All About Romance’s Rachel Potter has an interesting take on our perception of women’s sexuality in “Modern” Romance. While I’m all for women having the freedom to do what they want, and not be judged for it, I find myself in reluctant agreement with much of what Rachel says. Looking at my own circle of female friends, not one of us found a long-term relationship through flings or one-night stands. If you’re the exception, good for you, but I think the old double-standard is still alive and kicking. Men don’t respect women who are “easy” and don’t tend to stick around if women sleep with them too soon. Is this fair? Absolutely not. Realistic? Unfortunately, in my observation, it is.
Another post with a similar topic is Karen Scott’s What Would You Look For in Your Perfect Man? Karen links to a blog where someone has written up their 120 essential qualities for their ideal man. Yep, you read that right: 120. Holy fuck! I’m not advocating “settling” for someone you’re only indifferent to, or like well enough but don’t love. I do, however, think all dating advice books should be burned, or at the very least re-labelled as fantasy. Women who are waiting for the perfect man need to take a long hard look at themselves. Are they perfect? Could they write a list of their own 120 sterling qualities? If so, kudos to them, but I didn’t make it past 5.
Limecello at The Good, The Bad and The Unread has an amusing post called I’m Popular, Dammit! about the quest for popularity in Blogland.
Enjoy your weekend!
{ 3 comments }
Funny story — a million years ago (okay, that’s an exaggeration, but it’s nearly 30 years and that’s scary enough) I knew a woman who told me she had listed four essential qualities in a man she might want to marry. 1) Had to be a good dancer; 2) had to have blue eyes; 3) couldn’t be a racist; 4) had to be a good driver.
Guess which one her husband ended up having? #2 — the one that is purely genetic and says nothing about his qualities as a man. And what about #3 — did she really marry a racist? Well, yes, in this sense: She was in her thirties when she married, and he was a good bit older, so born in the 1930s. He’d lived his entire life in Maine, a state that even in the early 80s had very very few blacks. He didn’t hate them, but he did think they “smelled different,” a blatantly racist opinion. What Marty (my friend) realized though was that his racist assumptions were borne of ignorance, and thus were less important than his heart and his actions. Based on what Marty knew about her husband, she was confident he’d lose the racism as soon as he actually knew a black person.
I had that conversation with Marty more than 15 years before I married for the first time, but I remembered it as an example of how the list of what we’re *really* looking for is perhaps unknowable. We’re looking for someone who’s like our opposite-sex parent (if we’re heterosexual) but with significant differences. Or we’re looking for someone precisely opposite our opposite-sex parent only to discover the ways in which our mate is like that parent. Or we pick someone unlike us for added spice & conflict, or … well, you get the idea.
Honestly, I didn’t understand why Brit Hub 1.0 married me until after our divorce, when he and his mother came to visit Brit Hub 2.0 and me at our country place. (Two explanations are needed here: First, my ex-mother-in-law likes Brit Hub 2.0 a lot, I think because of his Oxford pedigree. Yeah, she’s a snob. I was only acceptable despite my American origins because a) I am a distant cousin to her husband’s family so I must be all right by association, b) she’s known me since 1971, and c) I have always been a lot nicer to her than her own daughter, who’s a bit prickly. Second explanation: Brit Hub 2.0 and I live in the country house that Brit Hub 1.0 and I had used as a weekend place. Nonetheless, my ex-MIL had never seen it while Brit Hub 1.0 and I owned it. So it was nice for her finally to visit.)
Okay, so we’re all four of us sitting over lunch and Anne (the ex-MIL) says something so definite and opinionated, but not hurtful or mean, that I suddenly realized my appeal to Brit Hub 1.0 — I was his mother, minus the chilly demeanor and plus a genuine desire that Brit Hub 1.0 have his own opinions. Of course, I was at best a half-way house between his deference to his mother and his self-determination. He had to divorce me to really have his own opinions and make his own choices. It’s one of the reasons our divorce is its own HEA…
Magdalen~that was a really long comment. lol
I pretty much agree with everything Magdalen said. People DO look for specific characteristics in their s.o.’s, but they might not be the ones they think they’re looking for. Or maybe the qualities are so general or ephemeral that they’re not really useful at all.
Sarah, to speak to your second blog point: A list of ideal items you look for in a husband is just plain silly. The whole package is what needs to appeal and what you need to be able to live with. Part of that package are going to be items you’ll admire and items you’ll wish you’d never had to witness. At the end, do the pros outweigh the cons? If so, game on. If not, move on.
I want to say this to Magdalen: I continue to be impressed with the amiability and civility of your situation. It’s highly encouraging to see adults behaving like adults instead of like spoiled children.