[blessingx]

In the last 24 hours, while searching for other issues, I came the following two articles that seem related. One says men today find it difficult to grow up and the other says women increasingly find it hard to settle for less than Mr. Perfect. You can see this doesn't lead to heterosexual dating bliss. I certainly wouldn't frame the debate that way, but since the articles are short and there are many members younger than I here, I was curious what others thought. Read less how people should be than how they should be to maximize their likelihood of long-term happiness (however they define it). So?

Men: Child-Man in the Promised Land
Women: The Case for Settling

EDIT: I haven't heard it yet, but it looks like the author of the second piece was just on Talk of the Nation.

 

[LFF]

I think men today do find it difficult to grow up. I am an easy going guy with lots of dating experience (married now). When I was single and talked to a lot women I was always surprised and shocked when I heard their dating experiences. IE, taking a girl to Dave & Busters for a first date to eat and play video games is not cool. Often the complaints were about conversation style, bad pick-up lines, and just bad behavior on the part of their male date. I have heard tons of stories about guys getting drunk and/or going for cheap feel-her-up moves. The no. 1 complaint was always that most guys can't keep a good conversation and those that do talk, tend to talk too much about themselves.

Just go to any place where there are singles and where you can hear conversations and you'd be surprised to hear some young guys (18 - 35) talk absolute crap. Frankly, I am sometimes surprised the girls are nice enough to pretend they are listening and interested.

I really do feel bad for most girls, but hey, when I was single - it gave me a better playing field. Just my 2 cents.

 

[Wmcmanus]

I get so insulted when reading articles like this that refer to single men, like me I suppose, as "child men"! Wherever do they get this idea from? Not me!

YouTube - How much fun can an Ariel Atom be?

No, seriously. There is a lot of truth in these articles. I find dating to be quite difficult these days. There are so many thing to be concerned about. Not just STDs and all of that, but trying to find someone who balances you out in positive ways. Someone who loves you just for you and not for what you can do for her. Plus, as I get older (now 45) they keep getting younger. Or at least the ones I'm attracted to, and let's face it, getting married to someone my age is pretty much like dropping back 10 years and punting in terms of my desire to have kids (and yes, I'd still love to have at least one... down from 2 about 5 years ago and 3 about 10 years ago). It's a hard dream to give up because it's the one thing that I haven't yet experienced that I'd most like to experience.

But I guess we all have patterns, as much as we would hate to admit it, and I've finally figured out that my pattern is to "go for it" with someone whom I think I love (never know for sure if I really love her until her true colors come out). In any case, if I'm the one doing the selecting in the sense that I won't really date someone unless I decide to pursue her, then I'm (in fact) missing out on a wide variety of other women out there who might actually offer what I'm really looking for! Beyond the looks, beyond the wiggle, beyond the "Wow!" factor that we men are drawn to, what does she think about me?

I was joking the other day that there are five things that I look for in women:

1. Young (or at least much younger than me, partly because of attraction and partly the kids thing)

2. Cute (comes in a lot of varieties, but something that ignites a spark, be it her eyes, her smile, whatever, not necessarily her shape, but on a physical level nonetheless)

3. Petite (not someone my weight for heaven's sake, and I know I don't really deserve this but it's still what I want)

4. Dark (or at least not so pale and pasty like me, but I guess this is simply a byproduct of living in the Caribbean for so long and just growing to love that laid back, care free, mentality that I don't necessarily find in North American, somewhat more pale toned women, and no offense, it's just an acquired taste thing for me)

5. Ultimately not interested in me! (and this of course is the whole point of what is wrong with numbers 1-4 above).

As it turns out, it's helpful if they're not interested in me from the very beginning. That way, I'll have my challenge laid out in front of me from the get-go! I can then wine and dine and flower them to death and spend untold amounts of money on them, be it jewelry, clothes, or whatever I think they might enjoy.

But more often than not they at least seem to be somewhat interested at first, love my personality, intelligence, sense of humor, and even think I'm "cute" in one way or another, either as a teddy bear type or whatever.

But ultimately, they're not interested. Why? Well, I suppose it's rather obvious, but it has taken me a while to figure out, so I guess I'm kind of dumb. Because I'm not young, not 'cute', not in shape, not dark skinned, not any of the things that I'm attracted to. And for the most part, women tend to be attracted to men who offer them the same kind of "Wow!" sensation.

I suppose all of this could change were I to dedicate myself to the gym for a couple of years and lose half a cow. But there's more to it than that.

It's not that I'm overly fussy, mind you. In fact, the above list is just illustrative in terms of my instincts, and not reflective at all of some sort of "list" that I must follow every time. Just my tendencies. But I'm open to anything, with no prejudice at all against white women, older women, women who have kids, dogs, whatever.

Yet, what I do seem to do most poorly in the selection process is not to allow myself to be selected. I'm always doing the selecting. I never seem to allow someone to select me. Of course, I see the signs, but if I'm not interested, I'm not interested, full stop.

I'd like to think that I could change that about me, but I guess time will tell. I don't doubt at all, as is the case with all of us, that I have much to offer. It's not that I lack confidence. It's just that, as I've aged and have learned from my dating experiences, I've come to realize *gulp* that I too have my limitations, and thus (in the eyes of the women I've loved, at least) would be the guy that they "settle" with, if they were to decide to settle. Thankfully, none of them have, because I really don't want to be someone's compromise.

In this regard, it's probably best that I have, in general, at least in recent years, gone for the younger, cute, petite, variety. At least they have this hope still that they won't have to settle. Once they realize that being with me would be settling, they find a nice way to wiggle out of it.

Were I to have applied the same formula (all of the gifts and attention and such) to a sample of women closer to my age, then no doubt one of them would have signed on the dotted line by now. But for what reasons? Probably not the same reasons that I'm hoping to find in whomever she might one day turn out to be. But then I could be wrong about that too.

Not saying that it ever was easy, but it's definitely not easy these days.

 

[Uncle Erik]

Interesting reading. Both aren't so kind to men - the first is a direct criticism and the second is really a piece about how men aren't good enough but you should marry one anyway.

If anything, I'd like to see more self-examination by women. When it comes to personality flaws, I find them pretty well equally divided between the sexes. Seems more of a human problem to me.

It's not good in the dating world. I've dated a few with boundless expectations and no recognition of their own shortcomings. No thanks.

I'd like to get married, but it'll have to be to someone easygoing. I don't rip people apart for forgetting something or occasionally screwing up. I expect equal treatment. That's not too much to ask for.

 

[ken36]

good stuff. A good adjunct to these articles would be the book: "The Death Of the Grown Up" By Diana West.

 

[Arainach]

The articles ignore a very real possibility: That single people can actually be happy. This "American" tradition of 'find one person at a young age and give your love only to them for the rest of your life" is not a universal historical fact, and really, when you look at the details, isn't even that terribly common in the context of history. If people are single and happy, let them be.

Also, it's sad but true that marriage makes zero economic sense for men in today's world. You have nothing much to gain and everything (or at least half of everything) to lose.

 

[braillediver]

OK so both articles are written by women?

An unbiased opinion?

Yeah Right.


Mitch

 

[tator]

Quote:

Originally Posted by LFF /img/forum/go_quote.gif Just go to any place where there are singles and where you can hear conversations and you'd be surprised to hear some young guys (18 - 35) talk absolute crap.

Not just the guys...

 

[zotjen]

The first article would have you believe that unless a man gets married, he won't "grow up". Absolute nonsense! While responsibility does add maturity, it does not mean that those who aren't married are immature.

While the article sites statistics about the percentage of men of a certain age married now as compared to 30 or 40 years ago, it also neglects to mention how times have changed. For example, the video game thing. Today's men may play video games but they did so as kids. Video games were non-existent 40 years ago.

Regarding the second article, I somewhat agree with it. There is no such thing as the perfect man, just as there is no such thing as the perfect woman.

 

[JadeEast]

First article was based way too much on mainstream popculture to be a serious examination of contemporary masculinity. Yes Tucker Max and South Park are juvenile at times but does that really have much weight?

I think the counter to this POV is that many of our olden views of "adult masculinity" have been viewed pretty harshly for the last 30 years. I would say that this "man-child" isn't a back lash against a perceived loss of power but a social adaptation to the changing social frame work of today.

 

[blessingx]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Uncle Erik /img/forum/go_quote.gif Both aren't so kind to men - the first is a direct criticism and the second is really a piece about how men aren't good enough but you should marry one anyway,

Quote:

Originally Posted by braillediver /img/forum/go_quote.gif OK so both articles are written by women? An unbiased opinion? Yeah Right.

Funny, I found the second article much more critical of unrealistic expectations of women. In my formative years, romance was John Cusack and Ione Skye in "Say Anything"...Now, though, I realize that if I don’t want to be alone for the rest of my life, I’m at the age where I’ll likely need to settle for someone who is settling for me. Except for extreme cases, neither sex/gender can culturally shift without the assistance of the other (even if the power isn't equally shared), so this just seems all the same to me. Both are looking short-term. Guys want a pseudo-60s bachelors life. Girls want that dream-like modern-Knight to come along. Both come off a little selfish if you actually want to spend a significant amount of your life with another (with their own baggage). That's a big 'if', but is likely still the majority.

Braillediver, yours is the most interesting comment. Why would you assume female writers are incapable of a reasonable amount of objectivity? Would you have said the same if both were male? Until we get a third sex/gender every human author is going to be one or the other. Certainly the settling piece is somewhat autobiographical (thus judged by different standards). Did you read them?

 

[Contrastique]

I found the first article an intersting one to read though it felt like every single man got jugded the same and they're not. I also like the simpsons and videogames to a certain extend and I'm not a male. You have to stay a kid in a way during your intire life I think.. And women talk A LOT of bs as well.

The second one is just pathetic. Written by a women who drowns in her own regrets. Trying to prove her point with refering to tv-series which suck and are superficial anyways is useless imo. Tv-series are not the real world, though sometimes the world does look like a cheap tv-serie.
Settle just for the to-be-settled....I've never heard anything more "blond" than that. And yes, women are picky and can be wining creatures, but it's not just women who are picky.
The 2 articles contradict eachother also in terms of available males at older ages.

 

[Wmcmanus]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Uncle Erik /img/forum/go_quote.gif It's not good in the dating world. I've dated a few with boundless expectations and no recognition of their own shortcomings. No thanks. I'd like to get married, but it'll have to be to someone easygoing. I don't rip people apart for forgetting something or occasionally screwing up. I expect equal treatment. That's not too much to ask for.

I've dated one or two like that as well. Or at least tried to. What a mess!

 

[plainsong]

Quote:

Braillediver, yours is the most interesting comment. Why would you assume female writers are incapable of a reasonable amount of objectivity? Would you have said the same if both were male? Until we get a third sex/gender every human author is going to be one or the other. Certainly the settling piece is somewhat autobiographical (thus judged by different standards). Did you read them?

Amen with a plagal cadence. You do see the true colors creep out when home truths are spoken.

As one of those boring married people, I do see in those long-term single friends (male and female) a want to settle down with one person. Actually much more than a want, more like a desperation. And why are they desperate? You'd have to ask them, but some of it might be society-driven, and some of it might be a real need to be a half of a whole.

But at the same time, they love stabbing themselves in the foot when going about it. Maybe it's the desperation, maybe it's the secret fear of loosing individuality, but the common factor I see in long term single men and women is that they have such strict requirements, it pretty well promises no one person would meet all the criteria they set.

And so they do it to themselves, and maybe that's what they want. There's nothing wrong with that, except why not just be honest and say you don't want anything long term ever?

You can have a list of criteria to be met by Mr. or Mrs. Right as long as you are tall, and when you meet the right person for you, they can go all out the window. If someone willfully denies that simple fact, then what they are truly saying is they want to stay single.

Not a thing in the world wrong with that, other than it's a shame to deny what could be right there in front of you.

 

[dazzer1975]

Today, everything seems to be about the woman:

What she needs, what she wants, what her expectations are, and then, at the end of the day, they generally are afraid of commitment and always do expect mr perfect, even though perfect doesn't exist.

There is absolutely no self analysis or awareness on the part of women, speaking totaly stereotypically, but then again, thats what all these articles are, stereotypes.

People are individuals with wholly different attitudes and outlooks and behaviours

It's just about finding someone you gel with and hoping they think the same about you...et voila