I decided to take a day off from life today.
Not entirely, but I definitely skipped the Cardinals game I was gonna go watch and hung out inside all day even thought it's gorgeous outside. I'm feeling pretty crappy because I'm not used to being back at work and physical therapy seriously kicked my ass today.
So I BARELY made it to the corner market this afternoon to pick up a healthy alternative to whatever crap is in my freezer. Unwashed hair pulled up without even looking in a mirror. Glasses. Cropped pajama pants with a hoodie. I have no shame when it comes to my corner market. And I blend in with the druggies.
On the way out, though, pretty attractive tall guy asks me if he can ask me a local question. He asks about my favorite sushi places nearby, which of course in San Francisco turns into a conversation because I had to ask "rolls or sashimi?" and "quality or economy?" He clearly knows all of the places I mention, which I comment on. This prompts him to ask me to go with him to dinner and let him buy me a beer.
My first thought was that he didn't seem drunk. My second was my response - I gestured to myself and said, "have you seen how I'm dressed right now?" He further tried to convince me. Maybe I should have taken him up on it - he's gotta have a good story, but I'm just not up for meeting someone new at the moment. I told him he caught me on a bad day, and that another time that would have totally worked. We said our goodbyes and I walked down the hill to go back to my day off of life and rest. Smiling all the way.
Ego incredibly boosted.
Showing posts with label ilikeboys. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ilikeboys. Show all posts
5.31.2014
2.18.2014
In Times of Trouble
I indulge in bad tv. Fortunately the new light-hearted show about heavy subjects, Enlisted, features my most recently announced actor crush, Geoff Stults. Between him and Bode Miller, I'm in a good place with current media. I'll be even better when 24 comes back.
3.03.2010
Told You I'm Not the Only One
Even SF Weekly thinks SF is a tough city for women looking to date men.
This week they featured an article about a pick-up artist who tried to teach SF women how to pick up men in the city...and found it more difficult than he expected.
Read for yourself: Girl Game
Some favorite excerpts:
Dating's hard! (said in an incredibly whiny voice, of course)
This week they featured an article about a pick-up artist who tried to teach SF women how to pick up men in the city...and found it more difficult than he expected.
Read for yourself: Girl Game
Some favorite excerpts:
...being a single, straight woman in this city can be an exercise in frustration and humiliation. All around the city, successful single women complain about not being able to find quality partners.
Although there's no hard data to prove it, anecdotal evidence abounds.
One possible explanation is that in San Francisco, men who aren't gay, married, or damaged by a previous owner are decidedly cagey when it comes to dating and relationships. "Men are more timid here to ask women out," says Emily Morse, a local radio show host who regularly discusses sex and relationships. "They also seem to think dating just isn't cool."------------
"I've never had as much trouble finding people to date as I have here," a woman wrote. It was the first response to an SF Weekly tweet calling for women fed up with the dating scene in San Francisco and willing to subject themselves to a pickup artist's workshop. "I moved to the city after a nasty breakup, expecting to casually date people," she continued. "I couldn't even get laid at first."------------
Plenty of other responses zoomed in, many including pointed complaints about male-female relations. "I've never seen so much dating down in my life," a woman wrote, referring to how many couples she knows that seem to include a smart, attractive woman and an average, barely tolerable guy.
In San Francisco, though, women have to deal with a lot of ambiguity. "We don't even know what it is," Valencia said of some men she has encountered around the city. "Is it gay? Is it straight? Is it a friend Is it a foe? Is it looking for a job? Is it looking for a place to crash?"
Another contributing factor to the dating doldrums: "There's no pressure to grow up here," she says. "The way I act now is pretty much the same way I acted when I was 24. It's culturally reinforced here. Nobody cares that you're in your late 30s and have roommates."------------
But as someone who has lived in New York City, she has noticed that in San Francisco, men are not very bold in approaching women.
"Here, there are all these group get-togethers," she says. "Men prefer to see women a few times before asking them out." And, as in any other city full of young, ambitious people, San Franciscans seem less interested in settling down than in exploring their options.------------
Maybe it was because we were out on a Wednesday. Maybe we had chosen the wrong bar. But that particular scenario — having just a couple of attractive men to fight over, finding out they're gay, then hitting on them anyway — seemed a perfect representation of what it's like for a single woman in San Francisco.------------
Valencia said her mother has a theory about men. "A good guy is like a good bra," she used to say. "He should uplift and make you look beautiful. He should fit really well. He should flatter you and never poke you in the wrong place or make you uncomfortable."------------
Dating's hard! (said in an incredibly whiny voice, of course)
1.11.2010
From the Mouths of SF Men
Continuing the conversation about nice guys and/or SF passive guys...
I was recently out with a friend who moved here last year from the East Coast and his roommate, who was born and bred in the Bay Area. My friend is the epitome of what I think it means to be a man. (Well, almost...Marlboro Man of Pioneer Woman is the true epitome, but I'm so never gonna meet that type out here.) He pays - even for friends when he can. He makes decisions, he open doors, he carries heavy things, he takes risks, he displays confidence, he walks girls home or hails their cab...as I'd say it back home, his mama done him good. So, knowing my friend's answer already, I asked the roommate if he always paid on the first date. Without hesitation he said no. We delved a little further and he emphasized that he behaves out of a belief in equality, not out of being a cheapskate. He said that he does usually offer to pay, but that the girls frequently argue with him and he's not going to let that go on all night. It seems like maybe the women are the cause of confusion rather than the guys not manning up. Unfortunately, I'm starting to think neither the men nor the women of SF were properly taught the rules (or they let go of their training in the confusion of SF liberalness). To do my part for my humanity, I decided to clarify the rules of paying for dates, as learned in southern Missouri and followed thus far by every man I've ever dated except SF boys.
First Date:
Bill comes, I take out my card in an offer to pay for my half.
He argues and says he has it.
I say thank you and put my card away.
If he actually lets me pay my half, there will be no second date.
I don't care how poor/broke you are. I don't need much. But if I'm not worth you making that gesture the first time we meet, it's not a date, and you therefore won't be getting a second one.
Second Date:
Now, this one is slightly more tricky.
If the first date was fairly expensive, I'm likely to ask if I can take him out this time and insist that I pay, but it will be for a less expensive thing than he did. I will also let him pitch in for drinks or pay half the bill for the date if he insists (and this would earn points and increase likelihood of 3rd date).
If the first date was normal, I'll again offer to pay my half, but I won't be offended if he accepts my offer.
I would expect him to then do something extra, though, like pay for a cab or purchase an after dinner drink. It wouldn't be points against him if he didn't, but it sets it up for a weird dynamic in which we're already discussing who pays for what a little soon in the dating scheme.
If he pays for the second date in full, I will be sure to pay for after dinner drinks or a cab or something small. I will also insist that I get to treat him next time, but again, he'll earn bonus points if on that next time he picks up some small thing like a drink or cab.
And so it goes until it evens out with him paying about 3:2 or so.
I like this plan. I have no problem feeling like he is taking care of me financially in regard to those dates, because it will even out. I'll keep my fridge stocked with his favorite beer or keep his whiskey at my bar. I'll buy the groceries when I make him dinner. I'll spend money on pretty underwear for his benefit. It just works.
The problem with the SF man not paying for the dates in the same way means the other stuff no longer evens out. So I spend money on make-up and hair and cute shoes and facials and yoga classes and sexy underwear - all so he gets what he wants. And now I ALSO have to share the burden of half the dates? As if men spend nearly as much as we do on these things. And honestly, if I trust him to pick up the alcohol, it's gonna be all beer all the time, and sometimes I need to go pick out that fancy bottle of wine. Am I supposed to ask him to repay me for half? Or groceries - I will always go for the local organic cut of beef, so if I expect that I have to buy it...which means I'm paying for it then, too.
These men who are trying to be more equal are forgetting about the natural dynamic that has worked for decades.
YES, I make money. I may even make as much as you. But women still don't make as much as men, even in the exact same positions at the same company. And men sure as hell don't shell out $150 to keep their skin clear and soft, their hair shiny and touchable, their hairy regions waxed, and everything else perfect just for us.
Boys, if you want to date a girl who doesn't wear make-up, shows up in the same clothes you wear, never wears sexy lingerie, has hairy legs and armpits, has wrinkles and/or major zits, and smells like discount soap - fine. Then you can let her pay. And yeah, you may think that beautiful chick across the bar is just that girl, but that's only because you don't know what goes into creating that "natural" look. You know how long we fuss just to make sure that one tousled lock of hair falls just so? And yes, we do it for us. But we also do it for you. So when you go around deciding to treat us equally by choosing not to pay for that first date, you throw off the balance. All of a sudden we're paying equally, but we're putting far more effort into our appearance. Then we start to think maybe we're better than you. Then we start looking for the guy who will pay. OR, we stop giving a shit, stop shaving, and start wearing ratty old grandma undies with holes and frayed waistbands. Up to you boys, make your choice.
ANYWAY, this all came up again because I was reading Why There Are No Girls in SF and Sam posted a guy's perspective of the city's unaggressive men. Sam points out that men are unaggressive here, in this case in approaching women, because the women are too damn scary.
Now, I was taught that if you aren't interested you always say thank you with a big smile and simply decline the opportunity for an introduction or a free drink. This encourages men to keep trying with other woman. Having seen other women out here react harshly to come-ons, I have to wonder if this isn't all our fault. Have too many of us women rejected vocally and meanly to the point where all the SF balls are now shriveled and tucked up inside never to be seen again? Honestly? It almost makes me feel more sorry for the guys here than disgusted with them. Good thing I'm way past my pity sex days.
Ladies, we need to understand our job. The men need to understand theirs.
We get pretty, we smell nice, we buy nice underwear and bat our eyelashes. Men pay (at least at first and usually slightly more overall), open doors, carry heavy things. Not because we can't do those things, but because they want to do them for us.
We can be equals, we can share power, but come on...there's a nice balance to how things work (one I find particularly sexy), and we're seeing the evidence of f*cking with that as plain as day.
I was recently out with a friend who moved here last year from the East Coast and his roommate, who was born and bred in the Bay Area. My friend is the epitome of what I think it means to be a man. (Well, almost...Marlboro Man of Pioneer Woman is the true epitome, but I'm so never gonna meet that type out here.) He pays - even for friends when he can. He makes decisions, he open doors, he carries heavy things, he takes risks, he displays confidence, he walks girls home or hails their cab...as I'd say it back home, his mama done him good. So, knowing my friend's answer already, I asked the roommate if he always paid on the first date. Without hesitation he said no. We delved a little further and he emphasized that he behaves out of a belief in equality, not out of being a cheapskate. He said that he does usually offer to pay, but that the girls frequently argue with him and he's not going to let that go on all night. It seems like maybe the women are the cause of confusion rather than the guys not manning up. Unfortunately, I'm starting to think neither the men nor the women of SF were properly taught the rules (or they let go of their training in the confusion of SF liberalness). To do my part for my humanity, I decided to clarify the rules of paying for dates, as learned in southern Missouri and followed thus far by every man I've ever dated except SF boys.
First Date:
Bill comes, I take out my card in an offer to pay for my half.
He argues and says he has it.
I say thank you and put my card away.
If he actually lets me pay my half, there will be no second date.
I don't care how poor/broke you are. I don't need much. But if I'm not worth you making that gesture the first time we meet, it's not a date, and you therefore won't be getting a second one.
Second Date:
Now, this one is slightly more tricky.
If the first date was fairly expensive, I'm likely to ask if I can take him out this time and insist that I pay, but it will be for a less expensive thing than he did. I will also let him pitch in for drinks or pay half the bill for the date if he insists (and this would earn points and increase likelihood of 3rd date).
If the first date was normal, I'll again offer to pay my half, but I won't be offended if he accepts my offer.
I would expect him to then do something extra, though, like pay for a cab or purchase an after dinner drink. It wouldn't be points against him if he didn't, but it sets it up for a weird dynamic in which we're already discussing who pays for what a little soon in the dating scheme.
If he pays for the second date in full, I will be sure to pay for after dinner drinks or a cab or something small. I will also insist that I get to treat him next time, but again, he'll earn bonus points if on that next time he picks up some small thing like a drink or cab.
And so it goes until it evens out with him paying about 3:2 or so.
I like this plan. I have no problem feeling like he is taking care of me financially in regard to those dates, because it will even out. I'll keep my fridge stocked with his favorite beer or keep his whiskey at my bar. I'll buy the groceries when I make him dinner. I'll spend money on pretty underwear for his benefit. It just works.
The problem with the SF man not paying for the dates in the same way means the other stuff no longer evens out. So I spend money on make-up and hair and cute shoes and facials and yoga classes and sexy underwear - all so he gets what he wants. And now I ALSO have to share the burden of half the dates? As if men spend nearly as much as we do on these things. And honestly, if I trust him to pick up the alcohol, it's gonna be all beer all the time, and sometimes I need to go pick out that fancy bottle of wine. Am I supposed to ask him to repay me for half? Or groceries - I will always go for the local organic cut of beef, so if I expect that I have to buy it...which means I'm paying for it then, too.
These men who are trying to be more equal are forgetting about the natural dynamic that has worked for decades.
YES, I make money. I may even make as much as you. But women still don't make as much as men, even in the exact same positions at the same company. And men sure as hell don't shell out $150 to keep their skin clear and soft, their hair shiny and touchable, their hairy regions waxed, and everything else perfect just for us.
Boys, if you want to date a girl who doesn't wear make-up, shows up in the same clothes you wear, never wears sexy lingerie, has hairy legs and armpits, has wrinkles and/or major zits, and smells like discount soap - fine. Then you can let her pay. And yeah, you may think that beautiful chick across the bar is just that girl, but that's only because you don't know what goes into creating that "natural" look. You know how long we fuss just to make sure that one tousled lock of hair falls just so? And yes, we do it for us. But we also do it for you. So when you go around deciding to treat us equally by choosing not to pay for that first date, you throw off the balance. All of a sudden we're paying equally, but we're putting far more effort into our appearance. Then we start to think maybe we're better than you. Then we start looking for the guy who will pay. OR, we stop giving a shit, stop shaving, and start wearing ratty old grandma undies with holes and frayed waistbands. Up to you boys, make your choice.
ANYWAY, this all came up again because I was reading Why There Are No Girls in SF and Sam posted a guy's perspective of the city's unaggressive men. Sam points out that men are unaggressive here, in this case in approaching women, because the women are too damn scary.
SF women seem to have this hybrid sensibility of hill-billy southern gallantry, where prescribed gender roles dictate who should aggressively pursue whom, and a regionally specific 70s-style extremist feminism, where there is hyper sensitivity to being hit on. According to San Francisco magazine, “Bay Area women have been known to react to innocent flirting as if they'd been groped ...
And you know what? I think maybe he's right. We are an independent sort here in SF, and it is frequently the case when we are out that we don't want to be bothered. Sometimes a guy interupting girl time is intrusive, and perhaps SF girls are a little more vocal about that. Maybe that leads to exactly what Sam posits about men just keeping their heads down and waiting for the girls to come to them.That’s the paradox. SF women get sort of annoyed when guys attempt to seduce them. Not bemused or bored, annoyed. The fact that the average SF guy has the charm of a yard rake doesn't matter. SF women want men to make advances on them but without them knowing that the advance is being made, which requires not just Code speak but pretending to be gay.
This creates what anthropologists call a double bind dilemma. A successful response to one message implicates a failed response to the other, so that the person will be automatically wrong regardless of response. It's pretty much the kind of thing that broke the Union in 1861 and makes the Middle East a total mess. So if you’re a guy in San Francisco and there's a pretty girl sitting next to you, what’s the right move? You keep quiet, keep your head down and hope no one starts yelling.
Now, I was taught that if you aren't interested you always say thank you with a big smile and simply decline the opportunity for an introduction or a free drink. This encourages men to keep trying with other woman. Having seen other women out here react harshly to come-ons, I have to wonder if this isn't all our fault. Have too many of us women rejected vocally and meanly to the point where all the SF balls are now shriveled and tucked up inside never to be seen again? Honestly? It almost makes me feel more sorry for the guys here than disgusted with them. Good thing I'm way past my pity sex days.
Ladies, we need to understand our job. The men need to understand theirs.
We get pretty, we smell nice, we buy nice underwear and bat our eyelashes. Men pay (at least at first and usually slightly more overall), open doors, carry heavy things. Not because we can't do those things, but because they want to do them for us.
We can be equals, we can share power, but come on...there's a nice balance to how things work (one I find particularly sexy), and we're seeing the evidence of f*cking with that as plain as day.
9.21.2009
The Nice Guy
My friends and I have been talking more and more about the Nice Guy lately. I think it started with the Feathery Stroker excerpt and the night with Period Boy.
Period Boy was a very sexy, very fun guy my girlfriends and I met at a club in Vegas. He became known as Period Boy because after spending an hour or two dancing with us and his friends, he started pouting anytime he wasn't getting enough attention. He got all sulky and needed to be attended to. Obviously, we got bored of this very quickly. Cuteness does not make up for the need for a babysitter in a grown man.
And then I came across the ad about a man's job, and it all started coming to a head. Coincidentally, it's also been coming up more in my blogroll, and I've been feeling inclined to say something about it. Amanda over at Dating is Miserable recently even had a slew of guest bloggers write about the issue. I'm not sure I'm talented enough to accurately capture everything that's rolling around in my head, but I'll try for the essence here.
Having pretty much always ended up with the self-defined Nice Guy, but having had enough experience with his opposite to feel expertly qualified, I think I can diagnose this issue as a problem of semantics.
The Nice Guy we root for in movies is nice, but he's still the Man in the relationship. He still knows how to handle his woman, and hot sex is not automatically thrown out the window just because he brings the female protagonist a cup of soup when she's sick.
So what makes him more appealing than the Nice Guy we meet in real life?
Well, for starters, it isn't about Nice vs. Not Nice.
The original Nice Guy debate sees to have stemmed from the difference between the bad boy that's fun and exciting versus the nice guy that will always be there and is thoughtful and, well, nice. In this face-off, bad boy gets the dates and nice guy gets the wife and 2.5 kids.
Side note: this doesn't even begin to address the problem of Nice Guys learning to affect Bad Boy characteristics and Bad Boys pretending to be Nice Guys, which Amanda deals with in her follow up to her guest week.
But that's not what we're dealing with in dating anymore. That's an oversimplified version of the real issue. Rather than having 2 men: the Bad Boy versus the Nice Guy, I'd argue, that there are really more like 4 archetypes, with dots on the spectrum all across the way. I propose using 2 variables (I'll leave incorporating other planes to someone out there who has far more time than I do): Nice and Sexy.
I propose The Nice Guy Graph:
It just so happens that many of the qualities that make a man seem Nice (sensitivity, friendliness, openness, approachability, humility) negatively correlate with the qualities that make a man seem Sexy (confidence, experience, edginess, mystery, toughness). This means the the upper left and lower right quadrants contain a significantly large percentage of the population. Thus the typical Nice Guy versus Bad Boy debate.
Being the complicated and never satisfied woman that I seem to be, however, I simply can't settle for one or the other. I want Nice and Sexy. I believe this is what most women want (although I can't really speak for all of us, now can I?).
The problem for me is that most of the nice guys I meet are too passive (asking me for the first kiss, not making a move at all), too sensitive (they want to talk about their feelings more than I do), too open and available (they lose all mystery, which is fun), too inexperienced (they have had less experience because they don't just take what they want, so they just aren't as good in bed), too humble (confidence is key!), too complimentary (if you worship me so much, maybe I'm out of your league), too...well, feminine. But most of the truly sexy men I meet are too mysterious (you've gotta open up a little), too arrogant (c'mon...you've got to have some weaknesses), too insensitive (I don't want to cry at home b/c you were a douche...this is when Nice Guy gets called), and too assholeish.
There's got to a balance. The aggressive man who takes what he wants but is happy to work to get you to want it, too. The guy who is open and honest without divulging all of his insecurities. The guy who makes you feel sexy without making you feel like he's not good enough for you. The guy who is confident without arrogance, rough with tenderness, and has the answers but doesn't mind asking questions.
I think the key factor for me is capability. That upper right quadrant is a capable man.
He is capable of love, romance, commitment, conversation, emotional sharing. But he is also capable of turning you into goo with a look from across the room, kissing you in a way that makes you think you never need to breathe again, getting what he wants in life, keeping you interested and excited, getting into trouble, getting out of trouble, fixing things. He is capable of handling me in all of my complexity. (On this - Amy Brown wrote an interesting post on how she doesn't like Nice Guys because she's not a Nice Girl. She poses that Nice Guys just don't want her because she's too complicated and restless. This seems right on for me. You can read more Nice Guy posts over at the Heartless Bitches archive.)
He can party you under the table, but will get you home safe and get you that awesome bowl of chicken tortilla soup for brunch the next day. After a night out he'll have you up against the wall before the door is closed, but the second time around, he'll take his time and be sweet and slow. He'll have his own life, his own friends, his own dreams, but he'll be there for you and support yours. He'll make you dinner, but he won't feed it to you unless it's leading right into dessert. He'll feed your cat when you're out of town, but he won't coo at it in baby talk. He'll fix your internet and your broken lock; your emotional drama and your sexual frustration. He is capable in many ways on many levels.
My favorite image of the Upper Right Quadrant Guy?
Peter DeWolf's guest "word doodle" on the Dating is Miserable blog:
And with that perfect thought, I'll leave it to you all to add your thoughts.
Oh...and you can read more of Peter's stuff on his blog.
Period Boy was a very sexy, very fun guy my girlfriends and I met at a club in Vegas. He became known as Period Boy because after spending an hour or two dancing with us and his friends, he started pouting anytime he wasn't getting enough attention. He got all sulky and needed to be attended to. Obviously, we got bored of this very quickly. Cuteness does not make up for the need for a babysitter in a grown man.
And then I came across the ad about a man's job, and it all started coming to a head. Coincidentally, it's also been coming up more in my blogroll, and I've been feeling inclined to say something about it. Amanda over at Dating is Miserable recently even had a slew of guest bloggers write about the issue. I'm not sure I'm talented enough to accurately capture everything that's rolling around in my head, but I'll try for the essence here.
Having pretty much always ended up with the self-defined Nice Guy, but having had enough experience with his opposite to feel expertly qualified, I think I can diagnose this issue as a problem of semantics.
The Nice Guy we root for in movies is nice, but he's still the Man in the relationship. He still knows how to handle his woman, and hot sex is not automatically thrown out the window just because he brings the female protagonist a cup of soup when she's sick.
So what makes him more appealing than the Nice Guy we meet in real life?
Well, for starters, it isn't about Nice vs. Not Nice.
The original Nice Guy debate sees to have stemmed from the difference between the bad boy that's fun and exciting versus the nice guy that will always be there and is thoughtful and, well, nice. In this face-off, bad boy gets the dates and nice guy gets the wife and 2.5 kids.
Side note: this doesn't even begin to address the problem of Nice Guys learning to affect Bad Boy characteristics and Bad Boys pretending to be Nice Guys, which Amanda deals with in her follow up to her guest week.
But that's not what we're dealing with in dating anymore. That's an oversimplified version of the real issue. Rather than having 2 men: the Bad Boy versus the Nice Guy, I'd argue, that there are really more like 4 archetypes, with dots on the spectrum all across the way. I propose using 2 variables (I'll leave incorporating other planes to someone out there who has far more time than I do): Nice and Sexy.
I propose The Nice Guy Graph:
It just so happens that many of the qualities that make a man seem Nice (sensitivity, friendliness, openness, approachability, humility) negatively correlate with the qualities that make a man seem Sexy (confidence, experience, edginess, mystery, toughness). This means the the upper left and lower right quadrants contain a significantly large percentage of the population. Thus the typical Nice Guy versus Bad Boy debate.
Being the complicated and never satisfied woman that I seem to be, however, I simply can't settle for one or the other. I want Nice and Sexy. I believe this is what most women want (although I can't really speak for all of us, now can I?).
The problem for me is that most of the nice guys I meet are too passive (asking me for the first kiss, not making a move at all), too sensitive (they want to talk about their feelings more than I do), too open and available (they lose all mystery, which is fun), too inexperienced (they have had less experience because they don't just take what they want, so they just aren't as good in bed), too humble (confidence is key!), too complimentary (if you worship me so much, maybe I'm out of your league), too...well, feminine. But most of the truly sexy men I meet are too mysterious (you've gotta open up a little), too arrogant (c'mon...you've got to have some weaknesses), too insensitive (I don't want to cry at home b/c you were a douche...this is when Nice Guy gets called), and too assholeish.
There's got to a balance. The aggressive man who takes what he wants but is happy to work to get you to want it, too. The guy who is open and honest without divulging all of his insecurities. The guy who makes you feel sexy without making you feel like he's not good enough for you. The guy who is confident without arrogance, rough with tenderness, and has the answers but doesn't mind asking questions.
I think the key factor for me is capability. That upper right quadrant is a capable man.
He is capable of love, romance, commitment, conversation, emotional sharing. But he is also capable of turning you into goo with a look from across the room, kissing you in a way that makes you think you never need to breathe again, getting what he wants in life, keeping you interested and excited, getting into trouble, getting out of trouble, fixing things. He is capable of handling me in all of my complexity. (On this - Amy Brown wrote an interesting post on how she doesn't like Nice Guys because she's not a Nice Girl. She poses that Nice Guys just don't want her because she's too complicated and restless. This seems right on for me. You can read more Nice Guy posts over at the Heartless Bitches archive.)
He can party you under the table, but will get you home safe and get you that awesome bowl of chicken tortilla soup for brunch the next day. After a night out he'll have you up against the wall before the door is closed, but the second time around, he'll take his time and be sweet and slow. He'll have his own life, his own friends, his own dreams, but he'll be there for you and support yours. He'll make you dinner, but he won't feed it to you unless it's leading right into dessert. He'll feed your cat when you're out of town, but he won't coo at it in baby talk. He'll fix your internet and your broken lock; your emotional drama and your sexual frustration. He is capable in many ways on many levels.
My favorite image of the Upper Right Quadrant Guy?
Peter DeWolf's guest "word doodle" on the Dating is Miserable blog:
i chuckle sometimes
i really do
i chuckle when you mistake
kindness for weakness
not malicious
i know
your warm dark eyes twinkle
lips turn up just a little
still
the smugness
irks
i'm nice
it's true
and i like being good to you
but
if i thought for a minute
a second
that you took it
for granted
you'd miss
popsicles and west wing dvds
when you are sick
and wearing those thread-bare pjs
you got when you
were sixteen
penguins!
you'd miss
me sensing the need
for a back rub
a foot rub
a soft but sturdy shoulder
when your boss
doesn't realize
everything you do
and are
and can be
you better
appreciate
because
well
i guess
what i'm saying is
baby
i will remember
our anniversary
and cook you a romantic dinner
but you better believe
when we're done eating
i'll be bending your ass over that table
And with that perfect thought, I'll leave it to you all to add your thoughts.
Oh...and you can read more of Peter's stuff on his blog.
2.06.2007
My Boy is Gone :(
It's a tragedy. Truly. This is a momentously sad occasion.
Concussions End Matheny's Career
SAN FRANCISCO -- Catchers are no ordinary men -- they're legitimate tough guys -- and to get an insight into what made Giants backstop Mike Matheny tick, let's go back nine months ago when a foul tip came off the bat like a ricocheting bullet, slamming into his mask at 100 miles per hour.
With Pujols in St. Louis and Matheny retired, how am I supposed to enjoy my baseball games this season?
Well, we do still have Matt Morris. Time to get more Cards to come over to the Giants.
Concussions End Matheny's Career
SAN FRANCISCO -- Catchers are no ordinary men -- they're legitimate tough guys -- and to get an insight into what made Giants backstop Mike Matheny tick, let's go back nine months ago when a foul tip came off the bat like a ricocheting bullet, slamming into his mask at 100 miles per hour.And even worse...he's moved back to St. Louis to spend more time with his wife and FIVE children. Okay, so not worse...obviously he's a great guy, but we'll miss him here.Matheny, stunned and dizzy, had already taken maybe a half-dozen shots to the head during the week, but even after head trainer Stan Conte pulled him out and X-rays were taken, Matheny was already planning on flying to New York for the next series against the Mets.
Fat chance. He couldn't remember what day it was.
"We're competitive -- we're wired that way," said the 13-year Major League veteran.
Matheny would, however, never play again, and the four-time Gold Glove catcher reluctantly but advisedly retired from baseball Thursday because of lingering post-concussion symptoms.
With Pujols in St. Louis and Matheny retired, how am I supposed to enjoy my baseball games this season?
Well, we do still have Matt Morris. Time to get more Cards to come over to the Giants.
3.31.2006
My New Roommate
Just also happens to be the most amazing boyfriend ever. Ack, we did it :)
almost...now we just have to get our OWN apartment that's big enough for all our stuff (or his stuff, I should say...I don't have nearly that much :))
almost...now we just have to get our OWN apartment that's big enough for all our stuff (or his stuff, I should say...I don't have nearly that much :))
11.10.2003
Dating
I've been dealing with a lot of issues lately concerning men and relationships and icky first dates and such. Nothing really felt right and I wasn't sure what to do or what to think or anything. I finally got smart and turned to God about it and made a decision based on that and my own comfort level.
I decided I am no longer dating. Not at all.
Here's what's wrong with dating:
1. I hate first dates. They suck. I do NOT enjoy it, so why waste my time doing it? The argument is so that I can reap the benefits of a dating relationship, but I have never gone on a date with someone and had it turn into more, so what is there to show me that it's going to start now? I don't like them, therefore I don't want to go on them.
2. Dating is incredibly fake. Everyone puts out what they want you to see and you never really get to see a person for what they are. You see how they act with you and with waitresses and such, but you never get to see how they respond to daily life situations. At least not until you're already emotionally invested in the situation. Then you find out they're really assholes and it sucks even more. Might as well not bother.
3. Dating is done under false pretenses. Societal pressures force you to make a decision about the romantic possibilities with a person based on little information about them or your potential with them. It's unfair decision making. For example, on The Bachelor...15 women fell in love with Bob. Bob fell in love with a few of them. Why? Because the show set it up so that that's what they were expected to do. People had this image of what could be and tried to make it real. Of course it's not real, it can't be that soon...not with all of those people...but it sure seems that way at the time...then these people devote their lives to it and turns out not to be later? that sucks. Not for me. Dating is the same thing. You go out on a date with someone and you have an expectation that you shoudl have something romantic with them. based on what? a five minute conversation you had while helping them find a book or waiting in line at the grocery store? I don't think so.
4. Dating, if it proceeds to a relationship, leads to intimacy, which leads to either marriage, or heartbreak. Considering that most people plan to get married once, but start relationships many more times than that, that's a lot of heartbreak. Unlike some advocates of my new position, I do NOT believe that we should guard ourselves from heartbreak until marriage. However, I've had enough. I've had, what...2 really serious heartbreaks and a few milder ones...that's enough learning experience for me, thanks. Of course, if you're ready to delve into a real relationship, that risk is necessary, but when you're not read for marriage yet anyway, what's the point? If you know you aren't at a point in your life where you think marriage is a possibility, why bother getting super close only to have to end it? This is the exact reason I ended one of my serious heartbreaks. Why did I let it get there? It's like playing house, but the emotions are real. I refuse to let this happen anymore.
5. Dating takes my focus away from being happily single. Dude, I'm on my own, I get to do whatever I want with my time, focus on things I love and want to work on...FOCUS ON ME! But instead, I worry about who I like or who likes me or what I'm doing Friday night or if I should call him or whatever. Nope...that's over. I haven't been without someone in my life since I was 17. When I didn't have a boyfriend I had a guy friend I flirted with and talked to every night and kinda dated occasionally. When the last serious heartbreak happened, I was all about focusing on me. But I wasn't over the heartbreak, so instead I kept my focus on new guys. I kept people in my life that were there so I wasn't alone. Well, now I'm over it (possibly more on that later). Completely over it. It's fabulous! But it means my focus gets to shift. So NOW my focus can be completely on me. why waste that on more guys that will probably never even have the opportunity to audition for the whole husband thing because I'm nowhere near ready? That just hurts them and me. Instead, I get to focus my attention on me and my future and my relationship with God. MUCH better, i think. I went to church Sunday...you know why? Because I wasn't up talking to someone so super late that I couldn't get up in the morning. I spend my time with my jobs, with my family, on my interests, and on God. Not on guys. Def. a good thing.
6. Real life never lives up to the fantasy. So you have a crush on someone, you think they're amazing. You'd have beautiful children and he'd be perfect and you'd be happy forever (damn, think what mine and kiefer's kids would look like...we should soooo get together). Yeah...it never happens. Our fantasies RARELY include the bad stuff, but humans are fallible. Even the most perfect man will not live up to our fantasy because we don't fantasize about not being able to pay the bills and fighting over dishes being done or what happens when he really really wants me to spend the weekend with him and his obnoxious teenage nephew who thinks its funny to grab my ass on occasion...There will be problems. Yeah, we'll get through them, but if you build up the fantasy first, it's not gonna be a good situation because you're constantly going to be thinking there's something that will live up to that fantasy. Yeah...I'd rather just have my crushes and never act on them. Then life gets to be perfect in my head for a while. At least while I'm planning ons taying single :)
The alternative to dating:
1. Friends. Great friends. Friends that don't come with strings. I have way too many male friends that I can't talk to about these issues or about other guys because the focus was always us as a potential something, not as friends. That sucks. I want real friends that I can go to in trust, not afraid they have an agenda or that I have an agenda. I can be super manipulative, especially with men, and I need tog et that out of my life. I'd much rather have friends.
2. Getting to know someone before getting invested. In a friendship relationship, you get to see how someone interacts with others, how they respond in certain situations, and how they are different with youand with their dates (assuming they talk about them) BEFORE you decide to invest any emotions into the deal. Also, you don't have to do your hair before you head out. Much nicer :)
3. When you have a really great friendship, if you think the person is attractive,when you're both ready it can just happen. But there's no pressure for anything to happen before it should. meaning now, when I'm planning on going to Germany and have no idea what will happen after that. I can't deal with pressure to answer certain questions to which I can't possibly have answers. I get to focus on me, and have great friends,and not deal with romantic bullshit.
additional thoughts:
1. I've kinda already done this already. By having people who were so far away, I could have a friendship and then have the romance when we were together, but without the pressure. The problem with me is that my focus has always been on the other person more than on God and my own future and development. Now I'm shifting that so that no one person becomes more important to me than anyone else. I have my girls that mean everything to me, and no one guy should overshadow that. If someone does, I need to back off because at that point I know I am becoming too intimate with him.
2. This does not mean I'll never go on "dates." I'll still go out with male friends sometimes. I do think that for awhile, until I'm more into the swing of this, I'll stick to group things, but at some point I'm sure I'll want to hang out with someone and he might happen to be a guy. That's cool. I can deal with that. Just not oging to think about it like a date, and make sure he knows that, and we're cool.
3. Also does not mean that I'm all of a sudden super pure and will never end up kissing a friend or a "date" or whatever. I'd like to avoid all of that for some time, until I can clearly understand exactly what place that has in my life...but really, it's not necessary for me, I don't think. We'll see.
4. I get to keep my crushes and dreams and hopes of the future without ever feeling like I'm settling. I also get to work on myself and those things I love so that when I do decide I'm ready for marriage, I know that I'm the best person I can be for my husband.
5. The people in my life have been surprisingly supportive. The Russian guy understands. WIth him I think i knew right away that I wasn't interested, but this way I get to back off without really hurting his feelings :) another plus...you can say no to a date without hurting someone's feelings :) sounds great to me. It also takes the pressure off those relationships that were starting to suffer. Now I get to learn more about these wonderful men and really develop a comfort level with them without worrying about agendas or manipulation or romantic feelings.
Yay for me.
For the first time in a long time, I feel really really great about all of this stuff. I feel at peace with my decision. I feel like God really led me to this. What's even cooler...i came up with this on my own. That's never happened, I don't think. There's always been a book, or a person that has influenced me. This one, I just knew all of a sudden that it was right. It happened in the space ofthe 15 minute drive home fromMGs one night last week. Nobody helped me come to this...it was all about me and God.
Now that I've made the decision and people have suggested the book, I've read I Kissed Dating Goodbye. I like it and it really helps me understand some of my feelings and reiterates things I had already decided. I don't completely agree with everything in the book, but I do think it's a good start to understanding this position if anyone is interested. Anyway, this is important to me and I wanted to share it with those who think I'm important enough to read my blog. If anyone wants to comment or talk about it, please email me, I'd love to.
I decided I am no longer dating. Not at all.
Here's what's wrong with dating:
1. I hate first dates. They suck. I do NOT enjoy it, so why waste my time doing it? The argument is so that I can reap the benefits of a dating relationship, but I have never gone on a date with someone and had it turn into more, so what is there to show me that it's going to start now? I don't like them, therefore I don't want to go on them.
2. Dating is incredibly fake. Everyone puts out what they want you to see and you never really get to see a person for what they are. You see how they act with you and with waitresses and such, but you never get to see how they respond to daily life situations. At least not until you're already emotionally invested in the situation. Then you find out they're really assholes and it sucks even more. Might as well not bother.
3. Dating is done under false pretenses. Societal pressures force you to make a decision about the romantic possibilities with a person based on little information about them or your potential with them. It's unfair decision making. For example, on The Bachelor...15 women fell in love with Bob. Bob fell in love with a few of them. Why? Because the show set it up so that that's what they were expected to do. People had this image of what could be and tried to make it real. Of course it's not real, it can't be that soon...not with all of those people...but it sure seems that way at the time...then these people devote their lives to it and turns out not to be later? that sucks. Not for me. Dating is the same thing. You go out on a date with someone and you have an expectation that you shoudl have something romantic with them. based on what? a five minute conversation you had while helping them find a book or waiting in line at the grocery store? I don't think so.
4. Dating, if it proceeds to a relationship, leads to intimacy, which leads to either marriage, or heartbreak. Considering that most people plan to get married once, but start relationships many more times than that, that's a lot of heartbreak. Unlike some advocates of my new position, I do NOT believe that we should guard ourselves from heartbreak until marriage. However, I've had enough. I've had, what...2 really serious heartbreaks and a few milder ones...that's enough learning experience for me, thanks. Of course, if you're ready to delve into a real relationship, that risk is necessary, but when you're not read for marriage yet anyway, what's the point? If you know you aren't at a point in your life where you think marriage is a possibility, why bother getting super close only to have to end it? This is the exact reason I ended one of my serious heartbreaks. Why did I let it get there? It's like playing house, but the emotions are real. I refuse to let this happen anymore.
5. Dating takes my focus away from being happily single. Dude, I'm on my own, I get to do whatever I want with my time, focus on things I love and want to work on...FOCUS ON ME! But instead, I worry about who I like or who likes me or what I'm doing Friday night or if I should call him or whatever. Nope...that's over. I haven't been without someone in my life since I was 17. When I didn't have a boyfriend I had a guy friend I flirted with and talked to every night and kinda dated occasionally. When the last serious heartbreak happened, I was all about focusing on me. But I wasn't over the heartbreak, so instead I kept my focus on new guys. I kept people in my life that were there so I wasn't alone. Well, now I'm over it (possibly more on that later). Completely over it. It's fabulous! But it means my focus gets to shift. So NOW my focus can be completely on me. why waste that on more guys that will probably never even have the opportunity to audition for the whole husband thing because I'm nowhere near ready? That just hurts them and me. Instead, I get to focus my attention on me and my future and my relationship with God. MUCH better, i think. I went to church Sunday...you know why? Because I wasn't up talking to someone so super late that I couldn't get up in the morning. I spend my time with my jobs, with my family, on my interests, and on God. Not on guys. Def. a good thing.
6. Real life never lives up to the fantasy. So you have a crush on someone, you think they're amazing. You'd have beautiful children and he'd be perfect and you'd be happy forever (damn, think what mine and kiefer's kids would look like...we should soooo get together). Yeah...it never happens. Our fantasies RARELY include the bad stuff, but humans are fallible. Even the most perfect man will not live up to our fantasy because we don't fantasize about not being able to pay the bills and fighting over dishes being done or what happens when he really really wants me to spend the weekend with him and his obnoxious teenage nephew who thinks its funny to grab my ass on occasion...There will be problems. Yeah, we'll get through them, but if you build up the fantasy first, it's not gonna be a good situation because you're constantly going to be thinking there's something that will live up to that fantasy. Yeah...I'd rather just have my crushes and never act on them. Then life gets to be perfect in my head for a while. At least while I'm planning ons taying single :)
The alternative to dating:
1. Friends. Great friends. Friends that don't come with strings. I have way too many male friends that I can't talk to about these issues or about other guys because the focus was always us as a potential something, not as friends. That sucks. I want real friends that I can go to in trust, not afraid they have an agenda or that I have an agenda. I can be super manipulative, especially with men, and I need tog et that out of my life. I'd much rather have friends.
2. Getting to know someone before getting invested. In a friendship relationship, you get to see how someone interacts with others, how they respond in certain situations, and how they are different with youand with their dates (assuming they talk about them) BEFORE you decide to invest any emotions into the deal. Also, you don't have to do your hair before you head out. Much nicer :)
3. When you have a really great friendship, if you think the person is attractive,when you're both ready it can just happen. But there's no pressure for anything to happen before it should. meaning now, when I'm planning on going to Germany and have no idea what will happen after that. I can't deal with pressure to answer certain questions to which I can't possibly have answers. I get to focus on me, and have great friends,and not deal with romantic bullshit.
additional thoughts:
1. I've kinda already done this already. By having people who were so far away, I could have a friendship and then have the romance when we were together, but without the pressure. The problem with me is that my focus has always been on the other person more than on God and my own future and development. Now I'm shifting that so that no one person becomes more important to me than anyone else. I have my girls that mean everything to me, and no one guy should overshadow that. If someone does, I need to back off because at that point I know I am becoming too intimate with him.
2. This does not mean I'll never go on "dates." I'll still go out with male friends sometimes. I do think that for awhile, until I'm more into the swing of this, I'll stick to group things, but at some point I'm sure I'll want to hang out with someone and he might happen to be a guy. That's cool. I can deal with that. Just not oging to think about it like a date, and make sure he knows that, and we're cool.
3. Also does not mean that I'm all of a sudden super pure and will never end up kissing a friend or a "date" or whatever. I'd like to avoid all of that for some time, until I can clearly understand exactly what place that has in my life...but really, it's not necessary for me, I don't think. We'll see.
4. I get to keep my crushes and dreams and hopes of the future without ever feeling like I'm settling. I also get to work on myself and those things I love so that when I do decide I'm ready for marriage, I know that I'm the best person I can be for my husband.
5. The people in my life have been surprisingly supportive. The Russian guy understands. WIth him I think i knew right away that I wasn't interested, but this way I get to back off without really hurting his feelings :) another plus...you can say no to a date without hurting someone's feelings :) sounds great to me. It also takes the pressure off those relationships that were starting to suffer. Now I get to learn more about these wonderful men and really develop a comfort level with them without worrying about agendas or manipulation or romantic feelings.
Yay for me.
For the first time in a long time, I feel really really great about all of this stuff. I feel at peace with my decision. I feel like God really led me to this. What's even cooler...i came up with this on my own. That's never happened, I don't think. There's always been a book, or a person that has influenced me. This one, I just knew all of a sudden that it was right. It happened in the space ofthe 15 minute drive home fromMGs one night last week. Nobody helped me come to this...it was all about me and God.
Now that I've made the decision and people have suggested the book, I've read I Kissed Dating Goodbye. I like it and it really helps me understand some of my feelings and reiterates things I had already decided. I don't completely agree with everything in the book, but I do think it's a good start to understanding this position if anyone is interested. Anyway, this is important to me and I wanted to share it with those who think I'm important enough to read my blog. If anyone wants to comment or talk about it, please email me, I'd love to.
11.03.2003
10.31.2003
Halloween
So I haven't posted in forever. Sorry 'bout that...if any of y'all out there are actually still reading this. I've been working on the soon to be launched Mandys website, as well as keeping busy with both Barnes and Noble and MarthaGrace.
It's Halloween,and I'm sick. It sucks. I put all of this effort into making this beautiful princess costume. I decided that I wanted to be pretty this year. Chris and I put together a bunch of material and a vintage dress and came up with a fabu outfit with lots of beading and layers of tule. V. flowy, v. princessy. Even had a big long train. Everyone loved it. Alas, did not get to wear it out. Only to BN. *sigh*
Went out with a Russian boy last Monday. Was v. nice...v. gentlemanly and sweet. He called tonight and Mom said he sounded super disappointed. It's really cute and I def.wanna give him a shot, I'm just not sure it has potential. I have this thing for the typical strong american male type. It's that damsel in distress part of me or some b.s. like that. I wanna cowboy with a poet's soul. But he's gotta be tough and macho when I want him to be. Is that so hard? Hmmm...maybe I should date twins. One could be strong and macho and masculine and one could be intellectual and sensitive and cultured...I could go back and forth. That sounds good to me.
I recently read a book that made me revisit the passion vs. comfiness issue in love/relationships. It's definitely got me thinking about some relationships of mine that I didn't give much of a chance to go anywhere. This is another reason I'm not sure about Russian boy. I'm trying not to limit myself, but I'm so tired of trying to deal with things that I just don't want to put forth any effort anymore. Maybe I'll swear off dating. That sounds like a good idea. I'll just make friends and one day it will be perfect and my best friend will suddenly turn into THAT guy. If only things could be so easy. :)
off to bed for me...need this danged cold to go away. Work in the a.m. I'll try to keep up with this blog a bit better from now on. We'll see if that actually happens. Good night all :)
It's Halloween,and I'm sick. It sucks. I put all of this effort into making this beautiful princess costume. I decided that I wanted to be pretty this year. Chris and I put together a bunch of material and a vintage dress and came up with a fabu outfit with lots of beading and layers of tule. V. flowy, v. princessy. Even had a big long train. Everyone loved it. Alas, did not get to wear it out. Only to BN. *sigh*
Went out with a Russian boy last Monday. Was v. nice...v. gentlemanly and sweet. He called tonight and Mom said he sounded super disappointed. It's really cute and I def.wanna give him a shot, I'm just not sure it has potential. I have this thing for the typical strong american male type. It's that damsel in distress part of me or some b.s. like that. I wanna cowboy with a poet's soul. But he's gotta be tough and macho when I want him to be. Is that so hard? Hmmm...maybe I should date twins. One could be strong and macho and masculine and one could be intellectual and sensitive and cultured...I could go back and forth. That sounds good to me.
I recently read a book that made me revisit the passion vs. comfiness issue in love/relationships. It's definitely got me thinking about some relationships of mine that I didn't give much of a chance to go anywhere. This is another reason I'm not sure about Russian boy. I'm trying not to limit myself, but I'm so tired of trying to deal with things that I just don't want to put forth any effort anymore. Maybe I'll swear off dating. That sounds like a good idea. I'll just make friends and one day it will be perfect and my best friend will suddenly turn into THAT guy. If only things could be so easy. :)
off to bed for me...need this danged cold to go away. Work in the a.m. I'll try to keep up with this blog a bit better from now on. We'll see if that actually happens. Good night all :)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)