Are men natural pursuers? (Page 3)

Oh I'm not gonna shoot you. I just disagree and I don't want to work, so I'm participating this debate! LOL! Since I was a little kid, I've been friends with mostly guys. Not in the usual, oh I'm gonna be a ----tease and then call you my 'friend' sort of way (hey, I was frustrated for some of my buddies with that crap). I was really one of the guys. I really only know one or two of them who approached it the way you talk about. Most of them were pretty shy and sensitive and didn't really have the balls to pursue that aggressively. Maybe we just hung out with different kind of guys (I'll admit, I hung out with some nerds)...

I don't chase. It's not in my makeup to do so. I do flirt, charm, giggle, twirl my hair (well, when it was twirlable) and make with the eyes to send unmistakable signals. But... I don't chase. Call it ego gratification, call it old-fashioned, anti-feminist, call it whatever you want. I am assertive in many ways, but I don't chase.

While dancing the tango, salsa, mambo, rhumba... whatever... the woman follows the man's lead. He leads her about, pulls her close or keeps her at a distance. She's working her mojo even while letting him lead. They are seductive dances. It just wouldn't be the same if the woman was leading the guy around.  It's damn sexy to let a man lead, IMO. Same for letting them pursue.

Ummm thank you but Justjester is the Happy Days (and Dungeons & Dragons) fanatic, not me. Dish on the quote! I love it.

I'm not lamenting that I'm not being pursued; I know why I'm not being pursued. It's hard for anyone to notice me when my schedule is sleep/train/work/eat/sleep/train... and, my friends tell me I'm unapproachable (when we go out to bars). I'm working on that.

AMEN! I hope men don't buy into the Oprahrization of America where all women are so independent that they don't want a man to lead. I mean look at Oprah. She may be the most powerful woman in the media but I bet you her and Steadman ain't snugglin' kissing in the kitchen. Basically she's a 50-year-old billionaire with no real man.Or look at Condi Rice. A perfect example of a wonderful woman - no matter your politics - if there ever was one, not only is she beautiful, smart, and capable of running a country she's cultured and down-to-earth. (Did you see her head shaking when the 9-11 Commission tried to eviserate her?) But she is, and probably always will be, single. It's unfortunate. I wrote a column about this the other day. The cruel and dirty trick that the feminization of America has played on women. I get women all the time writing to me, calling me telling me they want to be a CEO of a company but what they really want is to be held! I wish more men hadn't been eviserated by the feminzation of America and were more aggressive in their pursuits. I think many men are just confused. Do I open the door or not? Do I pay or not? Do I initiate contact or not? It's like they're walking round babbling to themselves like homeless men clueless as to what to do. But not the losers though. They still do what they've always been doing. Why is it that the losers are the only ones with the courage to talk to women?

Renee that's B.S. if I ever heard it. If a man wants to approach you he will. If he's not approaching that's a sign of weakness to me and do you really want that. My friends try to tell me that I'm too aggressive, intimidating, unapproachable etc. That I need to change. Screw that! BTW how are your friends doing in the relationship department? I love it that divorced, single, unhappily married women are always the first to give advice on how to get a man.

LOL! I can't handle the kind of guys you describe! Bleck! Well, I guess we're a little different... who'd a thunk it?

Re: my folks. I don't think she pursued him so heavily because she thought she needed a man (she ended up being a SAHM, but she was a teacher before we were born). She was still quite young when they met and discussing her relationships before my dad with her, she was pretty laissez-faire about men. She really, really, really wanted my dad, specifically. Looking at it objectively and from the outside, there was a lot about him that didn't exactly scream "great husband and father" (though he is a great husband and father, he just wasn't there at all back then... sowing lotsa oats). She just thought he was hot stuff and went for it. Though I would have gotten discouraged and not continued to pursue as my mom did, I think it's fabulous. She wasn't scared into some pigeonhole because that's what her gender was supposed to do! And likewise, you aren't pigeonholed by expectations based on your gender by not needing to drop endless energy into finding a man. That's what I think is the best path for any woman (or man, for that matter).... figuring out what she needs and wants and what is secondary and living her life as she chooses accordingly. If someone needs to be pursued, that's fine, but that doesn't make it a universal truth....

Ovetta, that's why I'm here, preaching that men should follow their natures and pursue women and that women should let them. I'm here to spread the word and un-eviscerate men. Just trying to help out my fellow man. Cuz I care.

Can I get an amen?!

Ovetta, I am have been unapproachable. I have walls and I'm quite the wise-ass. Gotta watch the verbal eviscerations.

I see that as totally unrelated to me being assertive, bold, or strong-willed, however. Those are good things.

Sure, if the guy actually knows how to lead, it's wonderful. But sometimes you'll know the dance better than your dance partner. Do you just let him stand there or do you give him a little help?

Renee,

What do you deem as unapproachable? I just don't want you to think just because you're over 25 (guessing on the age thing) and single that you got to "CHANGE." Unapproachable is a code word unhappy women use to cut down happyily single woman. It's like people believe that if you're single something is missing - that something is wrong. Marriage, coupling, etc., exists but it's not for everybody all the time. But note this advice is coming from a lifelong commitment-phobe. I'm just not interested right now in giving up my independent lifestyle. Relationships take commitment and time and nurturing and I'm running short on all three. So the guy would have to be hella' spectacular for me to put the halt on my single life. And Kim, I guess that's what your mom felt. That this guy was worth the rigormarole. And I guess if I felt that too then there's no telling what this independent-minded woman would do to get the man she really wanted.

Kim, have you ever tried to lead a guy in a dance? I don't mean free-form dance; I mean ballroom dancing (like the dances I mentioned). It doesn't work. Trust me. It's extremely annoying, too, when he doesn't lead with proper force (not bad force, just force). You don't know where the dance is going and you look foolish if he doesn't lead. You just end up stumbling around the floor. It's self-eviscerating to the guy!

(I'm going to use the word eviscerate all weekend.)

coredump - 2005-04-15 3:43 PM

Renee - 2005-04-15 4:28 PM

Are bars really the kinda place where you expect to find someone who shares your ideals and outlook on life?

Totally agree Chris. The bar scene got old a long time ago. But also I'm at a different place right now than I was then. I don't have time to play around. It's just not worth it. I've got too many other priorities. And most people you meet at bars want to play. And game's over for me. I could also say the same thing about church. Geez, who knew that praising God would turn into the next singles convention? I, like you Chris, am having a blast. And I seriously think when the man that God wants me to marry shows up I'll meet him at a triathlon, or on one of my trips out of the country, or on a mission trip or some place where my passions are being shown. Or maybe I'll hit him with my bike?

infosteward - 2005-04-15 5:54 PM  Or maybe I'll hit him with my bike?

Hey, that's a better plan than mine. I was thinking of throwing myself on my bike in front of their bike. They like to rescue, ya know.

Yup (and I was referring to ballroom/latin dancing), it sucks, but only because I never learned how to lead. Luckily, courtship has much fewer pre-determined steps, so, IMO, either role can be filled by either participant! Don't get me wrong, I love to be romanced! But men appreciate it as well, and there's one at home right now who deserves it, dammit! So I'm gonna go buy him some flowers and make 'im a happy boy!

I know a little more (not a lot) about Oprah and Stedman than the average person through mutual relationships. That aside, this implication you exert that if a man is gallant and gentlemanly, ie opening the door paying for a meal, means you don't stand on equal footing isn't accurate. I think the equal footing thing has nothing to do with gender. It's more of an economic thing for me that's where the unequally yoked notion comes in. A man can open the door or you open the door but if' your always paying for dinner you're on unequal footing. Cause you got an economic hold on him. In the past this is where women were but many men are there now.

I don't know, call me old fashioned but I just like the man to lead (or think he's leading). It could be the differences in our ages as well Kim that informs this difference of opinion. I mean I have lived long enough to know that I can do bad by myself so I really don't need an unconfident, unambitious, unfocused man in my life to make it worse in exchange for having someone there at night. It constantly amazes me the men my friends date. I mean geez can't you see he's a loser? I've been guilty of this as well so I've recommitted myself to being single and the next man I date will be the man I marry.

OK, yeah, I put that wrong. I didn't mean just whether or not one of us opens doors, but whether or not he feels like he has to and whether or not she feels like she can or needs him too (what kinda wimp?... ok, a door is obviously a metaphor here).

"It could be the differences in our ages as well Kim that informs this difference of opinion. I mean I have lived long enough to know that I can do bad by myself so I really don't need an unconfident, unambitious, unfocused man in my life to make it worse in exchange for having someone there at night." I don't think you mean that as it kinda sounds (that I'm young and therefore choose a dead fish of a man in order to not sleep alone), so I won't address it that way. A man who is not concerned with whether he leads or is led or walks right next to his woman is not necessarily unconfident, unambitious or unfocused. I'd say that in most cases, these men are more confident than men who need to be seen as 'leading' their woman.

OK, I gotta go home. Talk to you ladies later!