There are magic words that save a relationship. The basic concept is the same for both men and women, with a slightly different emphasis. They should be said at least a couple of times a year.
No, I'm not talking about "I love you." Nor Please. Those need to be said more than a couple of times a year, and they don't magically save a relationship.
Instead they are versions of "You are/were right, I am wrong."
If you are a man, the best phrasing is "Honey, you know more about this than I do, so let's do it your way."
The female version is "Dear, you were right, I'm sorry I insisted on doing it my way."
The reason is that most men tend to think the women never admit they are wrong and that most women tend to think that men don't value their opinions. Your particular situation may vary, and you may want to vary the phrasing, but the main point is you need to be able to tell your partner that they are/were correct and that you know that.
Monday, November 26, 2012
Friday, September 28, 2012
Fantasy vs Reality
Every intelligent Fantasy Geek eventually realizes that fantasy stories, while fun to read, would be hellish to actually live through. It's not just the danger, or the hardships, it's also all the stuff no one talks about - like eating crappy food, sleaping on hard ground, the lack of bathrooms, etc. etc.
Sci-Fi stories at least can take advantage of modern 'luxuries' that most of us really consider necessities. (When was the last time you caught your own food?)
Not so with Fantasy stories. Read about Gollum sure? But actually travel with him? I'd have to be crazier than, well, Gollum!
What most people don't realize is the same rule applies to all our fantasies - even the romantic ones.
The classic guy dating fantasy is two (or more - if you are particularly greedy) women. In reality, it is far more trouble than it is worth, except of course for the bragging rights.
The classic gal dating fantasy is to marry wealth. But wealthy husbands usually spend too much time at the office. Most people prefer a husband that they see more often than their next door neighbor.
They are fantasies because most of us don't actually have the experience. Just like fantasy novels, we concentrate on the relatively rare good parts, ignoring the practical realities that make it not worth our time.
If we don't know what we truly want, then the chance of us being happy is almost nothing.
Now there's nothing wrong with a good fantasy. As long as your understand that's what it is. When making your choices in real life, your goals should not be the same as in your fantasy life.
That doesn't mean you can't try for your fantasies - but you need to solidly think about the consequences first. That way you can make adjustments to get what you want without screwing yourself out of what you actually need.
At the very least, it may simply mean you will complain less about your wealthy spouse spendings half their time out of state and/or with the third wheel in your menage-a-trois.
But if you are like most people, it will more likely mean you accept something related to but not exactly like your fantasy. Maybe you will date/marry someone making only as much as the President does - but who works only 25 hours a week. Or maybe you will date/marry someone that is monogamous but role plays a threesome.
Sci-Fi stories at least can take advantage of modern 'luxuries' that most of us really consider necessities. (When was the last time you caught your own food?)
Not so with Fantasy stories. Read about Gollum sure? But actually travel with him? I'd have to be crazier than, well, Gollum!
What most people don't realize is the same rule applies to all our fantasies - even the romantic ones.
The classic guy dating fantasy is two (or more - if you are particularly greedy) women. In reality, it is far more trouble than it is worth, except of course for the bragging rights.
The classic gal dating fantasy is to marry wealth. But wealthy husbands usually spend too much time at the office. Most people prefer a husband that they see more often than their next door neighbor.
They are fantasies because most of us don't actually have the experience. Just like fantasy novels, we concentrate on the relatively rare good parts, ignoring the practical realities that make it not worth our time.
If we don't know what we truly want, then the chance of us being happy is almost nothing.
Now there's nothing wrong with a good fantasy. As long as your understand that's what it is. When making your choices in real life, your goals should not be the same as in your fantasy life.
That doesn't mean you can't try for your fantasies - but you need to solidly think about the consequences first. That way you can make adjustments to get what you want without screwing yourself out of what you actually need.
At the very least, it may simply mean you will complain less about your wealthy spouse spendings half their time out of state and/or with the third wheel in your menage-a-trois.
But if you are like most people, it will more likely mean you accept something related to but not exactly like your fantasy. Maybe you will date/marry someone making only as much as the President does - but who works only 25 hours a week. Or maybe you will date/marry someone that is monogamous but role plays a threesome.
Thursday, August 23, 2012
Guys that don't give up.
In the movies, books, and other media, we are taught not to give up.
This is a major problem with dating. We work too hard on doomed relationships. Whether we are talking about the girl/guy you moon over for months or the spouse you despise and think about killing, LEAVE THEM.
Many of us need to learn to give up. We keep wishing for things we already know won't work out.
Give up on the hopeless girl or guy that doesn't like us. Give up on the doomed relationship (even if it's marriage, even if you have children.)
One of the reasons I haven't posted on this blog in a while is that I found a woman and am too busy dating her to blog about the problems I have had with other people. I don't know yet if this relationship is going to work out. But I know what the major potential problems are both of us are working very hard to solve them.
She is a wonderful, intelligent, caring, successful woman and I hope to god we can work out our issues. Ending up with her would be a wonderful way to spend the rest of my life.
But we have set a deadline to solve the major problems in our relationship. If we don't solve them by the end of this year, we will probably go our separate ways.
This is a major problem with dating. We work too hard on doomed relationships. Whether we are talking about the girl/guy you moon over for months or the spouse you despise and think about killing, LEAVE THEM.
Many of us need to learn to give up. We keep wishing for things we already know won't work out.
Give up on the hopeless girl or guy that doesn't like us. Give up on the doomed relationship (even if it's marriage, even if you have children.)
One of the reasons I haven't posted on this blog in a while is that I found a woman and am too busy dating her to blog about the problems I have had with other people. I don't know yet if this relationship is going to work out. But I know what the major potential problems are both of us are working very hard to solve them.
She is a wonderful, intelligent, caring, successful woman and I hope to god we can work out our issues. Ending up with her would be a wonderful way to spend the rest of my life.
But we have set a deadline to solve the major problems in our relationship. If we don't solve them by the end of this year, we will probably go our separate ways.
Saturday, June 30, 2012
Women that insist on an insensitive guy
I hate it when a woman says she will call but doesn't actually call me back.
Some people are OK with that behavior. I know at least one woman that actually told me she preferred it.
Recently I had a really good time talking with a woman I found on OK Cupid. She never gave me her phone number (well, it showed up on my phone, so I knew what it was), and she said she would call me back.
I'm a pretty assertive guy, but if she wanted to do it that way, I was fine with it. But I did want to make clear my position about call backs. So I ask her if she didn't want to date me, to at least leave a message saying so, not to leave me hanging.
A couple of days later she sent me an email back saying that she did not want to meet me BECAUSE I had asked her to leave the message. It said
"After we hung up I realized that I felt strange about you telling me to let you know if I was not interested in meeting. I wanted to be honest and thought you seemed nice otherwise but it was off-putting.
I wish you all the best but don't think we will be a good match."
In certain ways I am glad she said no. I agree that we would not be a good match. I am clearly way too good for her. And I mean that in the most uncomplimentary way possible. She is not worth my time or effort.
I have emotions and feelings and am willing to tell her about them, but she clearly doesn't want that in a guy.
I wish her luck in her life, but not her search. Because while she will surely find a guy who will hide his emotions, I don't think she is going to actually LIKE him after she gets to know him.
Some people are OK with that behavior. I know at least one woman that actually told me she preferred it.
Recently I had a really good time talking with a woman I found on OK Cupid. She never gave me her phone number (well, it showed up on my phone, so I knew what it was), and she said she would call me back.
I'm a pretty assertive guy, but if she wanted to do it that way, I was fine with it. But I did want to make clear my position about call backs. So I ask her if she didn't want to date me, to at least leave a message saying so, not to leave me hanging.
A couple of days later she sent me an email back saying that she did not want to meet me BECAUSE I had asked her to leave the message. It said
"After we hung up I realized that I felt strange about you telling me to let you know if I was not interested in meeting. I wanted to be honest and thought you seemed nice otherwise but it was off-putting.
I wish you all the best but don't think we will be a good match."
In certain ways I am glad she said no. I agree that we would not be a good match. I am clearly way too good for her. And I mean that in the most uncomplimentary way possible. She is not worth my time or effort.
I have emotions and feelings and am willing to tell her about them, but she clearly doesn't want that in a guy.
I wish her luck in her life, but not her search. Because while she will surely find a guy who will hide his emotions, I don't think she is going to actually LIKE him after she gets to know him.
Thursday, June 28, 2012
On what kind of shallow is good to have
From my dating prospects, I have noticed several different kinds of shallow behavior.
Keep in mind that I am in FAVOR of being shallow. What I am against is being shallow then complaining about the lack of good dates.
First of all note that men have a slight advantage here. If we are too shallow, we get no dates. So eventually, we lower our shallow standards - i.e. ask out more women, not just the hot, thin gorgeous ones. Usually this also means we decide to not put up with bull crap. That is, in crassest of terms, if we have to date an ugly chick, she better be nice to us.
But with women, the reverse tends to occur. I.e. Women get hit on, rather than hit on other people. When they are being shallow, they don't stop going on dates - they go on BAD dates. As a result their initial reaction is not to lower their standards but to raise them. Which means, she starts going on less dates.
The problem is that they don't always raise the right standards. The shallow standards are the obvious ones -height, hair, wealth, style, etc. They are things you can easily tell before you go on a date. So if women are going on bad dates, they figure at least he should be tall and have, money and style. But those guys are in fact more likely to be the BAD dates - otherwise someone would have married them already (or maybe they did already marry them.).
So some women can get into a viscous cycle gets created - bad dates = more selective about shallow things = more bad dates.
I'm going to talk about some of the really stupid things I have seen women list as 'must haves' on OK cupid. These aren't jokes (as far as I can tell), nor are they normal shallow things such as (I'm a personal trainer/model and want someone as pretty as I am). They go beyond the normal rules.
All of these are from REAL dating profiles.
I am not bald. I refused to write to the "sorry no bald guys" women even though I otherwise liked her. I've dated women like her before and I don't need to do it again. The height thing used to bother me and I used to tilt at the windmill, so to speak, but I have given up. Oh, I still ask out taller women, but I don't ask them out if they mention they want a tall guy on their profile. It just demonstrates shallowness and foolishness on their part.
Keep in mind that I am in FAVOR of being shallow. What I am against is being shallow then complaining about the lack of good dates.
First of all note that men have a slight advantage here. If we are too shallow, we get no dates. So eventually, we lower our shallow standards - i.e. ask out more women, not just the hot, thin gorgeous ones. Usually this also means we decide to not put up with bull crap. That is, in crassest of terms, if we have to date an ugly chick, she better be nice to us.
But with women, the reverse tends to occur. I.e. Women get hit on, rather than hit on other people. When they are being shallow, they don't stop going on dates - they go on BAD dates. As a result their initial reaction is not to lower their standards but to raise them. Which means, she starts going on less dates.
The problem is that they don't always raise the right standards. The shallow standards are the obvious ones -height, hair, wealth, style, etc. They are things you can easily tell before you go on a date. So if women are going on bad dates, they figure at least he should be tall and have, money and style. But those guys are in fact more likely to be the BAD dates - otherwise someone would have married them already (or maybe they did already marry them.).
So some women can get into a viscous cycle gets created - bad dates = more selective about shallow things = more bad dates.
I'm going to talk about some of the really stupid things I have seen women list as 'must haves' on OK cupid. These aren't jokes (as far as I can tell), nor are they normal shallow things such as (I'm a personal trainer/model and want someone as pretty as I am). They go beyond the normal rules.
All of these are from REAL dating profiles.
- Can't have watched and enjoyed all three Lord of the Rings.
- Height - must be at least 5 inches taller than her
- Music - must like the same band she liked
- NOT being creative - apparently this girl was anti-art and meant it
- "sorry no bald guys"
I am not bald. I refused to write to the "sorry no bald guys" women even though I otherwise liked her. I've dated women like her before and I don't need to do it again. The height thing used to bother me and I used to tilt at the windmill, so to speak, but I have given up. Oh, I still ask out taller women, but I don't ask them out if they mention they want a tall guy on their profile. It just demonstrates shallowness and foolishness on their part.
Tuesday, April 10, 2012
Porn and Dating.
I am not going to discuss the morality of porn. Some think it is evil, others just a harmless good time. Either way, attitudes toward pornography is an incredibly good subject for an early conversation with serious dates. That does not mean discussing what kind of porn you like. Your goal is not to seduce, but to discover.
Specifically you need to discover the attitude your date has towards pornography. If one of you considers pornography to be immoral and the other enjoys it, that by itself will be a major problem in the relationship. In effect, one of you thinks the other is evil. Not a good sign for a relationship.
Worse, it probably indicates far deeper problems with basic attitudes toward sex. People that like dislike porn are more likely to insist on the missionary position, with the lights off, no more than once a week. People that like porn are more likely to be adventurous. These are important things you need to know before starting a serious relationship.
I wouldn't discuss it on first date, but if you are considering a long term relationship, then you need to have the talk. Don't force it, but if you need a topic, there it is.
Your goal is to discover the following:
1) How does the other person honestly feel about porn in general.
2) Are there limitations? I.E. Is it OK for singles, but not for married, is it not OK for parents, is it not OK for kids, etc. etc.
3) Can you live with their views HONESTLY. No hiding the porn, no pretending. Keep in mind that five years after you know someone, most of the passion will vanish. Chances are you won't be able to 'go without' forever if you disagree with their views.
4) For the experts/stronger relationships only: Which fetishes change the rules i.e. ok with straight vanilla, but not ok with child/bdsm/crush/food/old/fat. (Note, if they are OK with real child pornography, I suggest you run away from them. But there is a huge difference between real kiddie porn and cartoon porn, or real kiddie and role-play).
I know, some of you guys are going to say "but so few women are porn friendly and so many men enjoy it" So what? First, that is THEIR problem, not yours. Chances are most perverted men can find a woman that accepts (if not enjoys) porn easier than a prudish women can find a man that agrees with her. Yes, you may be rejecting a beautiful woman you like - but she thinks you are EVIL - with all capital letters. I can see dating someone that thinks you are evil - but a Long Term Relationship? You have to be a strange breed of masochist to have a Long Term Relationship with someone that thinks you are EVIL.
You should not compromise your principles to meet someone else's views. That goes for both anti-porn and pro porn people. Yes, pro-porn IS a principle if you don't think porn is wrong. It's several in fact - a belief in the innate goodness of sex, as opposed to evil, a belief in the right to free speech, a belief in your own equality and individual rights as opposed to being a servant to your spouse.
Worse, doing so puts you in the wrong, even if your view about porn is god's truth. That is, if you say you accept porn, but don't really, then you are lying, and have damaged the relationship. Similarly, if you say you don't like porn, but your internet browser history would make Hugh Hefner blush, then your lies will undermine the relationship.
To the women that are suddenly realizing that their own views may restrict the men they can date - wouldn't you rather the men be honest and not date you, rather than date you and then deceive you? If you find your morals limits your dating prospects too much, then it is your issue, not theirs. If you truly hold those morals, then stand up for them. If not, you need some introspection and consider growing as a person.
Specifically you need to discover the attitude your date has towards pornography. If one of you considers pornography to be immoral and the other enjoys it, that by itself will be a major problem in the relationship. In effect, one of you thinks the other is evil. Not a good sign for a relationship.
Worse, it probably indicates far deeper problems with basic attitudes toward sex. People that like dislike porn are more likely to insist on the missionary position, with the lights off, no more than once a week. People that like porn are more likely to be adventurous. These are important things you need to know before starting a serious relationship.
I wouldn't discuss it on first date, but if you are considering a long term relationship, then you need to have the talk. Don't force it, but if you need a topic, there it is.
Your goal is to discover the following:
1) How does the other person honestly feel about porn in general.
2) Are there limitations? I.E. Is it OK for singles, but not for married, is it not OK for parents, is it not OK for kids, etc. etc.
3) Can you live with their views HONESTLY. No hiding the porn, no pretending. Keep in mind that five years after you know someone, most of the passion will vanish. Chances are you won't be able to 'go without' forever if you disagree with their views.
4) For the experts/stronger relationships only: Which fetishes change the rules i.e. ok with straight vanilla, but not ok with child/bdsm/crush/food/old/fat. (Note, if they are OK with real child pornography, I suggest you run away from them. But there is a huge difference between real kiddie porn and cartoon porn, or real kiddie and role-play).
I know, some of you guys are going to say "but so few women are porn friendly and so many men enjoy it" So what? First, that is THEIR problem, not yours. Chances are most perverted men can find a woman that accepts (if not enjoys) porn easier than a prudish women can find a man that agrees with her. Yes, you may be rejecting a beautiful woman you like - but she thinks you are EVIL - with all capital letters. I can see dating someone that thinks you are evil - but a Long Term Relationship? You have to be a strange breed of masochist to have a Long Term Relationship with someone that thinks you are EVIL.
You should not compromise your principles to meet someone else's views. That goes for both anti-porn and pro porn people. Yes, pro-porn IS a principle if you don't think porn is wrong. It's several in fact - a belief in the innate goodness of sex, as opposed to evil, a belief in the right to free speech, a belief in your own equality and individual rights as opposed to being a servant to your spouse.
Worse, doing so puts you in the wrong, even if your view about porn is god's truth. That is, if you say you accept porn, but don't really, then you are lying, and have damaged the relationship. Similarly, if you say you don't like porn, but your internet browser history would make Hugh Hefner blush, then your lies will undermine the relationship.
To the women that are suddenly realizing that their own views may restrict the men they can date - wouldn't you rather the men be honest and not date you, rather than date you and then deceive you? If you find your morals limits your dating prospects too much, then it is your issue, not theirs. If you truly hold those morals, then stand up for them. If not, you need some introspection and consider growing as a person.
Tuesday, April 3, 2012
Rural vs Urban: How does any rural people find the right guy/gal?
It is a long standing fact that rural dating is much harder than urban dating. They have a much smaller dating pool. In fact, it's amazing to me that anyone living in a rural area finds someone to marry. I have asked out more women then guys that live in a rural area meet during their entire life time. How can they ever hope to get married?
First of all, throughout most of the world, the marriage and divorce rates are much higher in urban areas as compared to rural ones (Source - UN stats - but doesn't compare USA rural vs urban). This is not surprising at all - it is easier to find a person to marry in a big city, but at the same time, you get more temptation and generally make enough money to afford a divorce. In addition, rural areas tend to be more conservative and therefore more likely to discourage divorce.
In America however, that has changed. The monetary problems and conservative stigma against divorce prejudices has mostly vanished. Women can easily get jobs and no one looks at them funny when they say they are divorced.
In the most recent census, divorce rates are pretty much the same in rural vs urban areas (Source = examine the graphic chart). Honestly, this just indicates to me that people in both the rural and urban environments have the same resources to survive divorce and also the same ability to judge if the relationship will last.
Getting information about marriage rates is much harder than divorce rates. From what I can tell, they are similar in the USA. That is pretty shocking to me.
WHY???
How do people in a rural environment ever find and meet someone they want to marry at all, let alone someone they are willing to stay with, as opposed to divorcing. If I have had such a problem, how do they do it with such a tiny dating pool?
Well, I think there are several factors helping them.
They come from a similar culture. Everyone went to the same schools, work in the same place, do the same things for fun. Those that don't fit in, move away from the rural environment. Cities are not like this - we have a mis-mash of more cultures. Even if you are in Kansas City, while you might not have the foreign immigrants, you have some people that love comic books while others think they are devil's handiwork. Some people that like to get drunk, others that despise the drunkards. Cities have more variety, which makes it harder to find someone with similar goals and interests.
But that's not all of it. In addition, there is the BBD (Bigger Better Deal) effect. In a rural area, you know your dating pool is limited. You know exactly how many people you went to school with and exactly how many of them are totally undateable. You also know right off the bat all the flaws of the pretty people. Everyone knows the beauty queens and the wealthy men - and which ones are dumb as a post, which ones are alcoholics, which ones screw anything that moves.
In effect, you cease to judge solely based on the shallow stuff and are forced to look beyond it to the more important things.
In the city, there are too many beautiful people. It takes too long to figure out their flaws. As such you always think there is someone better out there for you - because you see them all the time on the street and don't have time to get to know their flaws.
The thing is you still end up seriously dating the same number of people. Oh, some of the city folk go on more one night stands, but a serious attempt to date takes time as in months, so the limit is not how many people you meet but instead how many hours you have available to date.
As such, both rural and urban people should tend go on the same number of serious dates before marriage, and have the same degree of success. In both cases, people end up selecting the best out of a rather small pool of people they dated.
The rural people pick their dates from a smaller pool that they know better and have similar cultures. The urban people pick from a larger pool that they know less well from a larger variety of cultures.
For the mathematically inclined, think of it as a bell curve, with a set compatibility level which happens to be the average + standard deviation. The rural people start out a bit higher on mean compatibility, but have a much smaller standard deviation. The urban people start out a bit lower on mean compatibility, but have a much larger standard deviation. But both differences cancel out at about the same point.
That is, the big rural mean + the small rural standard deviation = the smaller urban mean + the larger urban deviation. End result, both rural and urban end up with the same compatibility levels.
A perfect world would have the innate cultural compatibility plus extensive deep knowledge of the rural environments with the larger dating pool of the urban environment. Unfortunately the large dating pool is exactly the thing that prevents the cultural compatibility and in depth knowledge. That is, the larger the group, the less similar, and the less you know about all individuals.
Theoretically the internet could solve this problem - if we could find a way to enforce truthfulness and measure the deep inner workings of the human mind.
First of all, throughout most of the world, the marriage and divorce rates are much higher in urban areas as compared to rural ones (Source - UN stats - but doesn't compare USA rural vs urban). This is not surprising at all - it is easier to find a person to marry in a big city, but at the same time, you get more temptation and generally make enough money to afford a divorce. In addition, rural areas tend to be more conservative and therefore more likely to discourage divorce.
In America however, that has changed. The monetary problems and conservative stigma against divorce prejudices has mostly vanished. Women can easily get jobs and no one looks at them funny when they say they are divorced.
In the most recent census, divorce rates are pretty much the same in rural vs urban areas (Source = examine the graphic chart). Honestly, this just indicates to me that people in both the rural and urban environments have the same resources to survive divorce and also the same ability to judge if the relationship will last.
Getting information about marriage rates is much harder than divorce rates. From what I can tell, they are similar in the USA. That is pretty shocking to me.
WHY???
How do people in a rural environment ever find and meet someone they want to marry at all, let alone someone they are willing to stay with, as opposed to divorcing. If I have had such a problem, how do they do it with such a tiny dating pool?
Well, I think there are several factors helping them.
They come from a similar culture. Everyone went to the same schools, work in the same place, do the same things for fun. Those that don't fit in, move away from the rural environment. Cities are not like this - we have a mis-mash of more cultures. Even if you are in Kansas City, while you might not have the foreign immigrants, you have some people that love comic books while others think they are devil's handiwork. Some people that like to get drunk, others that despise the drunkards. Cities have more variety, which makes it harder to find someone with similar goals and interests.
But that's not all of it. In addition, there is the BBD (Bigger Better Deal) effect. In a rural area, you know your dating pool is limited. You know exactly how many people you went to school with and exactly how many of them are totally undateable. You also know right off the bat all the flaws of the pretty people. Everyone knows the beauty queens and the wealthy men - and which ones are dumb as a post, which ones are alcoholics, which ones screw anything that moves.
In effect, you cease to judge solely based on the shallow stuff and are forced to look beyond it to the more important things.
In the city, there are too many beautiful people. It takes too long to figure out their flaws. As such you always think there is someone better out there for you - because you see them all the time on the street and don't have time to get to know their flaws.
The thing is you still end up seriously dating the same number of people. Oh, some of the city folk go on more one night stands, but a serious attempt to date takes time as in months, so the limit is not how many people you meet but instead how many hours you have available to date.
As such, both rural and urban people should tend go on the same number of serious dates before marriage, and have the same degree of success. In both cases, people end up selecting the best out of a rather small pool of people they dated.
The rural people pick their dates from a smaller pool that they know better and have similar cultures. The urban people pick from a larger pool that they know less well from a larger variety of cultures.
For the mathematically inclined, think of it as a bell curve, with a set compatibility level which happens to be the average + standard deviation. The rural people start out a bit higher on mean compatibility, but have a much smaller standard deviation. The urban people start out a bit lower on mean compatibility, but have a much larger standard deviation. But both differences cancel out at about the same point.
That is, the big rural mean + the small rural standard deviation = the smaller urban mean + the larger urban deviation. End result, both rural and urban end up with the same compatibility levels.
A perfect world would have the innate cultural compatibility plus extensive deep knowledge of the rural environments with the larger dating pool of the urban environment. Unfortunately the large dating pool is exactly the thing that prevents the cultural compatibility and in depth knowledge. That is, the larger the group, the less similar, and the less you know about all individuals.
Theoretically the internet could solve this problem - if we could find a way to enforce truthfulness and measure the deep inner workings of the human mind.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)