So, on what do you base your declaration of predominant male extra-curricular shagging, Sadbelle? Your personal experiences? Gossip columns? Female intuition, or maybe a highly respected government study of human behaviour?
Come on, I wanna know.
I worry about you, Jon.
Liana said: Speaking as a woman who has "had more men than hot dinners" I have to say I find that statement and the supposition that such a woman could be faithful only surprisingly, a bit distasteful.
Well, I probably didn't explain myself well enough, though I didn't mean that it was a surprise. You're right, there's no correlation between how many boyfriends a woman has had and how likely she is to be faithful. I was trying to show that it may come as a relief to some women to settle down with one bloke for a while.
I read a biography of Anais Nin and was surprised when she eventually settled down with one unremarkable guy and happily lived with him in a trailer park, after the excitement shagging her way through the intelligensia of Paris and New York for many years. She always said that at last she'd found the one. So there's hope still for those of us who fear that will never happen. Having found and lost the love of my life twice already, I'm cynical these days about there being such a thing, but I'm always willing to be surprised.
In your case I doubt there's anything that divides the sexes, not that i have any axe to grind in that respect, i was just responding to your assertion that there might be some aspect of your callow personality that I might find threatening. Yeah right.
I would hate to have you think of yourself as in any way an equal to me, so I wear your disdain as a badge of honour. As I've said previously, your assessment of anybody is meaningless to me, I only take note of those I respect. My withdrawal from UKA is based on the fact that it's become a haven for insecure psyches that need constant approval, a coterie of backslappers that feel the need to hide behind central controls for fear of reading something less than flattering about themslves.
>> ...It takes childish behaviour from others to get me down to this kind of level... <<
No Jon, you revert to type when you 'visit' ABC, your personna on UKA is carefully designed to appeal to the sterile minds there and smacks of pasteurisation. I'm sure you're very happy there, so why do you bother with ABC? I suspect, that like a few others, subconciously you find it boring. You're right about one thing though, there ARE zillions of people that are your equal or superiors, I just wonder how you will cope with them when you have to leave your nest and go deal with them.
I can't believe I'm bothering to prod this thread anymore but as is his wont, Jon just HAS to perpetuate his Jack Russell impersonation, and my oldmans mentality won't allow me to pass up the opportunity to reply. For what it's worth Jon, I think your biggest problem is that you are still a boy with absolutely no personality. You try to make up for this with pseudo-intellectual posts that impress no one. 'Any 'life-lessons' anyone can enrich you with should be gratefully received, as you have absolutely none of your own to fall back on as yet.
(except perhaps for those that know you as Jack Cade)
There's no irony, to my mind...just the fact that Liana has the insight to see she can't go any further with this discussion constructively.
I'm inclined to agree.
<>
This is an odd way of expressing how you like to relate to people...as a mature person you should be able to hold your own, and not be 'dragged down'...the statement also implies that you are keener to reflect what's going on around you, rather than actually be yourself. You are young, so this is probably a realistic position, but others on here are not going to interact in the same way...as they prefer to engage as equals.
Coincidence! I bought Anais Nin's 'Delta of Venus' today.
Liana - I don't know why you're so hell-bent on avoiding what I'm actually saying in favour of a bizarre neo-masculist interpretation of my posts, but I'll rephrase this one last time: I make no moral judgement on women who get through men like dishcloths, but I have observed that, as a behavioural trait of my good self, I will rapidly lose any interest I might have in anyone who professes themselves to be such a woman, because it instinctively feels like a path of wasted time and effort. I don't see it as a gender thing at all - if I were gay, I'd feel the same about men who boasted of their many conquests. I'm just drawn more to people who are either modest about it, or have been more selective about their partners. I might well be letting myself in for a harder time, ultimately, but it always feels it would be worth it.
As for the argument about standards, what it really comes down to is how and when you apply those standards. I cannot for the life of me fathom why you think it's a good idea to start exercising them *after* you've started going out with someone. Wouldn't it save a lot of effort if you were to assess whether they had bad manners, bad hygiene etc. *before* anything serious happened? Going out with men who you immediately can't tolerate implies a serious lack of critical assessment prior to selection, hence my comment about the opposite of high standards.
As for my own bad manners... that reference was a private joke. I *try* to be as polite as possible, generally speaking, but it seems there are nuances of etiquette, particularly when one is dealing with tight-knit groups of women, that I have not been made aware of. I'm sure my manners *are* appalling to some, usually the same people who quickly appal me with their own version of politeness.
Come on guys. Reason is the slave of the passions and that's why it aways goes belly up.
People: time is a great healer, remember that...
Plus it's summer, love is in the air, don't you feel it brothers and sisters?
Oh indeedy
"When the moon hits your eyes like a......"
[%sig%]
Hmm, and bad manners have a way of amplifying themselves when we start getting bored. Like EVERYBODY trumps now and again, I mean if I've got a bowel condition it can hardly be called my fault...
Hrmm. Why Hen, do you always insist that people dont see your point, when in fact they are merely disagreeing with it? You come on with mock exasperation like you are the sole carrier of the Book of Grand Truths.
I suspect Rokkits reading between the lines is rather true. Ego Massagers only need apply.
Afterthought ...
... its rather wise of you to only select the people you feel will put up with you. After all, if they give men short shrift generally, then you aren't going to last long are you? So why put yourself in that position. I see where you're coming from.
Very clever.
(bizarre neo-masculist interpretation ... *guffaws*)
I'm eggy buns.
I am very, very old.
I am very, very fat.
I am very, very bald.
I am very, very beard.
So it's not physical, but I have many female friends, most of whom are 10-20 years younger than myself, who seem to enjoy my company.
So, what are the Laws of Attraction?
Definition of a weak man (in my book)
someone who embarks on a relationship, knows that it's not what he wants but strings the woman along for months because he hasn't got the balls to face it out.
Someone who needs a mother.
Someone who won't stand up to a woman and gives in for the sake of an easy life.
Someone who is led by what his mates think rather than making his own mind up.
Gutless cretins who want more than one woman, but don't say up front that they have no intention of being monogamous.
Mummy's boys.
Men who are happy to use their woman and live off her.
Men who hit women because it's the only way they can feel like a man.
Hen - if you meet a woman who you genuinely like, but she says she gets through a lot of r'ships...well, mate, it's your chance to change that.
Never judge a book by its cover either...judge each one individually, if they'll let you...if they don't - then you are wasting your time.
Women in tight knit groups are difficult to get to know in any circumstances...
get yourself somewhere where there are less of them per square yard.
Oh, and, if I may say so, and this is coming from one who is a deep cynic about such matters...
the web is a great way to meet people, and break the ice gradually, puts your cards on the table, and you can soon get intimate, and if it works...then take it from there...I've heard a hell of a lot of success stories of internet r'ships...take it from me...it's a real route forward out of a frustrated and lonely place.
xx
How many, Sooz? I guess my answer would be however many it takes before they all start melting into one great sludge of a man, and the quantity outweighs the quality. That's really my answer to 'how many women?' but I guess it works for men as well.
On the subject of men's weakness, are we judging them against their own kind, or on a grander scale? Because it strikes me as a Universal truth that all men and women are weak, or at least have a slew of dangerous weaknesses. When weighed against their own kind, I'd say the strongest men I know are typified by their generosity towards would-be enemies, their readiness to step away from pointless conflict, their refusal to take sides and their unwillingness to pursue or take advantage of women just for the sake of it. The weakest are those who have to continually claim to understand or know things in lew of being able to demonstrate it, who have to pass a damning verdict on everyone at odds with them (often repeatedly,) and do things because they're afraid of the alternative. In truth though, most are capable of great strength and great weakness.
And yeah, I do see the resemblance in the latter portrait to my own behaviour on the forums. Negativity breeds negativity.
...it strikes me as a Universal truth that all men and women are weak, or at least have a slew of dangerous weaknesses...
Well, cram a ball gag in my gob and call me Candy - trust the Henster to stumble over one of the big UTs at quarter to eight on a Saturday night. Cheers, mate - nice one. Or are you operating with Jane Austen-alike knowing irony? Who can say? Are you back in Norwich now? Phone me you cad!
Now, I must depart for the dark lights of Norwich's bars, to slake my thirst for wanton hussies.
at the risk of getting shouted at by both sides of this argument I have to say that bragging about sexual promiscuity has, in the past, easily made up for a lack of either personality or a decent rack on a woman and swayed me towards them with a pocket full of johnnies, a false ID, and a boner you could hang your hat on.
am I missing some of the finer points of this discussion d'you think?
We once booked up to see Porgy & Bess, but were well gutted to discover it was an opera version. It was crap! Who on earth would dream of opening their mouth that wide? We pissed off and went down the pub at half time.
Can't believe I'm back here again. A sneaky peak, say.
"I do believe that she understands Hen's points perfectly well, just doesn't agree with them."
She thinks it's misogynistic to be put off by girls who, to quote 1leg, "trivialise their past sexual encounters"! Simple/stupid as that. She thinks it shows I'm afraid of them, or feel they're inferior to me. Really, it's just that I find it an unattractive personality trait, and I don't think we'd go together. You, for one, know I can very easily make an exception where the person is otherwise cool.
The problem is, Rokkit, that the points Liana has ardently disagreed with are not ones I made. She's imagined I made them. Where exactly did I claim superiority to these women? Where did I say they had done anything categorically wrong? I insulted them, sure, because, as I say, I don't usually like this type (though there are enough exceptions.) But I haven't, and wouldn't, claim that they were simply in the wrong. Liana is convinced that I snort at them from some ivory tower of superiority. Maybe because that's the attitude she takes to types of people she doesn't like? Who knows. Fact of the matter is, most people who've since investigated the thread can see the situation clearly.
Missi - I can't explain why I come back to ABC. Something in me likes an excuse to get cussy maybe. But I can assure you it isn't more interesting than UKA. UKA *is* a haven - you're half-right. It's a haven from eternal adolescents like yourself whose idea of confidence and maturity is to constantly and loudly reassert the inferiority of everything and everyone they aren't partial too, and who flee from any site where you aren't allowed to shout everyone down to your heart's content. I also like UKA, of course, because I get helpful criticism - people actually telling me where I've gone wrong, instead of some pleb talking bollocks about 'the self-consciousness of youth' (not you, for once.) The problem with this site in general, I find, is that there's a resistance - nay, hostility - to anything that contains a whiff of the intellectual, the literary or the experimental. Remember the outraged response to the suggestion that we recognise what's 'cutting edge'? ABC is often too assertively, defensively middle-brow. In this respect, you're the spirit of the site, barking ferociously and tediously at anything that even mildly stretches your brain, or is vaguely below you.
This is typified by your grand 'no personality' judgement of me - I'm not some genius, or high culture baron, but even someone with a slightly differing attitude to the conventional comes sufficiently outside your idea of what is acceptable. It's actually so hard for you to believe that a 21 year old can be like this that you have to think I'm putting it on as some kind of show, that beneath there is nothing. This is extreme narrow-mindedness.
If you weren't threatened, you wouldn't feel the need to tell me such absolutely bollocks as 'you have no personality'. You, for one, have plenty of it - it just happens to be the kind of personality I'd normally expect from a teenager not yet accustomed to the variety of people life throws at them. There's no other reason to call perfectly nice people 'twats'. If you were mature, you'd let different people get on with being who they are, instead of shooting down anyone who isn't like you.
As for me, I already deal with people I consider my superiors all the time. I like them - they make me feel humble and warm towards humanity in general, whereas wannabe despots like you make me feel it's all going to hell and I'm among the minority who have their foot on the brake.
>> ...Going steady with a man *then* deciding that he isn't anything near suitable suggests exactly the opposite of high standards... <<
On the contrary, it suggests that the person is prepared to give everyone a fair chance to prove they ARE suitable and may meet the high standard required.
I agree with Emma that the net is a good way to meet people, I've been doing it for years with varying degrees of success.
i can't stand people who judge other people i think they are the worst.and especially people who might read things the wrong way without ever talking to the person but because they get a 'whiff' of lie and what the hell is a whiff meant to mean they quickly summarise and judge without being right, sorry liana people like that are usallually wrong. it is better known the whole story rather than just bits and pieces and its better talking to someone and finding the truth out rather than judging things on whiffs, generally this is what bitter old women do..
part from that have nice weekend..
Am having a lovelz time thank zou - despite the cyech kezboard and its amaying reversal of the y and z kezs... onlz visiting during slack periods, but am sure Hen would wish to know, am having lovelz lovelz fun with a dear friend of mine, who also happens to be an ex. Tchoh eh, and mz hatred of men and all.
Actually, in addition, was also going to say, that building up r'ships on the web is almost an old-fashioned route in some ways...I mean, you have to talk for a long, long time before you get your hands on someone...
On the other hand, the wonder of this modern phenomenon enables a kind of direct communication difficult to emulate in other circumstances...
apart from those who judge 'whiffers'. it could be easy to read my threads and think i am some kind of nut but if you ever talk to me in person you will find a really truly man..remember that, cause i will be metting ya all soon definelty at the next abc in london..and of course any of you guys are welcome to my house in glasgow and game of golf in saint andrews and a tour of scotland on me..just say.. I gaurentee your safety, a lovely weekend and a laugh..and a chance to see what i am all about..and to learn the truth about life..
'I mean, you have to talk for a long, long time before you get your hands on someone...'
Emma, all you have to say is 'yes'.
Mind you, they have to say 'yes' too.
That's the complicated bit.
Pages