised there is a book but do you think guys will actually read this shit? Not likely. Do you know what most guys do in their spare time? Something that we understand. Take hockey for example, I know what determines an offside, a penalty or a goal because its pretty well defined. When it comes to women, not so much. I only find out the rules when I break them and suffer the emotional wrath built up by all of the men who have wronged her before me (and her friends and Julia Roberts).
So how about some constructive criticism? Should I talk to women on buses or other forms of public transportation (subway, trains, airplanes)? Are drinking establishments the only places to meet women? Yoga classes sure as hell don't work. Honestly, texting doesn't fucking count as talking to me, because its just another way to avoid honesty and face to face conversation. If you cancel a date then call me on the telephone. Remember what phones use to be for? The last girl I was seeing broke up with me by email, how cool is that? I didn't have Facebook at the time so she couldn't use that I guess. What about a girl who invites me twice to her birthday party (greaser guy/pin-up doll theme) and then I go downtown looking like a sleazy Elvis and it turns out that plans changed slightly and people didn't dress up. Do you know why dogs are man's best friend, because women aren't reliable and we can communicate with dogs a hell of a lot easier and we totally get their body language. Its simple, direct and increases in urgency with time
So my point is let me in on all of these rules or give me some positive feedback...I'm only human and I don't even own a dog.
I called my mother long-distance and read your letter to her, because, like me, she enjoys a good tirade.
“RIGHT on,” she half-shouted. I heard my Dad grunt in the way he does when she startles him. “Women need to be honest and stop expecting men to guess what they’re thinking. You know those Brontë girls?”
“Charlotte, Anne and Emily,” I volunteered.
“Yeah, and that Jane Austen. Their books are good books, but women love books from that time because they miss the point, the whole social commentary thing, and they think it was such a romantic way to live in the 18th and 19th century with all the ceremony and the- I don’t think none of that is romantic.”
“No?”
“NO. The men pursued the women, and the women got married if they made the right moves in the game and got the men to make the right moves in the game, and after the wedding their lives were over. Those people didn’t die happy, don’t tell me they did.”
It’s been a while since my mother read any Jane Austen, but I think her take on the social structure of that time and any fascination people still have with it is really interesting. She feels that when people focus on rules too much, they lose sight of the end goal of the courting game – happiness with a companion – and focus instead on… points. Points for looks, points for wealth, points for social connections, points for just doing or saying the right thing at the right time. And then people end up together and they wonder why.
While she only makes generalizations when she’s keyed up about something on the telephone, Mother does suspect that women are more likely to participate in this nigglingly analytic and somewhat sadistic behaviour than men. Not because it comes naturally to them, but because she thinks it’s one of those negative gender stereotypes that some people revel in perpetuating.
People of either sex are capable of being catty, two-faced, vain, superficial, feather-brained and high-strung. Unfortunately, these traits are often thought of as female clichés, and a good deal of the people who think of them as female clichés are actually females who will actually luxuriate in this weak shit as if its part of being proudly feminine. Those females need to sit down and shut up.
BUT YOU KNOW, people of either sex are capable of being slovenly, sports-analogy-obsessed, insensitive, bullish, boorish, crude and willfully simple-minded, but those are often thought of as male clichés, and a lot of men seem to get off on displaying those behaviours and thinking how great they are at being guys.
Besides thinking you had a great point, Mom also thought you sounded a tad on the hypocritical side. We’re not saying that you’re all these bad things – we don’t even know you, and no matter what you’re really like, we both agree the girls in your anecdotes have not been giving you a fair shake; an e-mail breakup? Those coming from both women and men make me ashamed to be a human being.
But why complain that all women are alike (cruel, confusing), when you seem to represent yourself as the typical guy? By making these divisions between men and women and by perpetuating the stereotype of the impatient, woman-confounded man, you might be part of the problem. Maybe you’re even attracting classic female crazy because you’re giving off classic male mystified. That might just be something to think about.
What can you do, though, in the meantime? Pointers, eh? It’s going to depend on what you’re looking for. I’m not sure what that is, but I’ll do my best.
People always say ‘be yourself,’ and we often think it’s because they want us to have good self-esteem and not get stuck in weird teen-sitcom-like personas. I think you need to bear in mind that if you’re not yourself, you actually risk looking dishonest, untrustworthy, mildly evil, or worst of all, desperate.
You must know that some women feel weird about being out and out hit on by strangers, because it’s hard to look and sound genuine when you are feeding somebody a line. They might be thinking stuff like, ‘Who are you? What are you trying to get out of me?’ and they might get the urge to mangle your ego and crush your soul because how dare you come sniffin’ ‘round here ya betta MIIIIIIIIIND YO BUSINESS- (ahem).
Not all of us are so distrustful, and not all of us are looking for something all that pure, but you can’t always tell what anybody is looking for at first sight – this is not women being complicated, this is women being diverse, just as men are diverse. And so, a man who is actually good at flirting doesn’t necessarily know a lot of clever things to say or all the right places to go.
Basically, he’s a genuine guy who knows he can get by by just communicating what is on his mind: thinking that he'd like to kiss a girl and then smiling at her as if he'd like to kiss her, because he knows, as a genuine guy, he can’t make a woman feel manipulated or preyed upon by acting how he's feeling, and that's good because she might not be into being manipulated or preyed upon.
And buddy: if you find that feeling what you're feeling and letting it show on your face and in your actions isn’t working for you, then maybe you need to take a good hard look at what’s on your mind. Maybe women can tell that you just want a dog.
And everybody: call your mother.
So how about some constructive criticism? Should I talk to women on buses or other forms of public transportation (subway, trains, airplanes)? Are drinking establishments the only places to meet women? Yoga classes sure as hell don't work. Honestly, texting doesn't fucking count as talking to me, because its just another way to avoid honesty and face to face conversation. If you cancel a date then call me on the telephone. Remember what phones use to be for? The last girl I was seeing broke up with me by email, how cool is that? I didn't have Facebook at the time so she couldn't use that I guess. What about a girl who invites me twice to her birthday party (greaser guy/pin-up doll theme) and then I go downtown looking like a sleazy Elvis and it turns out that plans changed slightly and people didn't dress up. Do you know why dogs are man's best friend, because women aren't reliable and we can communicate with dogs a hell of a lot easier and we totally get their body language. Its simple, direct and increases in urgency with time
So my point is let me in on all of these rules or give me some positive feedback...I'm only human and I don't even own a dog.
I called my mother long-distance and read your letter to her, because, like me, she enjoys a good tirade.
“RIGHT on,” she half-shouted. I heard my Dad grunt in the way he does when she startles him. “Women need to be honest and stop expecting men to guess what they’re thinking. You know those Brontë girls?”
“Charlotte, Anne and Emily,” I volunteered.
“Yeah, and that Jane Austen. Their books are good books, but women love books from that time because they miss the point, the whole social commentary thing, and they think it was such a romantic way to live in the 18th and 19th century with all the ceremony and the- I don’t think none of that is romantic.”
“No?”
“NO. The men pursued the women, and the women got married if they made the right moves in the game and got the men to make the right moves in the game, and after the wedding their lives were over. Those people didn’t die happy, don’t tell me they did.”
It’s been a while since my mother read any Jane Austen, but I think her take on the social structure of that time and any fascination people still have with it is really interesting. She feels that when people focus on rules too much, they lose sight of the end goal of the courting game – happiness with a companion – and focus instead on… points. Points for looks, points for wealth, points for social connections, points for just doing or saying the right thing at the right time. And then people end up together and they wonder why.
While she only makes generalizations when she’s keyed up about something on the telephone, Mother does suspect that women are more likely to participate in this nigglingly analytic and somewhat sadistic behaviour than men. Not because it comes naturally to them, but because she thinks it’s one of those negative gender stereotypes that some people revel in perpetuating.
People of either sex are capable of being catty, two-faced, vain, superficial, feather-brained and high-strung. Unfortunately, these traits are often thought of as female clichés, and a good deal of the people who think of them as female clichés are actually females who will actually luxuriate in this weak shit as if its part of being proudly feminine. Those females need to sit down and shut up.
BUT YOU KNOW, people of either sex are capable of being slovenly, sports-analogy-obsessed, insensitive, bullish, boorish, crude and willfully simple-minded, but those are often thought of as male clichés, and a lot of men seem to get off on displaying those behaviours and thinking how great they are at being guys.
Besides thinking you had a great point, Mom also thought you sounded a tad on the hypocritical side. We’re not saying that you’re all these bad things – we don’t even know you, and no matter what you’re really like, we both agree the girls in your anecdotes have not been giving you a fair shake; an e-mail breakup? Those coming from both women and men make me ashamed to be a human being.
But why complain that all women are alike (cruel, confusing), when you seem to represent yourself as the typical guy? By making these divisions between men and women and by perpetuating the stereotype of the impatient, woman-confounded man, you might be part of the problem. Maybe you’re even attracting classic female crazy because you’re giving off classic male mystified. That might just be something to think about.
What can you do, though, in the meantime? Pointers, eh? It’s going to depend on what you’re looking for. I’m not sure what that is, but I’ll do my best.
People always say ‘be yourself,’ and we often think it’s because they want us to have good self-esteem and not get stuck in weird teen-sitcom-like personas. I think you need to bear in mind that if you’re not yourself, you actually risk looking dishonest, untrustworthy, mildly evil, or worst of all, desperate.
You must know that some women feel weird about being out and out hit on by strangers, because it’s hard to look and sound genuine when you are feeding somebody a line. They might be thinking stuff like, ‘Who are you? What are you trying to get out of me?’ and they might get the urge to mangle your ego and crush your soul because how dare you come sniffin’ ‘round here ya betta MIIIIIIIIIND YO BUSINESS- (ahem).
Not all of us are so distrustful, and not all of us are looking for something all that pure, but you can’t always tell what anybody is looking for at first sight – this is not women being complicated, this is women being diverse, just as men are diverse. And so, a man who is actually good at flirting doesn’t necessarily know a lot of clever things to say or all the right places to go.
Basically, he’s a genuine guy who knows he can get by by just communicating what is on his mind: thinking that he'd like to kiss a girl and then smiling at her as if he'd like to kiss her, because he knows, as a genuine guy, he can’t make a woman feel manipulated or preyed upon by acting how he's feeling, and that's good because she might not be into being manipulated or preyed upon.
And buddy: if you find that feeling what you're feeling and letting it show on your face and in your actions isn’t working for you, then maybe you need to take a good hard look at what’s on your mind. Maybe women can tell that you just want a dog.
And everybody: call your mother.
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
Doesn't anybody stay in one place anymore?
I am the most cynical human being on the face of this Earth. I suffer from clinical depression, and with the weather right now, I'm not the happiest camper.
I am currently dating the prettiest, happiest, most positive girl in the world, and I'm finding it hard to keep up. In such a short time (more than two months) we have fallen completely in love with one another. The problem is that she is in Vancouver, and I am here in New Brunswick; two opposite sides of the country. She will not be back living in my city (which is where she's originally from) until the summer.
The loneliness is really getting to me, waiting for her to come home from fashion school. This makes me a very unpleasant person to talk to, and my social life is confined to Facebook and my apartment as I find that nothing is really fun without her. I am a big grumpy mess, and recently, I've been finding that I have been taking it out on her a lot as she is the only one I really talk to anymore. I get angry when she doesn't show up on time for Skype dates. I get jealous when she tells me how much fun she is having on her weekends.
She is bright, intelligent, funny, comes from a wealthy family, and is going to a good school that costs a lot of money. Now, I know that money and stuff doesn't mean anything to her when it comes to our relationship NOW since we are so young (21 and 25), but I am a university drop out from a lower-middle class family, living paycheck to paycheck, trying to fight off a couple grand in debt, constantly worrying if I'll ever bounce back.
She is incredible, and I do not want to bring her down into my shit hole. The more I think about how I might be bumming her out with my depression when she has no reason to be, I start to feel insecure and that I don't deserve her or that I will only let her down in the end.
How can someone like me with so much love in their heart for a special person like her get over his own insecurities and unhappiness to make the one he loves happy? I'm sitting here, being a good boy, waiting for her, and it's really starting to pull on my heart strings. I have been quite unfaithful in past relationships, and I really don't want to fuck this one up.
Thanks.
Ugh, my heart. You seem like a very sweet, repentant person, and I’ve been in a few long-distance relationships myself, so my shoulders drooped in a special way when I read your letter. Your life, as a long-distance lover, is one of insane highs and miserable lows. You might have lots of people telling you long-distance is a crock. It's true that mine were miserable, and that none of them worked out, but those guys just weren't for me -- I can't blame the long-distance, seeing as I'm happier without them (though I may have been able to tell they weren't right for me if I'd been seeing them more often). Most of the cons people cite about long-distance relationships are reasons to avoid them when you can, not dissolve ones that are already in progress. Anyway, I'm actually not going to discourage you, there.
Lots of people feel like their partner is the best thing they have going on, but it’s that much worse when you’re actually having bad times in other areas of your life, and even worse when you don’t even have your significant other around. Add something like clinical depression to the mix, and it’s hard to have perspective on your life.
You want to be good for her -- happy, successful (whatever your definition of that is) and not unkind to her like you risk when you’re frustrated about Skype commitments and her social life -- and you want to be not miserable for yourself. One of Oprah’s friends once said ‘you need to be a whole before you can be part of a couple.’ The main thing, maybe the obvious thing, is take care of yourself.
About stuff like finances: All you can do is work as hard as you can, and the pay-off happens when it happens. You need to really accept you’re doing the best you can, for your own good, because you don’t help anybody by worrying. What you can dwell on, though, is how to work on yourself. Not just to be an impressive handsome guy, but to feel good, most important of all.
Everybody says ‘get counseling.’ I say that too, of course, if it’s possible for you. If you’re in school and you’re not happy, milk counseling services for all they’re worth while you can. A lot of employers, especially the major ones, offer programs that people can access mental health practitioners through, too. Speak to your family doctor about your situation, and they might have some options for you as well.
But above and beyond that: Are you eating well? Vitamin D is crucial when it comes to mood, especially this time of year, so if you can pick up a bottle of supplements and a fish filet to steam every now and then (if you eat fish), that will make a world of difference. You also get vitamin D from the sun, so you need to get outside where you can see the light for a few minutes any time it comes out from behind the February clouds.
Are you exercising? I would actually advise against joining a gym unless you know you’ll go there. Attaching the whole commuting element, besides the financial one that comes with having a gym membership, makes it easier to not exercise. Take walks in the cold air with a big bottle of water. I know a guy who takes a sheet, fills it with dirty laundry, ties it to his ceiling, and punches at it for an hour before he goes to bed at night. Push-ups? Serotonin, you guys. Serotonin makes exercise so good for depression (and exercise passes the time like gangbusters).
How are you sleeping? Sometimes going to bed late and waking up late really affects your mood and outlook. If you don’t have a work (or Skype) schedule that makes it impossible, even if you don’t have to get up until later, try getting up around 9 a.m. every day. That one’s just a thought. It does work for me, I have to say.
What really makes me sit up and take notice here, though, are your last few lines:
I'm sitting here, being a good boy, waiting for her, and it's really starting to pull on my heart strings. I have been quite unfaithful in past relationships, and I really don't want to fuck this one up.
You said a little further up in your letter that going out doesn’t really interest you and you’re not much fun to be around anyway, because everything pales in comparison to time spent with her, but it also seems like somewhere in your heart you’re a little afraid something could happen out there that might jeopardize things with Ladybug. Someone else might say, ‘well you don’t love her enough, if you think you’ll cheat if you try to go out and have some fun.’ That isn’t what I would say, though.
I wonder if, on some level, maybe subconsciously, in an effort to keep from making mistakes you made before, you’re doing the opposite of what you would usually do because you are just that determined where this girl is concerned. You say you're cynical, but I bet you were a pretty social person despite that (otherwise it's a little harder to be unfaithful), and while you may have had some important romantic relationships, they maybe took more of a back seat to having fun. There’s nothing wrong with that, until you want to be very serious about someone. However, when that time comes, you can’t let your relationship become the thing in your life. You have just got to find more stuff to do and think about, like she has done, otherwise you really risk making her crazy.
This may be something to consider: What has sex meant to you in the past? There are some people who just really like it a lot, but there are scads of people who are addicted to the validation that comes from it. A lot of people in committed, monogamous, but long-distance relationships feel worthless when they’re not getting any (a lot of people in committed, monogamous local relationships feel worthless when they’re only getting it from one person, I might add). When they hit that low, they forget all about who they love, and it doesn’t come back to them until regret sets in. That’s not an excuse, by any means, but if you find that this could be you, it’s a new way to think about and try to make sense of your past behaviour. Time spent considering that could help you find the key to a fulfilling social life while she’s away, and it’ll most definitely benefit your future with her.
Regardless of whether I'm right or not here, bear in mind: Spring, and the end of the school year, is coming soon.
I am currently dating the prettiest, happiest, most positive girl in the world, and I'm finding it hard to keep up. In such a short time (more than two months) we have fallen completely in love with one another. The problem is that she is in Vancouver, and I am here in New Brunswick; two opposite sides of the country. She will not be back living in my city (which is where she's originally from) until the summer.
The loneliness is really getting to me, waiting for her to come home from fashion school. This makes me a very unpleasant person to talk to, and my social life is confined to Facebook and my apartment as I find that nothing is really fun without her. I am a big grumpy mess, and recently, I've been finding that I have been taking it out on her a lot as she is the only one I really talk to anymore. I get angry when she doesn't show up on time for Skype dates. I get jealous when she tells me how much fun she is having on her weekends.
She is bright, intelligent, funny, comes from a wealthy family, and is going to a good school that costs a lot of money. Now, I know that money and stuff doesn't mean anything to her when it comes to our relationship NOW since we are so young (21 and 25), but I am a university drop out from a lower-middle class family, living paycheck to paycheck, trying to fight off a couple grand in debt, constantly worrying if I'll ever bounce back.
She is incredible, and I do not want to bring her down into my shit hole. The more I think about how I might be bumming her out with my depression when she has no reason to be, I start to feel insecure and that I don't deserve her or that I will only let her down in the end.
How can someone like me with so much love in their heart for a special person like her get over his own insecurities and unhappiness to make the one he loves happy? I'm sitting here, being a good boy, waiting for her, and it's really starting to pull on my heart strings. I have been quite unfaithful in past relationships, and I really don't want to fuck this one up.
Thanks.
Ugh, my heart. You seem like a very sweet, repentant person, and I’ve been in a few long-distance relationships myself, so my shoulders drooped in a special way when I read your letter. Your life, as a long-distance lover, is one of insane highs and miserable lows. You might have lots of people telling you long-distance is a crock. It's true that mine were miserable, and that none of them worked out, but those guys just weren't for me -- I can't blame the long-distance, seeing as I'm happier without them (though I may have been able to tell they weren't right for me if I'd been seeing them more often). Most of the cons people cite about long-distance relationships are reasons to avoid them when you can, not dissolve ones that are already in progress. Anyway, I'm actually not going to discourage you, there.
Lots of people feel like their partner is the best thing they have going on, but it’s that much worse when you’re actually having bad times in other areas of your life, and even worse when you don’t even have your significant other around. Add something like clinical depression to the mix, and it’s hard to have perspective on your life.
You want to be good for her -- happy, successful (whatever your definition of that is) and not unkind to her like you risk when you’re frustrated about Skype commitments and her social life -- and you want to be not miserable for yourself. One of Oprah’s friends once said ‘you need to be a whole before you can be part of a couple.’ The main thing, maybe the obvious thing, is take care of yourself.
About stuff like finances: All you can do is work as hard as you can, and the pay-off happens when it happens. You need to really accept you’re doing the best you can, for your own good, because you don’t help anybody by worrying. What you can dwell on, though, is how to work on yourself. Not just to be an impressive handsome guy, but to feel good, most important of all.
Everybody says ‘get counseling.’ I say that too, of course, if it’s possible for you. If you’re in school and you’re not happy, milk counseling services for all they’re worth while you can. A lot of employers, especially the major ones, offer programs that people can access mental health practitioners through, too. Speak to your family doctor about your situation, and they might have some options for you as well.
But above and beyond that: Are you eating well? Vitamin D is crucial when it comes to mood, especially this time of year, so if you can pick up a bottle of supplements and a fish filet to steam every now and then (if you eat fish), that will make a world of difference. You also get vitamin D from the sun, so you need to get outside where you can see the light for a few minutes any time it comes out from behind the February clouds.
Are you exercising? I would actually advise against joining a gym unless you know you’ll go there. Attaching the whole commuting element, besides the financial one that comes with having a gym membership, makes it easier to not exercise. Take walks in the cold air with a big bottle of water. I know a guy who takes a sheet, fills it with dirty laundry, ties it to his ceiling, and punches at it for an hour before he goes to bed at night. Push-ups? Serotonin, you guys. Serotonin makes exercise so good for depression (and exercise passes the time like gangbusters).
How are you sleeping? Sometimes going to bed late and waking up late really affects your mood and outlook. If you don’t have a work (or Skype) schedule that makes it impossible, even if you don’t have to get up until later, try getting up around 9 a.m. every day. That one’s just a thought. It does work for me, I have to say.
What really makes me sit up and take notice here, though, are your last few lines:
I'm sitting here, being a good boy, waiting for her, and it's really starting to pull on my heart strings. I have been quite unfaithful in past relationships, and I really don't want to fuck this one up.
You said a little further up in your letter that going out doesn’t really interest you and you’re not much fun to be around anyway, because everything pales in comparison to time spent with her, but it also seems like somewhere in your heart you’re a little afraid something could happen out there that might jeopardize things with Ladybug. Someone else might say, ‘well you don’t love her enough, if you think you’ll cheat if you try to go out and have some fun.’ That isn’t what I would say, though.
I wonder if, on some level, maybe subconsciously, in an effort to keep from making mistakes you made before, you’re doing the opposite of what you would usually do because you are just that determined where this girl is concerned. You say you're cynical, but I bet you were a pretty social person despite that (otherwise it's a little harder to be unfaithful), and while you may have had some important romantic relationships, they maybe took more of a back seat to having fun. There’s nothing wrong with that, until you want to be very serious about someone. However, when that time comes, you can’t let your relationship become the thing in your life. You have just got to find more stuff to do and think about, like she has done, otherwise you really risk making her crazy.
This may be something to consider: What has sex meant to you in the past? There are some people who just really like it a lot, but there are scads of people who are addicted to the validation that comes from it. A lot of people in committed, monogamous, but long-distance relationships feel worthless when they’re not getting any (a lot of people in committed, monogamous local relationships feel worthless when they’re only getting it from one person, I might add). When they hit that low, they forget all about who they love, and it doesn’t come back to them until regret sets in. That’s not an excuse, by any means, but if you find that this could be you, it’s a new way to think about and try to make sense of your past behaviour. Time spent considering that could help you find the key to a fulfilling social life while she’s away, and it’ll most definitely benefit your future with her.
Regardless of whether I'm right or not here, bear in mind: Spring, and the end of the school year, is coming soon.
Monday, February 9, 2009
Guest columnists!
Oh hey! I’ve heard from some people who want to lend their $0.02 to what we discussed last week here at TSW. I say: wicked.
First, we have someone weighing in on Thursday’s child, who was having some difficulty with his girlfriend’s online conduct, or rather, the online conduct of others towards her and her handling of it:
I would have to say that the girl I am currently seeing is by far one of the most beautiful women on this planet. She gets a lot of attention whenever we go out and online, especially on her Face Book. I, too, have to read through plenty of off-kilter, uncalled for, disrespectful and perverted comments directed at her on her Face Book (some of them from boys proclaiming their love!), and it does stir up a lot of bad feelings. The jealousy comes from the fact that she is not saying "Hey man, back off" and just lets these assholes objectify her without thinking how it might make me feel, and the anger comes from some douche bag who doesn't respect me, her, or our relationship which, thanks to FB statuses, is very much public.
I would suggest asking her nicely to tell these dead beats to... uhh... beat it. Let her know how much it bothers you, especially on a public forum where it can make you look like the push-over. Or do what I do; acknowledge that that shit is going on and make a similar wall post to shut him up. What can I say, I'm a vindictive dude! I have only been with my girl for about 2 months, but it is really intense and if it means talking to her about it or dissing some "bro" on her wall in public to save the relationship, I say then so be it!
*Shrug* Well put, stranger! It’s a slightly more confrontational approach, but at the core I agree: he’s more than O.K. to say something about it. You also raise a good point, and I don’t know if I had made this clear: these things can put a strain on the dynamic between a couple. I don’t know if it’s a matter of saving the relationship, but it’s better to act (rationally!) than to let resentment well up inside of you.
On Friday, somebody wrote in with some timely questions concerning the latest relationship philosophy phenomenon, He’s Just Not That Into You, namely: Do I really wait for the guy I like to approach me, and how can I show him I’m interested?
One lady kind of disagreed with me… I think:
If a guy really likes you, he WILL ask you out. NO MATTER WHAT.
If a guy might like you, but thinks you won't go out with him and therefore doesn't pursue you...that is because he is letting his own negative self esteem TRUMP his feelings for you and his ability to ask you out. Of course, it doesn't mean that he's "not that into you" but it DOES mean that "he's not that into you" if he has to risk actually asking you out. I know this probably doesn't make sense because you are thinking "but if he likes me, and i like him, then we should go out!" but the thing is that we, as females, go through the same thing...but if we REALLY REALLY REALLY liked a guy...we would let them know. and it is not a big deal to us. (or maybe it is, but we get over it and ask them out.)
If a guy isn't willing to do the same, then he's not THAT into you. He's into you...but not THAT into you. If a guy were really into you the way he SHOULD BE INTO YOU, then he would ask you because life would not be worth living if he didn't have the chance to get to know you better.
Furthermore, guys pursue girls that don't like them and are VERY CLEAR that they don't like them all the time....and guys never get the hint! Conversely, girls always pursue guys that don't really like them....they read into every little act and gesture and then ascribe a heightened sense or meaning to it that isn't really there... For example: "OMG, he sat next to me in class, he's GOT to like me!!!" "Actually...he sat next to you because it was the last open seat in class....wake up?!"
All I'm saying is that a guy doesn't need to know you're into him to ask you out. He will ask you out because he likes you PERIOD. After all, we aren't in junior high anymore. People don't go around telling other people "Hey....So-and-So likes you so you should ask them out." We all know how those relationships worked....they lasted for what?? A day? Maybe 2 weeks at the most....
I’m sorry if it came across like I was encouraging our letter writer to get her friends to set her up with her crush like it’s recess at Degrassi in 1987. By asking if she and he had mutual friends, I just meant that if they did, it’s an indication of how close they are socially and how much time she’s already spending with him. When you’re hanging out with the same people, it’s a start!
But know what I remember about junior high? Everybody tended to become absolutely smitten with others while actually understanding or even knowing very little about them as people. When it became apparent that you liked someone, if they liked you back, you were boyfriend and girlfriend. There was absolutely no building action. It was a simple time.
But it wasn’t a great time. You were up and down, hot and cold. Nobody really thought much about romance, but nobody was the least bit casual about it either. Thank God for adulthood, when dating became about testing the waters and just seeing how you felt and opening your heart to possibilities you wouldn’t have considered when you were a Backstreet Boys fan.
Thank God we learned that feelings can grow over time and that we don’t have to wait for someone we REALLY, REALLY-REALLY are THAT into to come along before we, you know, imbibe (don't lead people on when you know they aren't it for you, or when you know they want something very serious immediately and you're not ready, but otherwise give them a whirl is all I'm saying).
And thank God it’s not necessarily a waste of time to see someone you’re not obsessed with, because that someone might surprise us.
Thank God that we don’t have to lament if a person isn’t as taken with us as we are with them, because maybe the case is they just don’t know you well enough yet.
Thank God it’s a two-way street, too, and men can be just as open as women, and women can be just as proactive as men. Isn’t it great to be an adult?
What you say definitely makes lots of sense; I'm not sure we're disagreeing so much as you're just fleshing out what the book says. I already understood: if someone really REALLY likes somebody, like a LOT, they won’t let their shyness get in the way of something they really KNOW will make them happy.
… Probably. I mean, I could see it.
But while perfectly good men who end up miserable (either alone, or with the wrong person) because they never get the courage to approach anybody they were REALLY, TRULY, VERY MUCH into, are not the norm, they do exist. And I think we can give human beings too much credit – a lot of people, some of them man-people, are pretty passive and easy-going, and just are never that certain about anybody, or even come to consider anybody, until that anybody says, in the words of Abba, “take a chance on me.” Maybe that’s not attractive to some women, maybe that’s not enough for you, maybe you want somebody who will feel very strongly about you from the beginning, but some of us are, I don’t know, disillusioned?
It’s true, and I didn’t think to make the aside: some guys don’t necessarily need to be encouraged. Some really don’t take a hint! But you know that kind of conviction is not something that can happen to every person concerning a person they aren’t already seeing. And, I’ll just put it out there: the likelihood of a man or woman feeling that type of unrelenting conviction increases if they’re mentally unbalanced. Just because Ol’ Crazy will chase the pants off you doesn’t mean Big Sexy will.
I got another reply to this letter:
So, writing as a man, I'd like to say that the book you're talking about is horseshit.
Okay, maybe that's being a bit presumptuous. I haven't read the book, but after seeing what was here I did a wee bit of research. The authors of this book are people who work on (awful) television shows and comedy routines, so I'm not sure why we should be taking them as authorities on the male psyche to begin with, but I digress. Everything I've seen suggests that the book implies a farcical overgeneralization of all men: we think in simple yes/no dichotomies and our only mating strategy is to pursue a woman at all times, at all costs. If it's not clear by my tone already: this is blatantly false.
Men can be every bit as complicated as women when it comes to how we think about relationships. We often have just as many emotional hangups and anxieties when it comes to this sort of thing as women do. And I suppose that's what bothers me the most: As M. aptly notes, this book upholds outdated gender stereotypes which, most of the time, only serve to fuck up our relationship problems even further.
And then another guy summed up:
I have a real problem with "love manuals" or what have you that try and tell us how EVERY SINGLE MAN/WOMAN behaves. Everybody is different and shows their love in different ways, and everybody wants to be treated different kinds of ways.
That pretty much hits the nail on the head, for me. Like I said on Friday, you have to make some allowances for the fact that there are different types of people.
If our letter-writer wants to let the dude be the one to make a move, I did support that. Like I said, the book does have a good point, that philosophy about the guy coming to the girl may stand a good chance of being right, statistically. But I do think that if she wants to try to increase her chances or be proactive, if it’s right for her, she can be a little aggressive, even if it’s just something as simple as making herself more familiar and visible. Her own intuition and style seems to be telling her that there are some aspects of a book (which she found useful, otherwise) she can’t really get behind, and I think, all things considered, she might as well go with that.
First, we have someone weighing in on Thursday’s child, who was having some difficulty with his girlfriend’s online conduct, or rather, the online conduct of others towards her and her handling of it:
I would have to say that the girl I am currently seeing is by far one of the most beautiful women on this planet. She gets a lot of attention whenever we go out and online, especially on her Face Book. I, too, have to read through plenty of off-kilter, uncalled for, disrespectful and perverted comments directed at her on her Face Book (some of them from boys proclaiming their love!), and it does stir up a lot of bad feelings. The jealousy comes from the fact that she is not saying "Hey man, back off" and just lets these assholes objectify her without thinking how it might make me feel, and the anger comes from some douche bag who doesn't respect me, her, or our relationship which, thanks to FB statuses, is very much public.
I would suggest asking her nicely to tell these dead beats to... uhh... beat it. Let her know how much it bothers you, especially on a public forum where it can make you look like the push-over. Or do what I do; acknowledge that that shit is going on and make a similar wall post to shut him up. What can I say, I'm a vindictive dude! I have only been with my girl for about 2 months, but it is really intense and if it means talking to her about it or dissing some "bro" on her wall in public to save the relationship, I say then so be it!
*Shrug* Well put, stranger! It’s a slightly more confrontational approach, but at the core I agree: he’s more than O.K. to say something about it. You also raise a good point, and I don’t know if I had made this clear: these things can put a strain on the dynamic between a couple. I don’t know if it’s a matter of saving the relationship, but it’s better to act (rationally!) than to let resentment well up inside of you.
On Friday, somebody wrote in with some timely questions concerning the latest relationship philosophy phenomenon, He’s Just Not That Into You, namely: Do I really wait for the guy I like to approach me, and how can I show him I’m interested?
One lady kind of disagreed with me… I think:
If a guy really likes you, he WILL ask you out. NO MATTER WHAT.
If a guy might like you, but thinks you won't go out with him and therefore doesn't pursue you...that is because he is letting his own negative self esteem TRUMP his feelings for you and his ability to ask you out. Of course, it doesn't mean that he's "not that into you" but it DOES mean that "he's not that into you" if he has to risk actually asking you out. I know this probably doesn't make sense because you are thinking "but if he likes me, and i like him, then we should go out!" but the thing is that we, as females, go through the same thing...but if we REALLY REALLY REALLY liked a guy...we would let them know. and it is not a big deal to us. (or maybe it is, but we get over it and ask them out.)
If a guy isn't willing to do the same, then he's not THAT into you. He's into you...but not THAT into you. If a guy were really into you the way he SHOULD BE INTO YOU, then he would ask you because life would not be worth living if he didn't have the chance to get to know you better.
Furthermore, guys pursue girls that don't like them and are VERY CLEAR that they don't like them all the time....and guys never get the hint! Conversely, girls always pursue guys that don't really like them....they read into every little act and gesture and then ascribe a heightened sense or meaning to it that isn't really there... For example: "OMG, he sat next to me in class, he's GOT to like me!!!" "Actually...he sat next to you because it was the last open seat in class....wake up?!"
All I'm saying is that a guy doesn't need to know you're into him to ask you out. He will ask you out because he likes you PERIOD. After all, we aren't in junior high anymore. People don't go around telling other people "Hey....So-and-So likes you so you should ask them out." We all know how those relationships worked....they lasted for what?? A day? Maybe 2 weeks at the most....
I’m sorry if it came across like I was encouraging our letter writer to get her friends to set her up with her crush like it’s recess at Degrassi in 1987. By asking if she and he had mutual friends, I just meant that if they did, it’s an indication of how close they are socially and how much time she’s already spending with him. When you’re hanging out with the same people, it’s a start!
But know what I remember about junior high? Everybody tended to become absolutely smitten with others while actually understanding or even knowing very little about them as people. When it became apparent that you liked someone, if they liked you back, you were boyfriend and girlfriend. There was absolutely no building action. It was a simple time.
But it wasn’t a great time. You were up and down, hot and cold. Nobody really thought much about romance, but nobody was the least bit casual about it either. Thank God for adulthood, when dating became about testing the waters and just seeing how you felt and opening your heart to possibilities you wouldn’t have considered when you were a Backstreet Boys fan.
Thank God we learned that feelings can grow over time and that we don’t have to wait for someone we REALLY, REALLY-REALLY are THAT into to come along before we, you know, imbibe (don't lead people on when you know they aren't it for you, or when you know they want something very serious immediately and you're not ready, but otherwise give them a whirl is all I'm saying).
And thank God it’s not necessarily a waste of time to see someone you’re not obsessed with, because that someone might surprise us.
Thank God that we don’t have to lament if a person isn’t as taken with us as we are with them, because maybe the case is they just don’t know you well enough yet.
Thank God it’s a two-way street, too, and men can be just as open as women, and women can be just as proactive as men. Isn’t it great to be an adult?
What you say definitely makes lots of sense; I'm not sure we're disagreeing so much as you're just fleshing out what the book says. I already understood: if someone really REALLY likes somebody, like a LOT, they won’t let their shyness get in the way of something they really KNOW will make them happy.
… Probably. I mean, I could see it.
But while perfectly good men who end up miserable (either alone, or with the wrong person) because they never get the courage to approach anybody they were REALLY, TRULY, VERY MUCH into, are not the norm, they do exist. And I think we can give human beings too much credit – a lot of people, some of them man-people, are pretty passive and easy-going, and just are never that certain about anybody, or even come to consider anybody, until that anybody says, in the words of Abba, “take a chance on me.” Maybe that’s not attractive to some women, maybe that’s not enough for you, maybe you want somebody who will feel very strongly about you from the beginning, but some of us are, I don’t know, disillusioned?
It’s true, and I didn’t think to make the aside: some guys don’t necessarily need to be encouraged. Some really don’t take a hint! But you know that kind of conviction is not something that can happen to every person concerning a person they aren’t already seeing. And, I’ll just put it out there: the likelihood of a man or woman feeling that type of unrelenting conviction increases if they’re mentally unbalanced. Just because Ol’ Crazy will chase the pants off you doesn’t mean Big Sexy will.
I got another reply to this letter:
So, writing as a man, I'd like to say that the book you're talking about is horseshit.
Okay, maybe that's being a bit presumptuous. I haven't read the book, but after seeing what was here I did a wee bit of research. The authors of this book are people who work on (awful) television shows and comedy routines, so I'm not sure why we should be taking them as authorities on the male psyche to begin with, but I digress. Everything I've seen suggests that the book implies a farcical overgeneralization of all men: we think in simple yes/no dichotomies and our only mating strategy is to pursue a woman at all times, at all costs. If it's not clear by my tone already: this is blatantly false.
Men can be every bit as complicated as women when it comes to how we think about relationships. We often have just as many emotional hangups and anxieties when it comes to this sort of thing as women do. And I suppose that's what bothers me the most: As M. aptly notes, this book upholds outdated gender stereotypes which, most of the time, only serve to fuck up our relationship problems even further.
And then another guy summed up:
I have a real problem with "love manuals" or what have you that try and tell us how EVERY SINGLE MAN/WOMAN behaves. Everybody is different and shows their love in different ways, and everybody wants to be treated different kinds of ways.
That pretty much hits the nail on the head, for me. Like I said on Friday, you have to make some allowances for the fact that there are different types of people.
If our letter-writer wants to let the dude be the one to make a move, I did support that. Like I said, the book does have a good point, that philosophy about the guy coming to the girl may stand a good chance of being right, statistically. But I do think that if she wants to try to increase her chances or be proactive, if it’s right for her, she can be a little aggressive, even if it’s just something as simple as making herself more familiar and visible. Her own intuition and style seems to be telling her that there are some aspects of a book (which she found useful, otherwise) she can’t really get behind, and I think, all things considered, she might as well go with that.
Friday, February 6, 2009
She's Just Not That Into Waiting For You
Do you believe the whole. "He's just not that into you?" Sure, when he's not calling, or blowing you off a bunch for his friends or doesn't call when he says he will, i get it. he's probably not that into you and we make excuses for people all the time. I was in the relationship of this kind and wish i had the book then.
I have a hard time believing that when they say (in the book), "If a guy really likes you, he will ask you out. No matter what."
That's fine and all, but how do you let a guy know that you are even interested? The book says that if he likes me, he will ask me out. Do I wait forever for this guy to work up the courage to ask me out or should i let him know i'm into him?And if so, how do i go about doing this?
The books idea is, if he's not asking you out, he's probably just not that into you. Do I move on?
Help!
Sometime after He’s Just Not That Into You came out in book form, I was somewhere on the more positive side of indifferent about it. I skimmed it at the bookstore and noted the realistic tone and the message that you detail in your first paragraph, there, about how not calling and blow-offs equal disinterest. 'NICE, RIGHT ON,' I thought, and then sauntered off for an appointment with a guy I would confront and then break up with a little while later, after I’d forgotten about the book, for, you know, not calling and blowing me off.
But you know what? It turns out he wasn’t actually disinterested. He was just jerking me around because he thought if he looked disinterested, it would make me all the more interested. Too bad that that works sometimes, eh? Some women find nothing more attractive than a man who pays her absolutely no mind and some men know the Hell out of that one and try to base some moves on it. Does the book raise that possibility? No calls + avoidance = disinterested OR passive-aggressive? Not that you’d want passive-aggressive either; Regardless of the reasons it may or may not cite, HJNTIY encourages us to avoid wasting ourselves on people who don’t call and don’t try to see us, and that’s probably good enough. I’d say, call on that behaviour once, but not twice if you can help it and definitely not three times.
So while the book can be helpful (that is, if you’re not the type of lady who will actually just get sick of that treatment and cut him loose, no questions asked), maybe it can’t have everything right, as you seem to have detected. Case in point, this whole asking-out business.
As a straight woman, I like being asked out by men, but I am mega uncomfortable with the idea that I risk being turned down more often when I do the same because if a man was actually attracted to me he would have approached me already. I think this concept reinforces some negative things about traditional gender roles. It encourages men to be forward, it encourages women to be passive, and cute timid men and sexy confident women are just… wrong?
True, some men are like what the book says (though I suspect more men were like that in, uh, the ‘50s). But you’ve got to leave room for the boy who goes after what he wants, but takes a while to realize what that is. And for the boy who seems outgoing and go-getting but is kind of a baby about other things – a man can fear rejection just as much as a woman can, thanks. And for the boy who would make a great companion if he could only make eye contact with you.
So I'm all for the confrontational 'LET'S DATE' from women to men, but it doesn't seemlike you are there yet. How to proceed?
Let's assume for the sake of direction that he's just not considering you. Yet. Because I wouldn't encourage you to pursue someone who clearly has no interest in you, and just in case he isn't secretly in love with you.
Too many people get discouraged because the person they have a crush on doesn't magically feel exactly the same way about them. If he's not considering you yet, it's possible to win him over. Think about the following: What is your connection to him? Where is he in your life? Do you have regular contact? Do you have any mutual friends? Use your answers to these questions to determine how you can become more familiar. Say hi. Smile. Make conversation, even if you have to sit down and think for a while about things you could talk about (don't overthink it, but it never hurts to be prepared). Organize group things you may invite him to as a platonic friend (that means no pressure on either of you) so he can see what you're like with others and so you can just be with him more often. The more you see each other, the more organically things can happen. Maybe you'll reach a point where he'll make a move. Maybe you'll get comfortable enough to make a move.
And if he won’t cooperate, let him go and be as unattainable to you as he pleases. You might be better off.
I have a hard time believing that when they say (in the book), "If a guy really likes you, he will ask you out. No matter what."
That's fine and all, but how do you let a guy know that you are even interested? The book says that if he likes me, he will ask me out. Do I wait forever for this guy to work up the courage to ask me out or should i let him know i'm into him?And if so, how do i go about doing this?
The books idea is, if he's not asking you out, he's probably just not that into you. Do I move on?
Help!
Sometime after He’s Just Not That Into You came out in book form, I was somewhere on the more positive side of indifferent about it. I skimmed it at the bookstore and noted the realistic tone and the message that you detail in your first paragraph, there, about how not calling and blow-offs equal disinterest. 'NICE, RIGHT ON,' I thought, and then sauntered off for an appointment with a guy I would confront and then break up with a little while later, after I’d forgotten about the book, for, you know, not calling and blowing me off.
But you know what? It turns out he wasn’t actually disinterested. He was just jerking me around because he thought if he looked disinterested, it would make me all the more interested. Too bad that that works sometimes, eh? Some women find nothing more attractive than a man who pays her absolutely no mind and some men know the Hell out of that one and try to base some moves on it. Does the book raise that possibility? No calls + avoidance = disinterested OR passive-aggressive? Not that you’d want passive-aggressive either; Regardless of the reasons it may or may not cite, HJNTIY encourages us to avoid wasting ourselves on people who don’t call and don’t try to see us, and that’s probably good enough. I’d say, call on that behaviour once, but not twice if you can help it and definitely not three times.
So while the book can be helpful (that is, if you’re not the type of lady who will actually just get sick of that treatment and cut him loose, no questions asked), maybe it can’t have everything right, as you seem to have detected. Case in point, this whole asking-out business.
As a straight woman, I like being asked out by men, but I am mega uncomfortable with the idea that I risk being turned down more often when I do the same because if a man was actually attracted to me he would have approached me already. I think this concept reinforces some negative things about traditional gender roles. It encourages men to be forward, it encourages women to be passive, and cute timid men and sexy confident women are just… wrong?
True, some men are like what the book says (though I suspect more men were like that in, uh, the ‘50s). But you’ve got to leave room for the boy who goes after what he wants, but takes a while to realize what that is. And for the boy who seems outgoing and go-getting but is kind of a baby about other things – a man can fear rejection just as much as a woman can, thanks. And for the boy who would make a great companion if he could only make eye contact with you.
So I'm all for the confrontational 'LET'S DATE' from women to men, but it doesn't seemlike you are there yet. How to proceed?
Let's assume for the sake of direction that he's just not considering you. Yet. Because I wouldn't encourage you to pursue someone who clearly has no interest in you, and just in case he isn't secretly in love with you.
Too many people get discouraged because the person they have a crush on doesn't magically feel exactly the same way about them. If he's not considering you yet, it's possible to win him over. Think about the following: What is your connection to him? Where is he in your life? Do you have regular contact? Do you have any mutual friends? Use your answers to these questions to determine how you can become more familiar. Say hi. Smile. Make conversation, even if you have to sit down and think for a while about things you could talk about (don't overthink it, but it never hurts to be prepared). Organize group things you may invite him to as a platonic friend (that means no pressure on either of you) so he can see what you're like with others and so you can just be with him more often. The more you see each other, the more organically things can happen. Maybe you'll reach a point where he'll make a move. Maybe you'll get comfortable enough to make a move.
And if he won’t cooperate, let him go and be as unattainable to you as he pleases. You might be better off.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
