the first book I've read in a month

[lauralh]

So, in an effort to fall asleep/nap I started reading The Rules, which Steve had bought a few months ago in hopes of understanding girl(s). It worked like a charm (to put me to sleep, that is, i don't think Steve is ever going to understand women). But really, the authors keep stressing that these are rules to bag a husband, and I guess they work. I mean, if you only return one phone call for every five, any guy who keeps hanging around has GOT TO BE marriage material.

But as in everything that's mostly utter crap, there's a few kernels of truth in it. They recommend, for example, not to be exclusive unless there's a ring on your finger. Which is close to how I feel. A little more extreme, granted... and also they recommend not to see a guy more than twice a week in the beginning of dating him. Also, while I think the "be busy after Wednesday" thing is extreme, I do think that keeping plans you made previous to him asking you out is good. And the whole having a life outside one guy thing, in general, is good. And don't immediately start commanding him in the bedroom. Well, they say never, but primarily they say like, first time, just let him get a feel for stuff. So to speak.

But the whole never-pay-for-dinner shit is um, yeah. "The pleasure of your company is his recompense." Um, what, so the chick not only gets free dinner but also the pleasure of HIS company? Also I seriously doubt that if you never return a guy's phone calls, that he'd fall madly in love with you. I mean hell, I'm single, maybe I'm wrong, but after a point of no phone calls being returned, I tend to think someone is ignoring me. One or two is my limit.

and yet another :but: here... I am rather annoyed at the whole male point of view that sort of takes feminism too far in this realm. I didn't create this world and I never said that the guy should never call. I mean really it should be about equal, but more or less what ends up happening is the more interested person ends up calling more. And I've gotten incredibly annoyed with the "I'm on the way to the bar, you should come" call once a week. If you chat more regularly, a spur-of-the-moment thing is perfectly acceptable, because you know the person is probably not busy. But otherwise, geezum. (According to the rules, the guy who kept doing this to me should have figured out he needed to call me more in advance, but he never did. So we stopped talking for a while, and then he randomly messaged me a couple weeks ago to do almost the same thing. One day in advance this time at least. But dayamn.)

Comments

[lemur68.livejournal.com]

It think (or I would hope, anyway) that most rational people agree that "The Rules" reduce dating to a chess game and that they cater to The View-watching busybodies and nobody else.

[mindme.livejournal.com]

I do think men don't appreciate a woman they can have too easily. Ever notice that you throw yourself at a guy and he's all like "let's be cool about it baby" but the moment you're like "he ain't all that" he does everything in his power to get you back again just so he can ignore you. Like I always say, men are like fruit trees. Sometimes you have to prune them back because if they think they have all the time in the world love will never bloom.

[five-speed.livejournal.com]

I am definitely not someone who would ordinarily profess dating by "the rules," but I've learned that acting too interested, even a tiny bit too interested, is the worst thing you can possibly do if you ARE interested in someone. It works both ways, though. There's nothing worse than an overeager guy who admits right up front that he's really into you.

[aefirpo.livejournal.com]

I think you're all on crack. And not the good kind, either. The kind laced with PCP and trace amounts of LSD that drives you insane.

you must mean...

[(Anonymous)]

the bad yellow crack!

[drisrael.livejournal.com]

"i think you smoked some bad granola, hippie."

hehe... crack

[kzookitten.livejournal.com]

Yeah, you know, After reading that article, I think I can safely say it is the most ridiculous piece of 30s thinking anti-feminism trash ever. Holy crap, seriously.

Personally, if you make all those adjustments to your life to cater to him, how could you ever be happy. I know that I would never be happy with a guy who was attracted to that sort of bullshit.

I dont think acting interested when you really are is so much the problem as much as being too sure of it. Like, I personally am always terrified when I actually might be interested in a person on a serious level. This happens all of once every 3 years or so, and usually explodes into blech, but still.

I think my point of view contrasted with thiers paints an interesting picture, though. I mean, I think that any relationship worth anything should scare the shit out of you at first and make you a little more wary, make you want to take more time to make sure what youre experiencing is genuine. It should scare you because of the danger in upsetting the delicate balance of your life, and who you are, and you priorities, and your independence, that sort of thing.

For me serious relationships are always a scary sort of tight rope walking between your independent life, and your life with them. I think the key to maintaining a succesful relationship is maintaining your independence in your life, even though you may be hopelessly devoted to Your MAN, or female for that matter.

God, and you know, going to stupid events or doing things I dont want to do for him goes almost entirely against my recent brigade for bluntness. Im not saying compromise and adjustments are bad, but Im saying that whatever a person is feeling or thinking, regardless of relationship status, and within reason, should be stated bluntly and concisely.

But then, Im wierd and eccentric.