Okay, so I disappeared for a few days again. There's a reason for it, and you can call it an excuse later if you want to. It feels like an excuse to me, although there isn't a lot I can do about it.
Anyone who's been reading my blog for a long time knows that I'm temporarily disabled. I can walk, but I'm not supposed to. I have hip tear injuries and misshapen hip joints. They came about as a result of improper training techniques in figure skating. I was competitive and in the sport rather seriously, so my training was pretty rigorous. I used to have to wear ten-pound weights on each ankle (yes, twenty pounds total), while I was skating, which included all forms of skating such as dancing, freestyle with the jumps and spins, and patch (what we called the figure-eight stuff). The weights put extreme strain on the joints. These days they tell people not to jog using wrist and ankle weights because of the pendulum effect. Our shoulders and hips are only meant to take the force of a swinging arm or leg, not any additional weight.
So, the long and short of it is, I deal with a lot of pain. Sometimes that pain gets the better of me and I have to take something for it. My doctor usually prescribes Percocet, but I'm in the middle of switching doctors and I don't want to be on heavy-duty narcotics anyway. The last thing I need is a pill habit on top of everything else I have to deal with. So, when it gets bad I take Tylenol Ones, which have codeine in them. I have a sensitivity to all narcotics, so I have to take Gravol (an anti-nauseant, in case you don't get them where you live) in order to keep myself from throwing up. Between the two drugs, I turn into a zombie. I can't hold a thought, I don't feel much of anything, I don't get any creative ideas, and my writing goes out the window apparently.
It took me several days longer than expected to make some changes to a piece I wrote last week for Feminspire, and I didn't get my weekly piece done until this morning, when I originally requested a Saturday morning deadline. I've done nothing business-wise all weekend, and a few days before that. Admittedly I was burning out, though, so between the pills and overdoing things, it's not such a stretch that I had to take a few days off. That kind of thing happens when you wake up, go straight to work, and then work right through until you fall asleep every day for weeks on end sometimes.
Now I have to get back in the habit of working again. It's that whole inertia thing - bodies at rest versus bodies in motion. Thankfully nothing has been sliding that couldn't slide. My editor wasn't going to go over my article until this morning anyway, as she's never done it on the weekend before, but I still feel like a jerk for not getting it done by the self-imposed deadline. I had one hell of a time coming up with a topic even, because I wasn't sure what everyone else on staff had written about, and I lost my own list of ideas when I had to reformat my laptop. I had an alternate list in BlackBerry, but it wasn't the pre-approved one I'd already sent to my editor when I signed on as a staff writer.
I swear this last week I might as well have been walking around moaning for brains, because the drugs always kick the crap out of me. When you face more pain than childbirth every day, though, there gets to be a point where it becomes ridiculous to take it anymore. I actually wasn't too bad when I woke up this morning, but after having to go out for a bit (which means walking around) the pain has come back. Now that I've managed to get the vital things done, I think I'm going to have to resort to pain relief again. I did manage to install my scanner software so that I can re-send my referral paperwork to my proposed new doctor's office. One small step for my life, one giant leap for the outdated scanner.
Aside from bitching and moaning, however, I don't have much to say today, and frankly no one really wants to hear that part of things anyway. I haven't done anything worth writing about lately, and have no poignant or inspiring or angry words to spew. So, now that I've got a few hours' work in, I'm going back to playing some games for a while once I've posted this. I only have one game (on my laptop at the moment) with currently-appropriate zombies in it, which is The Sims 2, which I might play later, but for now I'm going back to one of my favourite hidden-object/adventure series games. House of 1000 Doors just came out with their third one, which I've already played through, and I'm replaying the first two. I've also been playing some of the Dark Parables games again, because they came out with a fifth one, and I love FROGs (fragmented-object games).
So, now that I've put in about six hours' work, I'm taking a break. I'll get back to working tonight with some business stuff, as I have to get blogging functionality into the new websites. We're probably going to be featuring a column on TKP, but I'll fill y'all in on that when the time comes. I have to get it working first. I'm also going to do some blog posts on TKLP and WLS regarding grammar, formatting, etc. To be honest there are a million things I need to do, but I'm only one person. I'll get to it all...eventually...
Monday, 10 June 2013
Tuesday, 4 June 2013
Choosing Ignorance and the Sacred Sperm
On Facebook today I saw a great meme. I ended up 'friending' the person who posted it, as I came across it through another friend. I'm re-posting the meme here, because I think the impact should be felt by everyone.
It never fails to astonish me that so many people make the choice to be ignorant. Anyone who is capable of getting on a computer and using it at all, is fully capable of using Google, Wikipedia, and/or a wide variety of other sites to learn things about the world.
A few years ago it didn't bother me as much to run into people like that, but having dealt with a person who chose television viewing of the most mind-numbing programs, over any sort of mental exercise, altered my perception of it drastically. We have brains, and we have them for good reason. We're meant to use them, and when we use them we actually get rewarded by becoming smarter. A few years ago I thought I was an oddity because the power of my curiosity compelled me, much like the power of Christ compelling demons to leave the body. I had to know things. Actually, that's the wrong tense for the word, because I still have to know things. I just thought I was the weird one out, and that nobody else should be forced to do what might be weird just because it would make my life a heck of a lot easier.
Having dealt with the fall-out from television zombification, however, and seeing first-hand how easily the mind rots, I've done an about-face on the issue. We have a responsibility to this world, to our families, and to ourselves, to use our brains and become as much as we are capable of becoming. Anything less than continuing to educate ourselves throughout our lives is lazy, and means unnecessary use of oxygen for a non-contributing member of society. In other words, lack of a brain becomes a drain on everyone else. In some cases people are in vegetative states for whatever reason, and obviously there isn't anything they can do about it. Those are not the people I'm referring to. I'm referring to the ones who choose to take more oxygen from the planet than they produce in ideas to compensate for the expenditure. If you want to suck up your share of the air, then put it to good use.
As long as we are striving to improve ourselves in some way, we are not wasted. When we stop improving ourselves it's a given that we aren't doing anything to improve the world either. Then all we're doing is consuming. I'm not talking about people on welfare, here. I'm talking about people who eat food that is shipped across the country, using fossil fuels in its transport, or that wear clothing that is processed from either earth-based materials or synthetics. Every person on the planet consumes things, but not every person gives back in accordance with what they consume. This isn't even an environmental issue. It's a humanity issue. Being a part of humanity is a responsibility. We receive our payment by the fact that we breathe and eat. We have been given a life, and the means to sustain it usually, but are we giving any of that back?
People who choose to stop learning, who stop asking questions, who stop caring about the world around them beyond what appears in their living rooms, are mostly humanity vampires. They drain energy from the world that the world will never see again. The responsibilities that should fall on each person's shoulders end up falling on the shoulders of the ones who actually do contribute. I often wonder what would happen if suddenly everyone in the world had doctorates in multiple fields (I'm assuming through the use of biochip implants where information could be uploaded directly into the brain - it's closer than you might think). Instead of only a few really brainy people taking on the responsibility of all the advances we reap the benefits of, if we had billions of people making those advances...wow...imagine where we would be!
In fact, not only does the responsibility of advancement fall on the few, but in most cases we have the drooling masses actually working against them. People dedicate their lives to education, knowledge, and science, only to have someone who has never even looked through a microscope decide that creationism is science and actually succeed in turning it into a law that it can be taught as science in school. People who have never actually learned the genetic details of how babies are made, are legislating birth control morality. The fact that the uneducated droolers, who actually choose not to learn anything and can often be the ones with a great deal of power in this world, happens to be a very frightening thing to me. The ones with the law degrees are telling women they know more about their vaginas than they do. They tell us that women can't get pregnant from rape, when the statistics tell us a woman is twice as likely to get pregnant from rape as she is from consensual sex - which makes sense seeing as there's no opportunity to say, "No glove, no love," to the perpetrator.
It's bad enough when the average citizen turns to ignorance as a part of their lifestyle tenets. They become mentally useless from lack of mental use, and eventually become a literal drain on society because they have to be cared for by others long before it should ever have become necessary. However, it's so much worse when it's someone who is not an average citizen, but rather someone with decision- and policy-making power. They're not just draining society but treating it to a flash-fire that is turning the world to ash. It is my humble opinion that no policy of any government should ever be voted on by those that are not educated in the subject matter and are not qualified to make any sort of ruling. Radical notion, isn't it?
Let's go back to the men who do not have vaginas, and also have no medical training, but make free with reproductive rights for women. They slant their opinions with so-called morality, when in fact they are the most immoral cretins currently walking the earth. They're the same morons who think women are asking for it when they get raped. They choose to be ignorant of the fact that most men are perfectly capable of stopping themselves from raping every woman wearing a mini-skirt. In fact, if all men compulsively had to drop their trousers every time a woman walked by, they'd be too busy raping women to bother legislating those reproductive rights. Most likely we'd have had nothing but female legislators long before now, seeing as many of the men who do rape attack in packs, leaving the remaining women to meander in their mini-skirts to real jobs.
If you think I'm exaggerating a bit, wait until you hear this. There's a politician in the States who wants women to be forced to report every single one of their miscarriages to the police. He's totally serious about it, too. The only time a miscarriage should ever be reported is if it's caused by someone purposely hitting a pregnant woman in the abdominal area in order to cause a miscarriage. It's assault, and causes not just the death of a fetus that may or may not be feeling anything at that point, but a great deal of physical and emotional trauma to the woman who was growing the child within her womb. It's beyond ridiculous to introduce this kind of legislation. Not only for the above reasons, but also because it would be impossible to handle the reports, many women don't even know they're pregnant at the time they miscarry, it's a huge waste of resources for police departments, and there's no actual crime. How the hell is it a crime for a woman to lose her baby? The medical term for a miscarriage is 'spontaneous abortion' and there's a reason for the word 'spontaneous'. It's unpredictable and uncontrollable. Again, not a crime.
These people in power who choose ignorance are actively, not passively, harming other people. I have to wonder, however, whether or not the ignorance is a ruse meant to lull people into a false sense of, "He's/she's an idiot - just ignore him/her and he'll/she'll go away." People can get complacent when confronted with moronic behaviour, many understanding that to argue with an idiot is a fruitless endeavor. We assume the idiots are harmless and stop paying attention to what they're really doing and the kind of impact they're having. They certainly aren't legislating male masturbation and sanctifying the sperm spilled which is more what's in line with biblical thinking. Some such nonsense about it being better to spill the seed in a 'harlot' than cast it upon the ground. If they're so keen on morality as dictated by the Christian bible, then masturbation by men should be a crime.
Of course, now that I've meandered off onto that topic I know I've got many hours ahead of me where I'm constantly hearing the Monty Python crew's stunning refrains from, "Every Sperm is Sacred."
It never fails to astonish me that so many people make the choice to be ignorant. Anyone who is capable of getting on a computer and using it at all, is fully capable of using Google, Wikipedia, and/or a wide variety of other sites to learn things about the world.
A few years ago it didn't bother me as much to run into people like that, but having dealt with a person who chose television viewing of the most mind-numbing programs, over any sort of mental exercise, altered my perception of it drastically. We have brains, and we have them for good reason. We're meant to use them, and when we use them we actually get rewarded by becoming smarter. A few years ago I thought I was an oddity because the power of my curiosity compelled me, much like the power of Christ compelling demons to leave the body. I had to know things. Actually, that's the wrong tense for the word, because I still have to know things. I just thought I was the weird one out, and that nobody else should be forced to do what might be weird just because it would make my life a heck of a lot easier.
Having dealt with the fall-out from television zombification, however, and seeing first-hand how easily the mind rots, I've done an about-face on the issue. We have a responsibility to this world, to our families, and to ourselves, to use our brains and become as much as we are capable of becoming. Anything less than continuing to educate ourselves throughout our lives is lazy, and means unnecessary use of oxygen for a non-contributing member of society. In other words, lack of a brain becomes a drain on everyone else. In some cases people are in vegetative states for whatever reason, and obviously there isn't anything they can do about it. Those are not the people I'm referring to. I'm referring to the ones who choose to take more oxygen from the planet than they produce in ideas to compensate for the expenditure. If you want to suck up your share of the air, then put it to good use.
As long as we are striving to improve ourselves in some way, we are not wasted. When we stop improving ourselves it's a given that we aren't doing anything to improve the world either. Then all we're doing is consuming. I'm not talking about people on welfare, here. I'm talking about people who eat food that is shipped across the country, using fossil fuels in its transport, or that wear clothing that is processed from either earth-based materials or synthetics. Every person on the planet consumes things, but not every person gives back in accordance with what they consume. This isn't even an environmental issue. It's a humanity issue. Being a part of humanity is a responsibility. We receive our payment by the fact that we breathe and eat. We have been given a life, and the means to sustain it usually, but are we giving any of that back?
People who choose to stop learning, who stop asking questions, who stop caring about the world around them beyond what appears in their living rooms, are mostly humanity vampires. They drain energy from the world that the world will never see again. The responsibilities that should fall on each person's shoulders end up falling on the shoulders of the ones who actually do contribute. I often wonder what would happen if suddenly everyone in the world had doctorates in multiple fields (I'm assuming through the use of biochip implants where information could be uploaded directly into the brain - it's closer than you might think). Instead of only a few really brainy people taking on the responsibility of all the advances we reap the benefits of, if we had billions of people making those advances...wow...imagine where we would be!
In fact, not only does the responsibility of advancement fall on the few, but in most cases we have the drooling masses actually working against them. People dedicate their lives to education, knowledge, and science, only to have someone who has never even looked through a microscope decide that creationism is science and actually succeed in turning it into a law that it can be taught as science in school. People who have never actually learned the genetic details of how babies are made, are legislating birth control morality. The fact that the uneducated droolers, who actually choose not to learn anything and can often be the ones with a great deal of power in this world, happens to be a very frightening thing to me. The ones with the law degrees are telling women they know more about their vaginas than they do. They tell us that women can't get pregnant from rape, when the statistics tell us a woman is twice as likely to get pregnant from rape as she is from consensual sex - which makes sense seeing as there's no opportunity to say, "No glove, no love," to the perpetrator.
It's bad enough when the average citizen turns to ignorance as a part of their lifestyle tenets. They become mentally useless from lack of mental use, and eventually become a literal drain on society because they have to be cared for by others long before it should ever have become necessary. However, it's so much worse when it's someone who is not an average citizen, but rather someone with decision- and policy-making power. They're not just draining society but treating it to a flash-fire that is turning the world to ash. It is my humble opinion that no policy of any government should ever be voted on by those that are not educated in the subject matter and are not qualified to make any sort of ruling. Radical notion, isn't it?
Let's go back to the men who do not have vaginas, and also have no medical training, but make free with reproductive rights for women. They slant their opinions with so-called morality, when in fact they are the most immoral cretins currently walking the earth. They're the same morons who think women are asking for it when they get raped. They choose to be ignorant of the fact that most men are perfectly capable of stopping themselves from raping every woman wearing a mini-skirt. In fact, if all men compulsively had to drop their trousers every time a woman walked by, they'd be too busy raping women to bother legislating those reproductive rights. Most likely we'd have had nothing but female legislators long before now, seeing as many of the men who do rape attack in packs, leaving the remaining women to meander in their mini-skirts to real jobs.
If you think I'm exaggerating a bit, wait until you hear this. There's a politician in the States who wants women to be forced to report every single one of their miscarriages to the police. He's totally serious about it, too. The only time a miscarriage should ever be reported is if it's caused by someone purposely hitting a pregnant woman in the abdominal area in order to cause a miscarriage. It's assault, and causes not just the death of a fetus that may or may not be feeling anything at that point, but a great deal of physical and emotional trauma to the woman who was growing the child within her womb. It's beyond ridiculous to introduce this kind of legislation. Not only for the above reasons, but also because it would be impossible to handle the reports, many women don't even know they're pregnant at the time they miscarry, it's a huge waste of resources for police departments, and there's no actual crime. How the hell is it a crime for a woman to lose her baby? The medical term for a miscarriage is 'spontaneous abortion' and there's a reason for the word 'spontaneous'. It's unpredictable and uncontrollable. Again, not a crime.
These people in power who choose ignorance are actively, not passively, harming other people. I have to wonder, however, whether or not the ignorance is a ruse meant to lull people into a false sense of, "He's/she's an idiot - just ignore him/her and he'll/she'll go away." People can get complacent when confronted with moronic behaviour, many understanding that to argue with an idiot is a fruitless endeavor. We assume the idiots are harmless and stop paying attention to what they're really doing and the kind of impact they're having. They certainly aren't legislating male masturbation and sanctifying the sperm spilled which is more what's in line with biblical thinking. Some such nonsense about it being better to spill the seed in a 'harlot' than cast it upon the ground. If they're so keen on morality as dictated by the Christian bible, then masturbation by men should be a crime.
Of course, now that I've meandered off onto that topic I know I've got many hours ahead of me where I'm constantly hearing the Monty Python crew's stunning refrains from, "Every Sperm is Sacred."
Sunday, 2 June 2013
Fight For It, My Butt!
A conversation I had the other night, which was one of those back and forth joking things, popped into my head today and the more I thought about it the more I realized I had something more serious to say on the subject. Not to the person I was having the conversation with, because we were just kidding around, but to my readers in general, and anyone else who is willing to listen to me.
Years ago a movie came out called "10 Things I Hate About You" starring Julia Stiles and Heath Ledger. There's a scene in it where he starts to sing to her over the P. A. system at their high school's football field. He's sings Frankie Valli's, "Can't Take My Eyes Off of You," as he tries to convince her to go out with him. It works in the movie, of course.
In an interview he gave after the release of the movie, Heath Ledger was asked if he had done, or would ever do, that for a girl/woman. His response was a flat-out, "No." At first it sounded a bit harsh to me, until I heard his reasons for it. He basically said that if you had to do that for a girl, she wasn't that interested in you in the first place. Once I'd thought about it for a while, I realized he couldn't have been more right.
This might surprise some people that I would feel that way, since I"m the type of person to go after what I want, and I don't feel it has anything to do with gender. Women can ask men out, and vice versa. However, the real issue lies in whether or not someone returns your interest. If they don't there isn't anything you can do about it. If you push them they're just going to get even less interested. Of course, there are those who do have feelings of attraction for you, and they get off on the idea of you chasing them, but I'll be blunt and say that it's an extremely immature person who feels they have to do that. If they need to be chased, they have self-esteem issues.
Asking someone out, or expressing interest in them, is one thing. It's another thing entirely to keep after them once they've already said no. If they're being honest in their refusal, you're not going to change their opinion. If they're being dishonest, they're playing games, and who the hell needs that?
Within society, however, women are conditioned to believe that men should chase them. Men are expected to put forth all kinds of effort to convince a woman to date him. Men would be far better off asking once and then letting it go after that. Not just because it can devolve into something similar to stalking, but also because it shouldn't be such a bloody difficult thing for them to proposition a woman for a date. I mean, really, it's hard enough for someone to get up the courage to ask someone out, which is exactly the same thing as admitting you like them. Having someone reject you, and then expect you to keep going after them, is just torture for the self-esteem.
I think it boils down to that princess mentality a lot of women were raised to adopt as their own dating code. Prince Charming is supposed to move heaven and earth to get the girl. Now, I'd like someone to explain to me why. What has she done to deserve that, other than sit there and look pretty. Granted, I talked about that aspect of things in a previous post, so I'm not going to expound upon that particular issue here. Suffice it to say, anyone who wants someone to ask them out should be worth a lot more than a superficial, outward appearance.
Patterns have developed in society that are unhealthy, however. One of my all-time favourite songs is "Every Breath You Take" by The Police. Breaking down the lyrics, mind you, reveals something very sinister indeed. It's known as 'the stalker song' for good reason. Yet, at the time it came out it was extremely popular and no one thought anything of it. It was commonly accepted behaviour in males who were interested in females. Men were expected to be pursuers, and if the girl didn't say yes at first, the guy was supposed to continue his pursuit and convince her somehow. He was supposed to win her heart, like it was some sort of competition or something.
Now, thinking about that song, how weird does it sound in your head if you imagine a woman singing it? To me the phrase 'bunny-boiler,' a la Glenn Close, comes to mind...but maybe I'm wrong. When I think of a woman watching a man, the feel of the song becomes totally different and I see it for what it truly is. I mean, I still love it, and try to think of it in harmless terms, but it really isn't harmless. Even if it isn't intended to be about stalking someone, it still glorifies an unhealthy relationship behaviour and an unhealthy component of North American society.
When you're in a relationship, fighting for it might take on an entirely different connotation. You fight for the relationship itself - you're not fighting to win someone's heart. Fighting for it means different things for different couples, but it usually includes conversation or therapy or something similar. In the case of fighting for a relationship, it's kind of the mirror image of fighting to win someone over. Once you stop caring enough to argue or fight, chances are the relationship is doomed.
The only time I can see it being acceptable to fight to 'win' someone, is when you've been really stupid and you did something that seriously hurt them. You have to work to gain their forgiveness. I can totally get behind that. Whatever it is that hurt the other person so badly, you're basically fighting to regain their trust. They now know that you can and will hurt them, because you've proven it, so now you have to show that you realize your mistake and sincerely believe that you will never be dumb enough to do it again.
I should add something, though. Not every infraction in a relationship requires a partner to pull out all the stops. Sometimes the offense is so minor that it should just be ignored so that you can get on with your happy little life, instead of turning it into a three-ring circus of he-said-she-said. Sometimes the offense is serious enough that it requires an apology, yet minor enough that it doesn't justify splitting up. The severity of the infraction can be judged pretty easily, too. If you feel like you've been gut-kicked, you probably deserve an apology of some sort. Not always, but it's pretty likely. If you're offended more than hurt, let it go. If you suddenly feel as though you might never trust your partner again, they likely need to do some serious butt-kissing.
In other words, fighting to win someone over should only be necessary if you screwed up. Otherwise they should already think you're good enough just the way you are. If they don't, walk away. As much as I hate to use such an overused phrase, "He's/she's just not that into you." Trite but true.
In a ways it's kind of surprising that so many men still fall for this line of thinking. Pride has been credited as the downfall of many whose testosterone commandeers their hormone levels. One would think, if that's really the truth about men (and it would be sexist to make that assumption at all), that they would have a hard time swallowing it in order to keep up their pursuit. I have to say, though, I'm pretty sure women have more than their share of pride. I certainly do, and I can guarantee that my pride will never allow me to behave that way with anyone. Back in high school it might have been possible, especially since I was pretty insecure back then. As a grown-up, though? Never.
One (sort of) caveat applies here. Performing some sort of grand gesture isn't off-limits if it's done for the right reasons. Sometimes we just want to show someone how much we appreciate them. It should be done out of a sense of giving, without expecting anything in return. Everyone likes those kinds of gestures, and it's nice to be shown appreciation just for the sake of appreciation. It's kind of like buying flowers for someone for no reason other than that you want to give them a gift or make them smile, compared to buying someone flowers to get them into bed. It's all about the intent of the gesture.
There are plenty of things in life that we should fight for. We fight for causes we believe in, or the achieving of personal goals. A relationship can't be a personal goal, though. It can only ever be a mutual goal if it's a healthy one, because it requires more than one person to go after it. I've know both men and women who have made it their goal to be married by a certain age, but it's not within our control, really. You can make it a goal to look for someone who is compatible, but you can't make it a goal to find them. Your chances of finding that person are increased by looking, and the more you keep an eye out, the more likely you are to find them, but maybe you won't. Good things will likely come to those who make an effort, but there are no guarantees, particularly when another person has some say in the matter.
Years ago a movie came out called "10 Things I Hate About You" starring Julia Stiles and Heath Ledger. There's a scene in it where he starts to sing to her over the P. A. system at their high school's football field. He's sings Frankie Valli's, "Can't Take My Eyes Off of You," as he tries to convince her to go out with him. It works in the movie, of course.
In an interview he gave after the release of the movie, Heath Ledger was asked if he had done, or would ever do, that for a girl/woman. His response was a flat-out, "No." At first it sounded a bit harsh to me, until I heard his reasons for it. He basically said that if you had to do that for a girl, she wasn't that interested in you in the first place. Once I'd thought about it for a while, I realized he couldn't have been more right.
This might surprise some people that I would feel that way, since I"m the type of person to go after what I want, and I don't feel it has anything to do with gender. Women can ask men out, and vice versa. However, the real issue lies in whether or not someone returns your interest. If they don't there isn't anything you can do about it. If you push them they're just going to get even less interested. Of course, there are those who do have feelings of attraction for you, and they get off on the idea of you chasing them, but I'll be blunt and say that it's an extremely immature person who feels they have to do that. If they need to be chased, they have self-esteem issues.
Asking someone out, or expressing interest in them, is one thing. It's another thing entirely to keep after them once they've already said no. If they're being honest in their refusal, you're not going to change their opinion. If they're being dishonest, they're playing games, and who the hell needs that?
Within society, however, women are conditioned to believe that men should chase them. Men are expected to put forth all kinds of effort to convince a woman to date him. Men would be far better off asking once and then letting it go after that. Not just because it can devolve into something similar to stalking, but also because it shouldn't be such a bloody difficult thing for them to proposition a woman for a date. I mean, really, it's hard enough for someone to get up the courage to ask someone out, which is exactly the same thing as admitting you like them. Having someone reject you, and then expect you to keep going after them, is just torture for the self-esteem.
I think it boils down to that princess mentality a lot of women were raised to adopt as their own dating code. Prince Charming is supposed to move heaven and earth to get the girl. Now, I'd like someone to explain to me why. What has she done to deserve that, other than sit there and look pretty. Granted, I talked about that aspect of things in a previous post, so I'm not going to expound upon that particular issue here. Suffice it to say, anyone who wants someone to ask them out should be worth a lot more than a superficial, outward appearance.
Patterns have developed in society that are unhealthy, however. One of my all-time favourite songs is "Every Breath You Take" by The Police. Breaking down the lyrics, mind you, reveals something very sinister indeed. It's known as 'the stalker song' for good reason. Yet, at the time it came out it was extremely popular and no one thought anything of it. It was commonly accepted behaviour in males who were interested in females. Men were expected to be pursuers, and if the girl didn't say yes at first, the guy was supposed to continue his pursuit and convince her somehow. He was supposed to win her heart, like it was some sort of competition or something.
Now, thinking about that song, how weird does it sound in your head if you imagine a woman singing it? To me the phrase 'bunny-boiler,' a la Glenn Close, comes to mind...but maybe I'm wrong. When I think of a woman watching a man, the feel of the song becomes totally different and I see it for what it truly is. I mean, I still love it, and try to think of it in harmless terms, but it really isn't harmless. Even if it isn't intended to be about stalking someone, it still glorifies an unhealthy relationship behaviour and an unhealthy component of North American society.
When you're in a relationship, fighting for it might take on an entirely different connotation. You fight for the relationship itself - you're not fighting to win someone's heart. Fighting for it means different things for different couples, but it usually includes conversation or therapy or something similar. In the case of fighting for a relationship, it's kind of the mirror image of fighting to win someone over. Once you stop caring enough to argue or fight, chances are the relationship is doomed.
The only time I can see it being acceptable to fight to 'win' someone, is when you've been really stupid and you did something that seriously hurt them. You have to work to gain their forgiveness. I can totally get behind that. Whatever it is that hurt the other person so badly, you're basically fighting to regain their trust. They now know that you can and will hurt them, because you've proven it, so now you have to show that you realize your mistake and sincerely believe that you will never be dumb enough to do it again.
I should add something, though. Not every infraction in a relationship requires a partner to pull out all the stops. Sometimes the offense is so minor that it should just be ignored so that you can get on with your happy little life, instead of turning it into a three-ring circus of he-said-she-said. Sometimes the offense is serious enough that it requires an apology, yet minor enough that it doesn't justify splitting up. The severity of the infraction can be judged pretty easily, too. If you feel like you've been gut-kicked, you probably deserve an apology of some sort. Not always, but it's pretty likely. If you're offended more than hurt, let it go. If you suddenly feel as though you might never trust your partner again, they likely need to do some serious butt-kissing.
In other words, fighting to win someone over should only be necessary if you screwed up. Otherwise they should already think you're good enough just the way you are. If they don't, walk away. As much as I hate to use such an overused phrase, "He's/she's just not that into you." Trite but true.
In a ways it's kind of surprising that so many men still fall for this line of thinking. Pride has been credited as the downfall of many whose testosterone commandeers their hormone levels. One would think, if that's really the truth about men (and it would be sexist to make that assumption at all), that they would have a hard time swallowing it in order to keep up their pursuit. I have to say, though, I'm pretty sure women have more than their share of pride. I certainly do, and I can guarantee that my pride will never allow me to behave that way with anyone. Back in high school it might have been possible, especially since I was pretty insecure back then. As a grown-up, though? Never.
One (sort of) caveat applies here. Performing some sort of grand gesture isn't off-limits if it's done for the right reasons. Sometimes we just want to show someone how much we appreciate them. It should be done out of a sense of giving, without expecting anything in return. Everyone likes those kinds of gestures, and it's nice to be shown appreciation just for the sake of appreciation. It's kind of like buying flowers for someone for no reason other than that you want to give them a gift or make them smile, compared to buying someone flowers to get them into bed. It's all about the intent of the gesture.
There are plenty of things in life that we should fight for. We fight for causes we believe in, or the achieving of personal goals. A relationship can't be a personal goal, though. It can only ever be a mutual goal if it's a healthy one, because it requires more than one person to go after it. I've know both men and women who have made it their goal to be married by a certain age, but it's not within our control, really. You can make it a goal to look for someone who is compatible, but you can't make it a goal to find them. Your chances of finding that person are increased by looking, and the more you keep an eye out, the more likely you are to find them, but maybe you won't. Good things will likely come to those who make an effort, but there are no guarantees, particularly when another person has some say in the matter.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)