09 Sep 2010, 10:51 am
09 Sep 2010, 11:33 am
09 Sep 2010, 11:50 am
HopeGrows
Veteran
Joined: 5 Nov 2009
Age: 50
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,565
Location: In exactly the right place at exactly the right time.
09 Sep 2010, 11:58 am
@billsmithglendale, it's always so difficult to have a discussion with you, because whenever someone expresses an opinion that contradicts yours, you become downright hateful. Why can't you try to disagree with some sense of civility, at least?
To answer your question, yes - I actually am a very special and highly prized person, with a nice circle of friends. My friends and I do things for each other not because we expect or demand a quid pro quo arrangement. We do things for each other because we like each other, because we love each other, because we empathize with a friend in need. If a friend asks me for any reasonable favor, my immediate response will be to oblige them - if there's no significant consequence to me. If there is a consequence that I can manage, I will oblige them. If there is a consequence that I can't manage (a favor I just can't do), I'll try to suggest an alternative way to solve the problem. I understand that this a construct that's difficult to understand if you don't understand/experience empathy, but that's pretty much the way friendship works. Have I ever had a friend who asked too much of me? Sure. We all have. I handled those situations, so that I wasn't taken advantage of.
My problem with your construct is that you seem to demand a quid pro quo arrangement, a type of balance sheet to ensure that you're sufficiently compensated for every little thing you do. In the NT world, you'd be known as someone who is petty. The reality is that sometimes there's an imbalance in friendships...sometimes a friend is in crisis, and you give more than you get; sometimes a friend is in extraordinary circumstances, and you give more than you get. And sometimes you're the one who gets more than they give.
But most of us balance the friendship as a whole, not according to each little "transaction" that occurs within the relationship. When a close friend's mom is dying, you bet I'll watch her kids, or take them to school, or let them sleep over, or take a call in the middle of the night. I don't expect to be "repaid" for those "favors" - because that's part of my definition of being a decent human being. (Btw, that friend has never let me down, and would do exactly the same for me if the tables were turned.)
As far as your sarcastic remark about inventing capitalism....um, no - not my point at all. I agree that people should be compensated for services rendered. If you expect to be paid for tutoring a fellow student, then make that arrangement up front. I don't want anyone to be taken advantage of, either. But you don't want money - you want a woman to like you, or date you, or f#ck you as "payment" for services rendered. Okay, if that's what you expect, that's what you should arrange up front. Because the bottom line is, you can't demand that someone like you, @billsmithglendale. You can't demand that someone should desire a relationship with you. "I explained finite math to you for an hour. You should want to date me now." The very idea is absurd. You want to find out if a woman could be interested in you, or just interested in your skills? When she asks you to tutor her, your response is, "Well, I can find time this week, but I charge $20/hr cash, up front for tutoring. Or you could just take me out for pizza instead." 
Yes, that would require a bit of flirting - perhaps a smile. But then you'd have your answer. If she'd rather pay you, she's not interested. If she wants to go out for pizza, at least she may be interested in you as a friend, and quite probably more. If she doesn't want to do either, she was just trying to use you for your massive intellect.
Finally, for someone who's always claiming to be so "happily" married, you come across as a very angry, very controlling person. I respond to your posts because I think your ideas actually will impede the men here in their attempts to form healthy relationships with women. You clearly do not understand the give-and-take that exists between men and women, and your suggestions always seem to follow a common theme: how to control the "evil" women lurking around every corner, so you can be sure the "Piper gets paid." Fail.
09 Sep 2010, 12:02 pm
09 Sep 2010, 12:21 pm
To answer your question, yes - I actually am a very special and highly prized person, with a nice circle of friends. My friends and I do things for each other not because we expect or demand a quid pro quo arrangement. We do things for each other because we like each other, because we love each other, because we empathize with a friend in need. If a friend asks me for any reasonable favor, my immediate response will be to oblige them - if there's no significant consequence to me. If there is a consequence that I can manage, I will oblige them. If there is a consequence that I can't manage (a favor I just can't do), I'll try to suggest an alternative way to solve the problem. I understand that this a construct that's difficult to understand if you don't understand/experience empathy, but that's pretty much the way friendship works. Have I ever had a friend who asked too much of me? Sure. We all have. I handled those situations, so that I wasn't taken advantage of.
My problem with your construct is that you seem to demand a quid pro quo arrangement, a type of balance sheet to ensure that you're sufficiently compensated for every little thing you do. In the NT world, you'd be known as someone who is petty. The reality is that sometimes there's an imbalance in friendships...sometimes a friend is in crisis, and you give more than you get; sometimes a friend is in extraordinary circumstances, and you give more than you get. And sometimes you're the one who gets more than they give.
But most of us balance the friendship as a whole, not according to each little "transaction" that occurs within the relationship. When a close friend's mom is dying, you bet I'll watch her kids, or take them to school, or let them sleep over, or take a call in the middle of the night. I don't expect to be "repaid" for those "favors" - because that's part of my definition of being a decent human being. (Btw, that friend has never let me down, and would do exactly the same for me if the tables were turned.)
As far as your sarcastic remark about inventing capitalism....um, no - not my point at all. I agree that people should be compensated for services rendered. If you expect to be paid for tutoring a fellow student, then make that arrangement up front. I don't want anyone to be taken advantage of, either. But you don't want money - you want a woman to like you, or date you, or f#ck you as "payment" for services rendered. Okay, if that's what you expect, that's what you should arrange up front. Because the bottom line is, you can't demand that someone like you, @billsmithglendale. You can't demand that someone should desire a relationship with you. "I explained finite math to you for an hour. You should want to date me now." The very idea is absurd. You want to find out if a woman could be interested in you, or just interested in your skills? When she asks you to tutor her, your response is, "Well, I can find time this week, but I charge $20/hr cash, up front for tutoring. Or you could just take me out for pizza instead."
Yes, that would require a bit of flirting - perhaps a smile. But then you'd have your answer. If she'd rather pay you, she's not interested. If she wants to go out for pizza, at least she may be interested in you as a friend, and quite probably more. If she doesn't want to do either, she was just trying to use you for your massive intellect.
Finally, for someone who's always claiming to be so "happily" married, you come across as a very angry, very controlling person. I respond to your posts because I think your ideas actually will impede the men here in their attempts to form healthy relationships with women. You clearly do not understand the give-and-take that exists between men and women, and your suggestions always seem to follow a common theme: how to control the "evil" women lurking around every corner, so you can be sure the "Piper gets paid." Fail.
It's my observation that in this particular part of the forum (Love and Dating), you and some of the other women here have difficulty having a discussion with any of us -- it's like if we don't exactly agree with you, we're automatically "being difficult or argumentative" rather than trying to distinguish or clarify the point we were making. I see the same arguments and classic "Men are From Mars, Women are From Venus" clashes here, so I'm not going to take that particular comment personally. I would also agree that there are many men here, including myself occasionally, who are difficult or obstinate in our POV's, so touche.
Using your friendship example -- if you had a friend in your group who never gave, but only took, would you still be their friend? You have a nice thing going with the mutual respect and favors your group provides each other, but sociological and psychological studies and theory both back up my assertion that there has to be give and take for a relationship to work (of any kind). This isn't just me projecting my values, this is in fact a relatively reproducible phenomenon.
This part of your comment:
No one here has said (if they did, they are wrong) that sexual favors are quid pro quo for doing a small favor for a woman. I agree with you that some men here do seem to act as though they can force someone to like them -- this is partially a guy thing, and partially a result of the media misleading us all through a constant bombardment of happy-ending, love-conquers-all, "if you try long enough, you'll get her" brainwashing and propaganda. So yes, to anyone who would think this way, this is wrong, nobody owes their body or soul to anyone (except maybe someone who actually took the formal wedding vows, and even that is legally and morally debatable).
And yes, your sentence about what should have been said by the guy is exactly right. A man with confidence in himself and his value would and should say that, to prevent being used. But would you expect the same statement from a guy with low confidence, low experience, and low social ability in the face of a charming smile and beautiful face, especially when that same woman is intentionally using those charms to get something for nothing and using the social construct to her advantage? Half the guys in this part of the forum can barely get the courage up to talk to a woman like that, and now that she's talking to him and asking for things, you expect him to say no? So that's the thing, we actually do agree on a point, but just not on some of the grey area about what was right or wrong in terms of the woman's request or her intentions.
Oh, rest assured I'm angry about a lot of things, but not my marriage. Me finding my wife (and I have dated around) was probably the biggest turning point in my life to finding some satisfaction and positivity, and that's why I'm so passionate about the topic. I look back on many of my years before that with anger, for many reasons. By no means do I blame those events entirely on any one factor, including women.
That being said, I don't see what I write here as particularly angry unless someone resorts to personal insults against me or jerks me around. Treat me with dignity, I'll treat you the same way. I have a very high sense of justice and giving what people deserve, as well as getting the same. Belaboring a point or using rhetoric, logic, and my writing skills to prove my POV is not the same as being angry. This might be another man/woman thing -- women see more importance in agreement and positive personal relations (which is why they often will not reject a man to his face, but will do so indirectly), while men do not necessarily see a problem with debating something extensively. It's not personal.
09 Sep 2010, 12:28 pm
HopeGrows
Veteran
Joined: 5 Nov 2009
Age: 50
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,565
Location: In exactly the right place at exactly the right time.
09 Sep 2010, 1:04 pm
09 Sep 2010, 2:06 pm
09 Sep 2010, 2:24 pm
If you want to help someone, help them.
If you want to ask someone out, ask them.
If you want to help someone and ask them out, do both. (works well together)
As long as you're following your will, you'll always be happy. This board is filled with resentment, and the only way I see that possible is if someone wasn't really doing what they wanted. If you help a girl, and end up angry about it because you got nothing in return, you really did not want to help her, did you? And if you want to ask her out, do it. It should be based on it being what you want to do, not whether you think you're earned it or not.
I see the OP guilty of both of these will-defying acts and therefore, resentful because of it.
The ultimate sh**-test
This analysis is way too in depth. The 2 simple questions here are do you want to hold her drink or not? and do you want to date her or not? Totally independent of each other. It's possible to do both.
I think the message is that it should never cross your mind that holding her drink will lead to romantic favor. And any indication that you do think that way will lead to rejection. Making the connection between the two independent acts creates a lof of frustrated and angry men.
09 Sep 2010, 2:34 pm
If you want to help someone, help them.
If you want to ask someone out, ask them.
If you want to help someone and ask them out, do both. (works well together)
As long as you're following your will, you'll always be happy. This board is filled with resentment, and the only way I see that possible is if someone wasn't really doing what they wanted. If you help a girl, and end up angry about it because you got nothing in return, you really did not want to help her, did you? And if you want to ask her out, do it. It should be based on it being what you want to do, not whether you think you're earned it or not.
I see the OP guilty of both of these will-defying acts and therefore, resentful because of it.
The ultimate sh**-test
This analysis is way too in depth. The 2 simple questions here are do you want to hold her drink or not? and do you want to date her or not? Totally independent of each other. It's possible to do both.
I think the message is that it should never cross your mind that holding her drink will lead to romantic favor. And any indication that you do think that way will lead to rejection. Making the connection between the two independent acts creates a lof of frustrated and angry men.
Why yes. Yes indeed.
(Incidentally, this post also explains why halebopp and I were not bitter and angry about not winding up as the girlfriends of the men we cooked for back in the day. )
09 Sep 2010, 3:36 pm
09 Sep 2010, 3:58 pm
09 Sep 2010, 4:07 pm
09 Sep 2010, 4:08 pm
09 Sep 2010, 4:11 pm
| Similar Topics | |
|---|---|
| A part of me wants to give up with dating |
17 Nov 2024, 2:26 pm |
| Video: Give Yourself Permission to Be Creative |
24 Jan 2025, 12:29 am |
| A Socialist Plea not to give up on Americans |
17 Nov 2024, 12:45 pm |
| I identify red-flags but I give too many chances, thoughts? |
10 Jan 2025, 7:23 pm |
