Steve, who is about my age and just as single, has been put off women:
I am having a horrifying experience.
A long time ago, Allah, king of all misogynists [genuflect] posted a comment here, mentioning a site called NoMarriage.com Tonight, after sitting through today's mind-scorching family law CLE [Continuing Legal Education], I decided to take Allah's advice and see what the site said.
My GOD, this site will put you off women forever. At least American women. Let me list a few things.
1. They put up a list some crazy bitch made, of all the things she demands in a man. The list included "cute laugh." I shit you not. And it was like 50 items long. I thought it was funny at first, but then I realized I'VE KNOWN LOTS OF WOMEN WHO MAKE LISTS LIKE THIS. Like shoppers at a slave auction. "1. Good teeth. 2. Strong back. 3. Likes picking cotton." Tell me that doesn't scare you. You remember Claudia, the girl I had to eject from my life two years ago? She had a list!
The lists are here. I found this item particularly hilarious (read: "telling"), buried among twenty other requirements:
6. He is not selfish and self-centered.
Right. Because that would get in the way of her plan to be supremely selfish and self-centered.
I have a great idea here, women (and men): If you're tempted to keep a list of requirements, instead of [just] writing ten or twenty things you demand from your ideal lover, why not write a list of ways in which you would promise or ideally desire to benefit them? Turn it on its head. Start thinking of someone else for a change, not just yourself.
Here's mine:
1. I'll be straight with you, as best as I can.
I find it a struggle to be honest with myself even, given my constant temptation to see myself as the one who's eternally in the right and think well of myself, but I'll do my best to be honest with you as well.
This means I'll be honest and admit when I'm wrong, but that I'll also have to tell you -- on important topics, not hurtful trivia -- when I think you're stepping out of bounds. You often won't like this. (Indeed: who even likes to be honest with himself?) And it will take courage from me to do this. But I wouldn't love you if I didn't.
2. I'll attempt to be romantic at random times.
Truth is, I'm incredibly lazy. But I know this, so I'm warning you: don't expect overtly "romantic" gestures from me every day. I won't open the car door for you all the time, for example. I'll probably forget a lot of important dates. I'll probably view my sacrifice for you as dragging my butt out of bed and going to work. And coming home at a reasonable hour.
BUT, I promise never to give up the ghost: to randomly try to make it up to you, or surprise you. One night a week, perhaps, I'll try to take you on a "date", and THEN, at least, remember the whole "opening the car door" thing. I'll try to send you flowers sometime when I'm not in trouble. To add to the surprise, I'll probably refuse to send them to you other "expected" times, like those many made-up holidays we men are supposed obey.
3. As the bible teaches me to, I'll try to love you as I love myself.
This doesn't sound like much, but it would radically change society if even a small number of people would try this more often.
Take the dreaded "lists" Steve mentions: A woman writing such a list has no intention of seeing herself from the other person's perspective, of thinking how demeaned she'd feel if she tried to hold herself up to some list of twenty (or 150!) things a guy wants from a woman. She is communicating that she believes she is the actual center of the universe, a small god, and that everything should rightly revolve around her. I have no room nor time for such women. Nor should anyone else.
By the way, before you should get excited about this point, I should point out that "loving" myself isn't always fun. On one hand, it certainly doesn't include thinking I'm always right: I tell myself a half-dozen times a day I've done wrong. On the other hand, it does mean I'll always want to forgive myself, and will take care of, feed, and act in my own reasonable interest even after I've done wrong. I'll owe you the same.
4. I'm not going to take any crap from you.
Oh, don't get me wrong: this doesn't mean I'm not going to endeavor to be long-suffering, etc., or fail to love you unconditionally. See #3. But there's a difference between suffering from your crap and justifying or enabling it. See #3.
I can't change you, but I don't have to give in to your bad side, or enable or agree with it. Or make you feel justified by doing the same (wrong) thing back. If you want to behave like a jerk, I won't dump you or give up on you. But I also pray you'll get precious little comfort from me about it. And I hope you treat me the same. So it will take courage from you, too.
5. I love to travel and have fun with someone I love.
If you do to, then you'll find this to be a quality of mine which you'll enjoy. But if this doesn't float your boat, then I'm really the wrong guy for you.
That's it. Doesn't sound very exciting, does it? That's because everyone expects a huge amount from others, but offers very little themselves. Here, I'm just putting down what I'm comfortable pledging to give. But I'll bet, paltry as it is, it's probably a lot more than many people actually get out of a relationship.
Women: The cards are stacked pretty heavily against men these days: especially legally. As Jesus's disciples remarked in astonishment (in an era more favorably disposed to men): it is probably better -- from the man's point of view -- that he shouldn't marry.
So if you find a guy who knows all this, and yet is willing to commit to you anyway, don't view him as fortunate to have such a wonderful person as you. Instead, be grateful, grateful, grateful, that in this society, where you could put him in jail with a single unproven allegation of rape, divorce him and keep him from forever seeing his children, and take him for nearly every free dime he will ever earn -- that he's willing to take such an enormous chance on you.
>Steve, who is about my age and just as single, has been put off women
How old would that be?
Posted by: rara on April 4, 2006 02:15 PM