It's a funny thing about men/boys: if a hot girl which we want is hanging out with us but not having sex, we feel she is dishonest and mean. She's being "a tease". We blame her for us being attracted to her and for all that sexual frustration we feel.
I thought about it while watching Just Friends, which is pretty much about that (and good fun too). You can't trust everything you see in movies, but I've actually heard one of my friends in the old days complain about it too. This guy had a talent for hanging around with the hottest girls, seriously. One time I escorded two of them to the cinema, on was a really pretty brunette with big gazoombas, and the other was a petite blonde who was just stunning. I had one on each arm. Didn't suck!
... Ahem, got lost in memories there... my point was that this guy once ranted to me about what was wrong with these girls: here he was, they were hanging out, and he was perfectly available, yet for some reason none of them were his girlfriend. They were just being so cruel and disingenous!
Bert commented:
By that logic, the "prettiest girl in town" can't have any male friend(s), unless she gets in bed with any and all males she meets... what a sad, weird and twisted view of the world! Do you really think that way???
Eolake said:
No. It's a philosophical generalization.
TC said:
"somehow, there seems to be an unspoken *rule* that a pretty/beautiful woman is expected to give herself up, if she is in the presence of a man that is interested in her?"
No no, no, not an unspoken rule, just an irrational expectation, at lizard-brain level.
See, a pretty girl hanging out with you
ReplyDelete1) is pleasing
2) stokes your ego
3) does not mean she is holding out.
If a pretty girl is hanging out with you, and
1) talks flirtatiously
2) acts flirtatiously
3) gropes, fondles and flashes
but still doesn't engage further, then she's a big time PT.
Of course some people can't tell a "hanging out" from a "come on", and I think that works both ways.
It's a funny thing [...]
ReplyDeleteBy that logic, the "prettiest girl in town" can't have any male friend(s), unless she gets in bed with any and all males she meets... what a sad, weird and twisted view of the world! Do you really think that way???
No. It's a philosophical generalization.
ReplyDelete.
ReplyDeleteNice answer, Alex ! :-)
Eolake posted another provocative post to raise discussion... (I hope :-)
Well, your friend should have probably felt more happy in a muslim country were all the women have to wear djilbab. No part of the female body is visible there, hidden under thick layers of clothing, you can hardly see the eyes.
There he would not have been exposed to the cruel and devastating experience of seeing beautiful women not sleeping with him ! :-)
.
I would even suspect that the kind of anger he was feeling, combined with a culture where male are really dominant and can legalize their anger, leads whole groups to force women to hide under thick clothing.
ReplyDeletePascal will probably tell you that hiding the woman only makes matters worse. He's told several times about how many men in arab countries are sex maniacs which make Italians seem like Tele Tubbies.
ReplyDeleteYou mean Italians look like cross dressers with wearable computers and preference for strong colors.
ReplyDeleteYes, that's the irony of it ! :-)
ReplyDeleteI've been living in Algeria for 3 years when I was a kid.
There is anger against women. If you cannot have them, hate them, hide them, harm them. (And desire them even more.) Of course not everybody, I still have Algerian friends. But it seems that a certain kind of religious fundamentalism is quite connected with frustration close to what your friend was experiencing, strongly enhanced by the local context and possibilities. Like old religious men throwing acid at the face of a young girl who went out without hiding her face.
"You mean Italians look like cross dressers with wearable computers and preference for strong colors."
ReplyDeleteSounds spot on to me.
First, I agree with the original post, in that part of the concept where the men get angry/frustrated if they don't get what they unreasonably expect.
ReplyDeleteBut I'd like to point out, that this dynamic isn't always as simple as the initial post makes it seem. If the girl, and guy, BOTH, are clear on the terms of the interaction -- "hey, we're hanging out, and there is definitely not going to be any fucking" -- then I don't have any problem with it. But quite often, there's deception involved.
So, the original post's description is, to me, a bit naive. Many a time, attractive women are hanging out and also portraying themselves as "maybe" willing to have sex with that guy; while knowing that they are NOT willing to have sex with him. The deception keeps him coming back to commit time, energy, effort, on her.
I think men aren't very justified in being annoyed about the initial situation, in which honesty is there and the hanging out activity is a benefit for its own sake, as Eolake rightly pointed out.
But I do think men are sometimes justified in disliking the hypocrisy and deception of the latter scenario, in which the women "play" the men by means of false promises.
Yes, that's obviously nasty.
ReplyDeleteBut I must be either lucky or innocent, because I don't think I've met such women.
Interesting anonymous complain.
ReplyDeletePracticing english in the night...
I think one has the right to be uncertain. On both sides.
I would also think that if the guy only wants that one thing from the girl... Not building other sides of a human relation... Then probably he is just seeing her as an object of lust, not respecting her as a human being. Having plainly the intention of using her for the sake of his own physical pleasure.
I am not saying this is bad. If both are ok, it's ok !
But I guess it is likely you get from a relation what you give. If the guy is not giving respect, if his main intention is to use the girl, then he will not get respect from the girl. And will be used. Either for pleasure (good for him), or for making fun of him.
And, somehow, it is a fair deal.
I think a guy would never talk about a girl the way anonymous writes if he had any respect or hint of love for her. What do you think, guys? :-)
Dead on, sweet Aniko. Any worthy relationship is built on respect; I can't see any durable friendship forming in a context where either one or both would be playing the other.
ReplyDeleteNot that this kind of scenario can't happen, but one would have to have a very poor opinion of oneself to cling to such a relation.
Luckily, scarcely anybody has *that*!
ReplyDeleteOk, so what kind of "we" was this ? :-)
ReplyDelete"If a hot girl which "we" want is hanging out with us but not having sex, "we" feel she is dishonest and mean."
***
"Dead on". Thanks ! Learning new words every day !
:-)
It's the philosophical "we". A way of taking responsibility for your gender, and not seem like you're attacking others for flaws you perceive you don't have any of yourself.
ReplyDeleteCapiche?
Good answer. Well done.
ReplyDelete:-)
The advantage of speaking truth is that you don't have to strain your memory or imagination.
ReplyDeleteI think that women have a tendency to test men. I think it is built-in, a low level brain function, part of the sex drive more or less.
ReplyDeleteHow fast can he run? Is he strong? Is he smart? Women who want their children to survive need to pick the best possible man to be their father. This has been true for tens of thousands of years. If evolution can select for this, I expect that it has.
I told a woman friend that she was very good at not testing men, and she knew exactly what I was talking about. She said that it was difficult not to test.
Conversely, it's not easy for men to get out of the role of demonstrating how strong and smart they are when they are around women.
So I'd say "just hanging out" with the opposite sex is a skill that is aquired.
Teasing can be thought of as a desire to put guys through their paces to see how they react, and to make sure that all the guys will desire the woman when she does finally choose a mate. Or two mates, but that's another story for another post.
I must definitely be hanging out with eccentric people.
ReplyDeleteHow do women test men?
eolake said...
ReplyDelete"I must definitely be hanging out with eccentric people."
I believe that we *hang out* w/people that reflect similar beliefs; conduct similar lifestyles; and behaviors...or at least that would be the most comfortable setting.
"How do women test men?"
I will write only about what I have seen, in America...addressing what you have written:
I think men tend to hang around w/*pretty* women because it boosts men's (the women's too) ego...no matter what age they are. Somehow, men tend to put *pretty/beautiful* women on some kind of idol pedastal where they can *worship* them...until they get bored w/them.
A large majority of the *pretty/beautiful* girls are so vain w/such fragile self-images that they have spent most of their life just primping themselves...to *catch* a man...that there isn't much depth to them. To *survive* they have learned a *game* that I like to call a *head game* (and you can, of course, define that to your personal preference - either one works but most men go w/the one below the belt on this one! Women tend to use the *opposite end* anatomy on this one! lol!):
the *pretty/beautiful* woman has, somehow, been granted something akin to knighthood (is it a Dame? I dunno.) due only to her beauty and...she knows it. With this unspoken granting of [misplaced] *power* she proceeds to see how far she can get this man, who is following her (leaving a trail of drool, along the way! lol!), to *jump* for her every perceived whim and need. Guess what the *reward* is, if the poor dude has completed "the test" *properly*: the big, um, *carrot*...for her, it is often marriage (apparently) and...just [simple] sex for him...which was, ultimately and sadly, the only thing he was really ever after!
Sometimes younger girls will be going *just* for the sex but...*the game* is ALL about who has the *upper hand* and *power*. If the girl *wins* he gets *the prize* of having sex w/the girl. If the guy wins, the girl looks *easy*; he *conquers* and bugs out.
As stated, before, this is not how every woman/girl nor man/boy behaves, I'm sure, but it seems to be one that I have heard girls talk about and seen girls and guys behave like, for the past 30 years or so and...I think that it is sad...for both. In the end, if the *cat and mouse* marry, it is quite the delusional experience. I would venture to guess that that might explain why the divorce rate is so high, these days: namely, that neither party took much time to first become friends...to find *substance* between the *mezmerizing* face and above the beltline. Getting...um...*sucked in* by either end changes the dynamics of any and all relationships. A boundary is crossed that can never be re-established...with that particular person. And...once it has been crossed, the *getting-to-know your morals, character traits, etc.* gets pretty clouded and the sex becomes the main focus; the other, which should have been the most important *gatekeeper* to the heart has now moved to second place and is rarely of importance to most people, after the *conquering*. :-(
It seemed odd, to me, to read that:
somehow, there seems to be an unspoken *rule* that a pretty/beautiful woman is expected to give herself up, if she is in the presence of a man that is interested in her? What about if she has chosen to not sleep around w/every *Harry* and *Dick*? My thought is that it *shouldn't* be a *given* or expected that a woman/girl will [nor should have to] *put out*...just because she is sexy/beautiful/pretty/[whatever]. The same, of course, would be true for the rare gentlemanly sort, such as Eo, who isn't *all about* getting it on, with a woman. If a man is not interested in having sex then that should also be respected.
And...conversely, how does that work if a girl wants a guy and he isn't willing to give himself up?! Is she considered *loose*? And...could he be considered a *tease* when he knows she wants him but doesn't give in? Women/girls have the same desires too, ya know! :-)
In the end, a *tease*, in my mind, is usually a girl flaunting too much of her *stuff* and then retracting *the offer* when the man responds. That...to me is *cruel* behavior. It is immature and irresponsible behavior on her behalf and...again...it is flaunting a form of power.
BTW: men should NOT try to "blame" a woman for their sexual frustration. That is a self-control issue that needs to be...uh...handled, personally. "Frustration" can lead to rape...seriously. Rape is forced sex...whether you know the girl or not. It would behoove women to not flaunt themselves in front of "frustrated" young men. The best thing for a "frustrated" young man to do would be to leave the area and avoid a girl who is using her body and the suggestion of sex to tease him. Someone behaving like that is being a trouble maker. But...a young man *expecting* a young girl/woman to *put out* is also not someone I would advise a young girl/woman to hang out with, either.
In re: to your friend, Eo: perhaps he wasn't *all that* for any one of the girl(s) or...as stated above: the girls might have been demonstrating self-control. Or...they could just have been trying to behave as society often wants women to behave: like a lady. Perhaps one of the girls was waiting for him to approach her...respectfully and he had not been brought up to be aware of such a character trait. Perhaps he was socially inept or not confident enough in himself to have approached the one that he liked. Too bad he didn't just have a talk w/whichever girl he liked to have solved the mystery. Communication would have lowered his frustration level and possibly even *relieved* it! lol! The dynamics of relationship is a delicate *dance*. ;-)
You're quite right, he was mostly a nice guy, but he was not a "catch", he lived in a basement with his workshop. Not somebody to show off to your gal friends.
ReplyDelete"somehow, there seems to be an unspoken *rule* that a pretty/beautiful woman is expected to give herself up, if she is in the presence of a man that is interested in her?"
No no, no, not an unspoken rule, just an irrational expectation, at lizard-brain level.
Eolake said...
ReplyDelete"No no, no, not an unspoken rule, just an irrational expectation, at lizard-brain level."
lmao! Fair enough, friend! That makes it all the more *appealing* to *give in* to the *poor dude*! lol! (just kidding...sort of...or not!) ;-)
Don't sweat it, like many human affairs, there's nothing appealing or excusable about it.
ReplyDeleteLike there also isn't when women use a sex embargo to get their bf to do what they want.
Eolake said...
ReplyDelete"...like many human affairs, there's nothing appealing or excusable about it."
I'm sorry you think that but...that *is who you is* and what makes you the unique person that you are. :-) There are many relationships/people that don't operate this way, though, I assure you. :-)
"Like there also isn't when women use a sex embargo to get their bf to do what they want."
Completely agree on that. Perhaps it's a *revenge* kind of *tactic* @ a dude 'cuz the gurl wishes that the guy could...uh...*rise above* the reptilian brain and add substance to their encounter...rather than the added heartache of *robbing* them a little more of their self-image, when they *steal* a part of their soul in *heartless* sex...just for the simple *relief* factor! Hmmmm... Not saying I *condone* either behavior but wondering if that might be why peeps interact this destructive way.
"There are many relationships/people that don't operate this way, though, I assure you."
ReplyDeleteI know that. Like I said, it was a philosophical generalization.
Eolake said...
ReplyDelete"...Like there also isn't when women use a sex embargo to get their bf to do what they want."
BTW: men have their own *game*: it's called *withholding sex*...to gain control of a woman, when she doesn't *behave* as he would like. So...neither sex is *innocent* of *playing games* w/the other...
I met the principle of the "Law of Attraction" last year, but I kind of discovered it for myself some years before. It states that it is what you want yourself that you attract into your life. It can be also be conceived on a plain psychological level: you are open for what you need.
ReplyDeleteIt may be positive-looking, or negative-looking things.
I experimented it, and it works quite well... for me. It means: you have to take full responsibility for what happens to you. And ask yourself, especially when it is weird and unpleasant: why did I want that? Why did I need that ?
Sometimes there is an answer. Sometimes not. But it is worth trying.
Well, I am not good at philosophical "we", I will give a personal example as illustration. For long, I was always attracted to guys who were not interested in me, or who were thousands of miles away: unreachable people. Each time I was sad. And I became even more sad when I realized that this happening over and over again. I had the feeling that there is a curse on me... For many years.
And then I discovered that actually I was the one doing it to myself. I wanted it to be that way. And maybe it was "good" for me. Because I had had bad experiences, I was afraid of having a real relation with a real boy. So I was always trying to reach unreachable guys, and running away from the real guys interested in me. This behavior, though hurting me, actually protected me from something I was much more afraid of: having a real relation.
When I understood the underlying fear, I could start to work on it. It's a long process.
Well, I don't know exactly what the people want for themselves. These are things one can only understand for oneself. The ones who hang out with unreachable girls, or that they don't want to reach. The ones getting involved in all sorts of games, financial, sexual, emotional etc.
I can imagine that a girl who is teasing the guys is actually afraid of intimacy. Then, with her behavior, she is attracting only the guys who see her as a sexual toy, and actually somehow she does not want to be that way, so she reject them. Vicious circle.
I guess the guy who is always hanging out with "bombas" also does not want to have a real relation.
Anyway. No general explanation. Just that if the same situation happens over and over again, then probably we want it. And if we don't like what we want, it is time to start trying to understand why we want it.
Hum. Sorry for being so long...
The Law of Attraction isn't working for me. (BTW, this is Final Identity writing. But I've lost my log-in ID somehow. I wrote the anonymous post above, too.) I've been THINKING ABOUT having sex with attractive women all my adult life, but it hasn't been coming to pass at all.
ReplyDeleteHaha little silly sarcasm there ... but kind of sad ... and kind of true ... :(
So you lost your final identity? That sucks.
ReplyDeleteI try to remind me sometimes that when I actually did have sex with attractive women, it turned out not to change my life anyway.
Yes, but, sitting alone at home regularly, incessantly, being lonely because the women you're attracted to don't reciprocate? That DOES change your life ...
ReplyDeleteF-iD
I don't recall mentioning Tele Tubbies... Probably to spare you the trauma of picturing the little obese freaks!
ReplyDeleteSee The woman paradigm, and my latest comment there, for more details on the main topic.
And, in some far future, I'll probably talk about it in more detail on my blog. (Do I sound like I'm desperate for some regular readership, always inserting mentions of my own blog like that? Well... I am! ;-)
"There is anger against women. If you cannot have them, hate them, hide them, harm them. (And desire them even more.)"
Yes, that's the general idea...
For as far as can be recalled, women have striked back at the muscle power of men with their seduction power. A tease is called in French "une allumeuse". Literally, one who turns you on, or sets you on fire [and of course stops there to make you suffer]. The term is typically used with much hate/anger in the tone, both by men and by less manipulative women.
I'm deeply convinced that if/when women finally get TRULY treated equally by men, that sick game of power should practically disappear. The fact that some women use the weapons of their own gender against men, is, consciously or not, mere payback for being dominated. Or sometimes abused as a child. The teasing of some secretly scarred women is a cry for help, "I know about sex and seduction, but I've never learned LOVE".
More later, I have thunder knocking outside my window, it's risky for my modem and I expect to find myself in the dark soon.
Which would force me to use the illumination of my bright intellect if I can't find my flashlight.
;-)
No time for proofreading. [Send]
"Eolake reflected hard...
ReplyDeleteThe advantage of speaking truth is that you don't have to strain your memory or imagination."
Indeed, well said. Though I think this fundamental truth has been expressed before. Many, many times.
Hmm... might explain why deceivers and chronic liars always consider themselves so smart. Constant solliciting of memory and imagination. But smart doesn't imply wise.
Bruce testified...
"I told a woman friend that she was very good at not testing men, and she knew exactly what I was talking about. She said that it was difficult not to test."
Now that's interesting.
"Conversely, it's not easy for men to get out of the role of demonstrating how strong and smart they are when they are around women."
Now that, is obvious. Embarrassing showing off is a cliché. Shown even in Tom & Jerry.
"So I'd say "just hanging out" with the opposite sex is a skill that is aquired."
Aw, quit flattering me. If this is a skill, then I must be born gifted.
Or educated in respect. I did have good parents.
TC theologized...
"Somehow, men tend to put *pretty/beautiful* women on some kind of idol pedastal where they can *worship* them..."
Yeah :-(
The cult of appearances.
They try to convince us that this is because "pretty is healthy", therefore indicating a better prospective mother for transmitting the genes. But what about men who LIKE fake boobs?
It's a cult, I tell you. They're everywhere. They control the media. They brainwash us at every waking moment. (Pant! Pant!) Run! Run if you can!
Hey, jogging is good for ya. Gives you pretty legs. ;-)
Also... what about blatantly sickly fashion models? :-P
"to see how far she can get this man, who is following her (leaving a trail of drool, along the way! lol!)"
That's what I call proceeding at a snail's pace!
"*the game* is ALL about who has the *upper hand* and *power*. If the girl *wins* he gets *the prize* of having sex w/the girl. If the guy wins, the girl looks *easy*; he *conquers* and bugs out."
You know? I think that sick game was never explained better and simpler.
Of course, to play it in the first place, you've got to be pretty... immature? Of narrow view, anyway. It automatically implies that gender relationships are about power, not trust. About domination, not respect.
I don't like these games.
Once, rather early in my life, there was a girl which I really liked. But she seemed insistent on following that sort of attitude, that she had to be demanding and keep some "upper hand". At some point, she got frustrated that I refused to play along, and that's the last I saw of her. That's one break-up that left me no regrets.
I hope she grew up. She wasn't mean or anything, just... misled.
And these WERE hard times, our classes constantly disturbed/canceled on account of the war.
The only thing that really upset me, was that time when she was crying, and wouldn't share the reason or even let me comfort her. I felt this as upsetting lack of trust. Ah well. No hard feelings, Annie.
You're right, TC, it's just sad. A dangerously tempting easy path leading away from any possible happiness.
"to find *substance* between the *mezmerizing* face and above the beltline."
Hey, there's mesmerizing material above the beltline too, in case you hadn't noticed! ;-)
"Getting...um...*sucked in* by either end changes the dynamics"
Must... resist... guy... reflex... of... dirty... images!
Focus, Pascal, focus! This is a serious discussion.
No, but really now. I really like the depth of your analysis, TC. And that expression, "the most important *gatekeeper* to the heart". Lovely.
You got smarts, woman.
"What about if she has chosen to not sleep around w/every *Harry* and *Dick*?"
Mom? What's a "harry"?
Oops! Lost focus again. :-\
"If a man is not interested in having sex then that should also be respected."
Well, see, there's also a problem with that. In the (stereo)typical way things go, the gentlemanly type is appreciated for his being respectful, but somewhere along the way he gets perceived as unattractive, not sexual enough. And too often he gets the "let's just be good friends", because he's perceived as unfit for a romance.
That's what you risk getting when you're not minimally "virile" (translate: brutish). At least with the girls who play the game of power.
Maybe because there's no satisfaction in dominating a non-dominant man? The thrill of the hunt, the trophy of putting the macho's castrated balls over your chimney?
Again, it's just that way with SOME people. But alas, it's a far too popular attitude, it seems.
"Women/girls have the same desires too, ya know!"
Indeed. But, as I've explained, when "the System" declares that it's a taboo topic, frustration settles in. Men are frustrated because typically they like sex. Women are frustrated because they're not allowed to freely be who/what they truly are, there's a dogma to follow.
Phooey! Nobody's happy in the end.
"men should NOT try to "blame" a woman for their sexual frustration. That is a self-control issue that needs to be...uh...handled, personally."
A real man takes the issue into his own hands! ;-)
"Frustration" can lead to rape...seriously.
Yep. Sexual frustration can be relieved with the help of legalized porn. But power frustration? Less simple, it necessitates an in-depth evolution of society and mentalities. Shattering the paradigm, and living as complementary equals.
"Living as complementary equals", I really like it. Seems to summarize the whole issue of biological (and psychological) differences and what they SHOULD be. Meaning, not extend to social rights.
But YOU try and explain this to Anurag's parents.
Or not. He's in enough hot water as it is!
"Someone behaving like that is being a trouble maker. But...a young man *expecting* a young girl/woman to *put out* is also not someone I would advise a young girl/woman to hang out with, either."
That's putting everybody back in their place: back to back! :-)
"The dynamics of relationship is a delicate *dance*."
There's an expression in French for that dance: "the hesitation waltz". La valse-hésitation.
"not an unspoken rule, just an irrational expectation, at lizard-brain level."
Makes it even more sneaky, doesn't it? You can't fight what you can't see.
"That makes it all the more *appealing* to *give in* to the *poor dude*!"
Aw, you're just being a tease! ;o)
"when women use a sex embargo to get their bf to do what they want."
Another version of the power game...
But at least, in the West, it is POSSIBLE for women to play such power games. In the arab world, your ho' goes on strike, you push 'er down an' have your way, it's yo' male's privilege!
Or, you just say to her "divorce" three times in front of a witness, and under islamic law she can go back to her mother's home in disgrace. That'll teach her to forget that she's no better than cattle! To quote one guy: "At least, my goat gives me milk. But a woman? Worthless."
What a nice part of the world I live in!
(Well, OK, Lebanon TENDS to be a little more evolved than that. A little...)
"BTW: men have their own *game*: it's called *withholding sex*..."
Hmm... knowing men, and especially men who would play the power game, I'm betting the withholding only concerns their GF. A macho would have a hard time withholding himself for long. And also, I bet, a hard time "unwithholding" without finding himself another woman for the relief. In macho mentality, "if I'm punishing HER, why should *I* be annoyed along?"
Why, yes, I watch a bit of the Jerry Springer Show, how did you guess? :-\
"if the same situation happens over and over again, then probably we want it."
"Sounds logical, Captain." - (Dr Spock, pediatrician and psychologist. Or some guy with the same name.)
*How* do women test men? I don't recall any woman ever ask me to run a 100m dash.
ReplyDelete(sigh) Eolake, Eolake, Eolake...
ReplyDeleteIf you dash after a woman from 100m away, then you've DEFINITELY failed the test.
Remember: even a snail's pace (slowly following and drooling) is already bad.
Why? Because snails are invertebrates: they have no spine. ;-)