the hatchet...as requested :)
Sinanju -- "I'm not bashing RN, but women, in their need to feel politically correct, will put forth the appearance that they are fair in their dealings with men and that they will give any suitor a chance."
I never said I was 'fair' when dealing with men. When it comes to attraction, there's just no room for political correctness. I'm NOT gonna have sex and/or start a relationship with you if I think you're too fat, thin, smart, stupid, old, young, driven, lazy, etc for what I'm looking for at that particular moment in my life. You either turn me on, or you don't. You're either the man of my dreams, or one of my mates. There's either chemistry, or there's not. I'm not going to apologise for that. I'm hardly gonna bump uglies with a man I'm not attracted to, just so I don't hurt his feelings.
But as for giving any suitor a chance - if you mean do I go into things with an open mind and without prejudice, then yes. I do. I don't have a 'type' of man that I go for, as such. There ARE certain characteristics that I generally find attractive, but I never go specifically looking for those things. I rely VERY heavily on chemistry and instinct. If I'm not turned on (or at the very least, intrigued) within the first few minutes, its not gonna happen. But I'll give ANY man those first few minutes to at least have a go.
taking the hatchet out of my head
RN, I don't ever remember begrudging a woman having the requirement of chemistry. It's that a lot of them say that they would give ANY suitor a "chance". They never state the requirements you did, which is why I hold their feet to the fire. That omission makes them appear blameless from the beginning, but when things turn bad, THEN they add the caveat. Even in our private conversations I don't remember EVER chiding you for turning up your nose at someone who didn't physically attract you or didn't stir your chemistry. If I ever DID, please produce the evidence. If a woman said UP FRONT the things you did about her requirements, that'd be cool and I would have no reason to chide her. HOWEVER, American women have mastered omission in order to manufacture the situation to make them come out smelling like a rose. As for men adopting underhanded techniques to make it with women, in early life, WOMEN BEGIN with a headstart on men in the arena of relationships and therefore develop more techniques of "guile". We are (admittedly) less developed as a whole in the arena of relationships than women and women KNOW THAT. The result is that they will take advantage of that fact and not feel ANY guilt about it WHATSOEVER. When a man engages in such underhanded behavior, it is no less abhorrent, BUT it is a lesser skilled participant playing catch-up to his more skilled opponent. I applaud any victory a man achieves in that fashion. It's wrong to feel that way, and if you truly want to bury the hatchet in my head, feel free to do so.
You seem like a cool chick who would be a great find, but I truly wonder if a man came at you with all the intangible requirements you described would last very long since you would have him all figured out in no time flat. You would be bored very quickly and looking for the guy who could keep you metaphorically (read: NOT NEGATIVELY) off-balance.
Accept my sharpening stone if you feel offended...
Since you've been gone........
While at the gym yesterday, I was doing some cardio on one of the recumbent bikes when the new song from American Idol winner Kelly Clarkson came on the radio. There was an audible increase in the level of chatter coming from a few college girls exercising behind me. When the chorus came on, they couldn't help but to sing along:
"Since you've been gone
I can breathe for the first time
I'm so movin on
Yeah, yeah
Thanks to you
Now I get
I get what I want
Since you've been gone"
It turns out that one of the best things ever to happen to Kelly Clarkson was breaking up with her wretched boyfriend. He probably did terrible, controlling things to her, like ask her for a BJ every once in a while. Now that he's gone, she can "breathe for the first time!" Here's to "movin on!"
All of which got me to thinking. It's exactly as a poster here recently said. It's not marriage that's the anachronism in 21st century America, it's the male species! Other than providing a paycheck (or simply being the paycheck, in many cases) there is no reason to need a man around anymore.
Harvard's president Larry Summers is under pressure because he (correctly) speculated that differences between male and female brains explain why there are few women at top universities in science and maths. The feminists are using this to point to yet another example of a glass ceiling in which women are held back from the high paying jobs. All of which is irrelevant, as this firestorm of controversy obscures that fact that within 10 years or less, many of the high-paying math and science jobs (which men excel at) will be gone, having been sent to India or China. All that will be left in this country will be soft social-skills jobs that require high degrees of personal interaction and empathy (which women excel at).
As women begin to earn more of the money and become the primary breadwinner in more and more households (it is happening today, look at the numbers) the importance of the male in the American family will furthur diminish. President Hillary is only the beginning.
Probably within 50 years, masculinity itself will be viewed as a vice, not a virtue, and assailed as a primary contributor to violence in society. Laws will be passed, re-education camps will be formed, where men get together to "talk about their feelings" in order to coerce the last bit of manhood out of them.
Even further into the future, one can imagine a worst-case-scenario where men are born in slavery, kept in pods contained in vast fields, and periodically harvested, milked if you will, of their sperm at the whim of the female rulers. Because, despite the female's greatest efforts, asexual reproduction is simply unachievable. However, when engaging in recreational intercourse with each other, the females will still rely on that old standby, the strap-on dildo. (beacause a tongue is no substitute for that feeling of fullness!)
Myself, I hope by then to either be retired to a 3rd world country or dead.