|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: God witholding marriage from the single person
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mertide:
Isn't the size of that pool within their control, though? If highly educated women don't consider lesser educated men to be acceptable partners, and highly educated men do consider lesser educated women to be acceptable, then those women have a lot of competition for that small group of men. If those women as well as a high education level insist on physical attractiveness, social adeptness, and even openness to a particular religious outlook, they're looking at a very small pool indeed that are their targets, while those same men may have a potential mate pool tens or hundreds times bigger, and may themselves have certain "must haves" for a spouse that have nothing to do with the quality of the degree. It's not exactly God withholding marriage if the women withhold themselves from the vast majority of men who might be interested in them.
In my experience, many men are intimidated by women who are better educated than they are and by women whom they perceive to be more intelligent than they are. Crossing education off her list of desireable qualities in a mate will frequently not increase the size of the pool of potential mates for a well-educated woman; less well-educated men typically don't want her.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
In my experience, many men are intimidated by women who are better educated than they are and by women whom they perceive to be more intelligent than they are.
This conversation has been nagging me for the lst 48 hours since Rat posted:
quote:
degree-educated men married to hairdressers, shop-assistants and the like.
so I set to thinking about couples I know well enough to have some idea of their education and I really don't know many who fit this description. In fact I can hardly think of any.
Starting with my own family my Mum had more education qualifications than my Dad (which would not have been hard as AFAIK he left school at 14 with none whatsoever). I & my brother married women with more exam passes than us (though since then I've managed to get a few more her but she kicked me out & married someone else with even fewer...) and my sister has more than her husband.
One of my male cousins is married to a woman less educated than him, one to someone about the same, one to someone (much) more educated.
(None of this says anything about intelligence of course, but there is no real way to measure that)
Thinking about my close friends, I can't call to mind more than one or two where the man has significantly higher education than the woman, and rather more where it is the other way round.
Same goes for my colleagues here at work.
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Callan
Shipmate
# 525
|
Posted
Originally posted by Little Miss Methodist:
quote:
Maybe you would have more sucess with women if you used that as your chat up line?
Let's drop this entire tangent shall we.
Callan
Purgatory Host.
--------------------
How easy it would be to live in England, if only one did not love her. - G.K. Chesterton
Posts: 9757 | From: Citizen of the World | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jazzuk777
Shipmate
# 5720
|
Posted
From my experience at junior and primary, the girls in my classes consistently performed better academically than the boys anyway......being normally 1st or 2nd male in the class, my scores still normally equated to somewhere around the middle of the female half of the class.....as to what would have happened in Secondary, I never got to see that, as I ended up going to an all-boys grammar school ![[Frown]](frown.gif)
So if women find it difficult to date/marry less intelligent men (or men find it difficult to date more intelligent women - the complementary hypothesis), then by rights only a 50% of us ever will, roughly the most most intelligent half of the male popluation, and the least intelligent of the female population!*
(*I know this is Purgatory not Heaven, but please don't take my theory too seriously!)
--------------------
You spit out mannah/ God sends quails - the 77s
Posts: 281 | From: ....an original idea by God. (c)1970 all rights reserved. | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
mertide
Shipmate
# 4500
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
QUOTE]In my experience, many men are intimidated by women who are better educated than they are and by women whom they perceive to be more intelligent than they are. Crossing education off her list of desireable qualities in a mate will frequently not increase the size of the pool of potential mates for a well-educated woman; less well-educated men typically don't want her.
My experience is more that highly educated women are far more likely to reject say a tradesman or someone with a lesser education, even a lesser standard degree, with a "just not my type" than the rejection going the other way. If you add a tendency to look for a mate later in life, when the available pool is smaller, I suspect some women are unconsciously setting themselves up to have great difficulty in finding a partner.
I wonder if rather than a woman's education and intelligence being a turn off for men, what is actually the turn off is the intellectual snobbery that can be associated. Most people don't find being told directly or indirectly that they're just not quite good enough for consideration an attractive feature. Perhaps the problem isn't that no-one wants a highly educated woman in her late 30's, but that no-one in the vanishly small group of targets in her group of contacts who meet her criteria does.
Posts: 382 | From: Brisbane | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Emma Louise
Storm in a teapot
# 3571
|
Posted
hmmm futures not looking good for me then!!!!
(good education and iq)
Im not too worried to be honest. If im still single in a few years time I see no shame in online dating etc....
Posts: 12719 | From: Enid Blyton territory. | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
HopPik
Shipmate
# 8510
|
Posted
As a somewhat irreverent and definitely irrelevant tangent, can I just mention that when I first saw this thread I read the title as "God witholding massage"?
--------------------
Never wrestle with a pig. You get dirty, and supposedly the pig enjoys it. G.B. Shaw
Posts: 2084 | From: London | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Emma.:
hmmm futures not looking good for me then!!!!
(good education and iq)
All you have to do is not look down your nose at plumbers and taxi drivers...
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Joan_of_Quark
Anchoress of St Expedite
# 9887
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
quote:
Originally posted by Emma.:
hmmm futures not looking good for me then!!!!
(good education and iq)
All you have to do is not look down your nose at plumbers and taxi drivers...
I can see the adverts now..."Black cab drivers - we always know the quickest way!" ![[Biased]](wink.gif) -- but would they stop talking once they got there?! Could bring a whole new meaning to the inevitable phrase, "Do you know who I had in the back of the cab last week?"
--------------------
"I want to be an artist when I grow up." "Well you can't do both!"
further quarkiness
Posts: 1025 | From: The Book Depository | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
saysay
Ship's Praying Mantis
# 6645
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mertide:
My experience is more that highly educated women are far more likely to reject say a tradesman or someone with a lesser education, even a lesser standard degree, with a "just not my type" than the rejection going the other way.
Not IME. There does tend to be a communication breakdown, though, when one person is not educated and doesn't see education as having value and the other person has more or less dedicated their lives to education.
I used to think that most people (like me) wanted a partner in the same intelligence bracket (which, as has been pointed out, doesn't necessarily correspond to level of education). But some of my male friends have convined me that this isn't true - they want their partners to be less intelligent than they are because it makes the relationship less complicated (ok, I'm never sure how serious they are about this, as their longer relationships are usually with intelligent women, but I suspect there may be something hidden in the joking).
I think it's harder on men to be married to someone with more education than it is on women because of cultural expectations. Most people's default assumption is still that the man's career is more important than the woman's (because, you know, he earns more) and reversing that can be a challenge.
I have two good (female) friends who have phd's and are married to men less educated than they are who do manual labor. Socially, things can get very awkward. I tend to think a lot of the situations are funny, but I also think it takes an extremely secure man to be able to deal with it. I see a certain amount of the same social problems in couples where the man has a lot more education, but not nearly to the same extent.
--------------------
"It's been a long day without you, my friend
I'll tell you all about it when I see you again"
"'Oh sweet baby purple Jesus' - that's a direct quote from a 9 year old - shoutout to purple Jesus."
Posts: 2943 | From: The Wire | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by saysay:
I also think it takes an extremely secure man to be able to deal with it.
Exactly. The one relationship I had with a man who didn't have a college degree eventually foundered, in part because of his perception that I looked down on him for not finishing college. This was really his own feelings of failure and inadequacy projected onto me, but it didn't matter; sometimes I made him feel bad about himself just by being who I am.
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
mertide
Shipmate
# 4500
|
Posted
Since it seems my experience is not held in common with most of the educated women here, does anyone have a strategy for how these wonderful, smart, educated women are likely to find personally and socially acceptable partners? Do they expand the age range they're looking in or look in different places? Take on "fixer-uppers"?
Posts: 382 | From: Brisbane | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Joan_of_Quark
Anchoress of St Expedite
# 9887
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mertide:
...Take on "fixer-uppers"?
If I understand "fixer-uppers" correctly, that's an analogy to buying a scruffy house and renovating it, right? The trouble with that is that human "houses" are going to have feelings. Suppose I say to some hypothetical new partner, "John, if only you shaved off that bird's nest of a beard, your real personality would shine through so much better" etc. I've had experience of control freaks in relationships, and they started with very sensible suggestions for how to make my life better. Only once they had me lulled into thinking they had my interests at heart did they start on the changes that were to make me a better trophy wife FOR THEM, and start demanding rather than suggesting. But I'd be very wary of someone whose agenda included a lot of changes to me, and guess others would if I were to do this to them. Maybe I am just not subtle enough at all that stuff about "power behind the throne", "let the man THINK he thought of the great idea all by himself" etc. - but then I am rubbish at telling the difference between general banter and real flirting so will probably not be in need of these "skills" any time soon!
--------------------
"I want to be an artist when I grow up." "Well you can't do both!"
further quarkiness
Posts: 1025 | From: The Book Depository | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Lady of the Lake
Shipmate
# 4347
|
Posted
One way of looking at the issue is of seeing certain qualifications as part of a specific career path. e.g. some avenues of work require a PhD, but then, people who train to be architects or doctors or engineers train for roughly the same length of time as it takes to get from first degree to PhD. (There's a difference between someone who does a PhD in order to work in particular industry, or in a university, and someone who does it as a career break or a hobby.)
That's restricting things to people with university education, but to me it makes things clearer. A PhD does not prove someone is 'more intelligent' than others who have done academic study for less time. It proves that they have specialised in one narrow area for a while and written a book of up to 100, 000 words long.
--------------------
If I had a coat, I would get it.
Posts: 1272 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alfred E. Neuman
What? Me worry?
# 6855
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mertide:
Since it seems my experience is not held in common with most of the educated women here, does anyone have a strategy for how these wonderful, smart, educated women are likely to find personally and socially acceptable partners? Do they expand the age range they're looking in or look in different places? Take on "fixer-uppers"?
They can start by being honest with themselves about their priorities. Many "intelligent" women have more important personal issues than finding a mate. It shouldn't be surprising if they're alone because career or intellectual pursuits take precedence over fulfilment in a relationship. It takes work to find that special someone and it's easier to write off failure as an act of God or lack of available, qualified candidates. As I mentioned earlier, aggressive action helps if finding a compatible partner is important. Archaic social convention shouldn't restrict the modern woman from taking the traditional male role in initiating contact.
Another matter that I've discovered from personal experience is the high percentage of emotionally and physically abused female victims of childhood. I'm sure this effects many males also, but since my emotional interaction with them is on a different level, my experience of the problem with regard to women is biased. It seems many female victims reach middle age without finding a personal resolution to the abuse which continues to color their relationships with men. It's difficult to imagine a person committing themselves to an open, honest and loving relationship with a partner who subconsciously symbolizes pain and insecurity. Many times that lack of resolution can be purposely buried under academic, career or "intellectual" priorities.
--------------------
--Formerly: Gort--
Posts: 12954 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Emma Louise
Storm in a teapot
# 3571
|
Posted
what do you suggest then?
are you saying women are just sensitive creatures and you find that hard to deal with? or that theyre all screwed up and need therapy? Or if they have suffered abuse theyre not good potential mates?
Posts: 12719 | From: Enid Blyton territory. | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alfred E. Neuman
What? Me worry?
# 6855
|
Posted
My "suggestion" is in the first line of my response above. I'm not "saying" anything like you are extrapolating, just commenting from my experience.
--------------------
--Formerly: Gort--
Posts: 12954 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anselmina
Ship's barmaid
# 3032
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gort:
They can start by being honest with themselves about their priorities. Many "intelligent" women have more important personal issues than finding a mate.
Just for clarification. I know what an intelligent woman is. What's an "intelligent" woman? And is there some reason why 'more important personal issues' are more wrong for her, than they would be for anyone else, say, a man or a married woman?
A 'more important personal issue' can include anything from caring for needy relatives, health issues or needing to put a roof over one's head. Is it really dishonest to prioritize these things over finding a mate?
quote:
It shouldn't be surprising if they're alone because career or intellectual pursuits take precedence over fulfilment in a relationship.
So while waiting, or aggressively searching for Mr Right, women should forget about the bills, the rent, the need to earn a decent wage in order to live a reasonable life? And, further, they should be willing to sacrifice 'intellectual pursuits' just in case they may be perceived as taking precedence over a bloke?
I know it's a tedious feminist thing to say, but I wonder how many men deliberately play down career, and satisfaction from enjoyable pursuits in case it rookies their marriage chances? Most men I know would consider a decent career something as a good thing in terms of appearing to be a decent prospect for marriage. But it doesn't work the other way?
I suspect most men have a perfectly fair and reasonable expectation that they can have satisfying work, should they need it, mental stimulation and a partner should they wish it. And I'm disappointed that anyone should feel that oughtn't to apply for both sexes.
quote:
Archaic social convention shouldn't restrict the modern woman from taking the traditional male role in initiating contact.
Now I'm confused. Initially, you were advocating women to sacrifice intellectual pursuits and a decent career so they could pursue men for marriage. A truly 'archaic social convention' if ever there was one. Now you're saying 'archaic social convention shouldn't restrict... woman'. Which is it?
quote:
Another matter that I've discovered from personal experience is the high percentage of emotionally and physically abused female victims of childhood. I'm sure this effects many males also, but since my emotional interaction with them is on a different level, my experience of the problem with regard to women is biased. It seems many female victims reach middle age without finding a personal resolution to the abuse which continues to color their relationships with men. It's difficult to imagine a person committing themselves to an open, honest and loving relationship with a partner who subconsciously symbolizes pain and insecurity. Many times that lack of resolution can be purposely buried under academic, career or "intellectual" priorities.
I can certainly understand a woman who has been a victim of abuse being wary of future relationships, or caught in a spiral of harmful relationships. I'm wondering how the academic, career and "intellectual" profile of a woman should necessarily be connected with that. (And again "intellectual" in quotes. Are women only "intellectual", and never intellectual? What qualifies a woman as intellectual, in your eyes, rather than "intellectual"?)
Is it really so unusual for women to have careers, intellect and academic aptitude but that we have to explain it by suggesting it's probably a result of their being damaged, compensating delusionists?
--------------------
Irish dogs needing homes! http://www.dogactionwelfaregroup.ie/ Greyhounds and Lurchers are shipped over to England for rehoming too!
Posts: 10002 | From: Scotland the Brave | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by mertide:
Since it seems my experience is not held in common with most of the educated women here, does anyone have a strategy for how these wonderful, smart, educated women are likely to find personally and socially acceptable partners? Do they expand the age range they're looking in or look in different places? Take on "fixer-uppers"?
Well, I "expanded the age range" by marrying about 20 years above myself, and also the "culture range" by marrying an Asian. But I don't think all cultures have the same issues as Western ones with regards to education and romance. At least, my husband feels no need to hide the fact that his wife is highly educated (of course, he has nearly as much himself) and in fact others in the community tend to regard me as a "trophy wife" (shows what THEY know) .
To be sure, there is a strong tendency there as well to marry equally in as many respects as possible, and I HAVE met Asian men who were vastly insecure and took out their feelings on their somewhat more educated wives. The difference is maybe that the community condemns him for it. She is not the oddity; he is.
--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!
Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alfred E. Neuman
What? Me worry?
# 6855
|
Posted
Anselmina wrote:
quote:
Just for clarification. I know what an intelligent woman is. What's an "intelligent" woman? And is there some reason why 'more important personal issues' are more wrong for her, than they would be for anyone else, say, a man or a married woman?
First, I profess to be a liberated male with respect to gender issues over intelligence, emotion and physical issues. I refuse to acknowledge any significant differences between the sexes on those three subjects (except for basic physical procreational roles) and if confronted with scientific evidence to the contrary, I will ignore that evidence on moral principles, especially when it attempts to define my personal interaction with fellow humans. Please, let's not get our feminist dander up, this is the wrong place and I'm the wrong target.
My quotes were only meant as acknowledgment that the word "intelligent" is a slippery one as has been noted elsewhere on this thread. Nothing more. I don't understand how you assume that I think 'more important personal issues' are wrong for her and not for a man or married woman. I was simply observing that if an issue is more important than finding a mate, then that may be a factor in subsequent failure in finding one. There's nothing "dishonest" about having other priorities, unless a person is fooling themselves into thinking those other priorities are not more important. I'm not making value judgements here. quote:
So while waiting, or aggressively searching for Mr Right, women should forget about the bills, the rent, the need to earn a decent wage in order to live a reasonable life? And, further, they should be willing to sacrifice 'intellectual pursuits' just in case they may be perceived as taking precedence over a bloke?
Did I say anything about sacrificing to find Mr. Right? No. There's no reason to assume that women can't multi-task any better or worse than men. If finding a partner is a priority, then make it so. If it's not, then don't expect Mr. Right to drop out of the sky any faster than your job promotion or Uni degree. quote:
I can certainly understand a woman who has been a victim of abuse being wary of future relationships, or caught in a spiral of harmful relationships. I'm wondering how the academic, career and "intellectual" profile of a woman should necessarily be connected with that.
It isn't necessarily connected with that. My experience has been that a "high percentage of emotionally and physically abused female victims" (this isn't meant to imply that men don't do the same) ignore the effects of childhood abuse on their adult social lives by focusing on academic, career or intellectual pursuits to enhance missing self-esteem or as possible compensation for the difficulty of enjoying close personal relationships with the opposite sex. Again, there is no value judgement here, it's simply an observation from my experience. God knows I'm not educated, intelligent or objective enough to propose a solution for the many problems that confront humans seeking mates. I am bright enough, however, to notice certain patterns in my personal experiences.
[ 17. September 2005, 23:47: Message edited by: Gort ]
--------------------
--Formerly: Gort--
Posts: 12954 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
saysay
Ship's Praying Mantis
# 6645
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anselmina:
quote:
Originally posted by Gort:
They can start by being honest with themselves about their priorities. Many "intelligent" women have more important personal issues than finding a mate.
A 'more important personal issue' can include anything from caring for needy relatives, health issues or needing to put a roof over one's head. Is it really dishonest to prioritize these things over finding a mate?
I read this differently. I don't think Gort was saying that it's dishonest to prioritize those things over finding a mate, but that women should admit that that's what they're doing.
I broke of my last LTR when I was 22, right before my life fell apart. For years I didn't even bother looking for a relationship, because I knew that I didn't have any time or energy to devote to one. When I finally got things back together, I discovered that the pool of potential mates in my age range had shrunk considerabley, as many people had either gotten married or were already involved in LTRs.
That's just the way the cookie crumbled. But it would be dishonest for me to complain that there are no decent men who like intelligent women - the fact that almost all my female friends are either married or in the planning stages indicates otherwise. But my priorities during my twenties were very different from their priorities.
quote:
Originally posted by Anselmina:
I suspect most men have a perfectly fair and reasonable expectation that they can have satisfying work, should they need it, mental stimulation and a partner should they wish it. And I'm disappointed that anyone should feel that oughtn't to apply for both sexes.
I'm not sure anyone was advocating for a double standard. But all the men that I know konw that if they devote all of their time and energy to their career and none to dating or finding a mate, they have to find their career very satisfying, because there's a good chance they'll never find a mate.
--------------------
"It's been a long day without you, my friend
I'll tell you all about it when I see you again"
"'Oh sweet baby purple Jesus' - that's a direct quote from a 9 year old - shoutout to purple Jesus."
Posts: 2943 | From: The Wire | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Lady of the Lake
Shipmate
# 4347
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gort:
It takes work to find that special someone and it's easier to write off failure as an act of God or lack of available, qualified candidates. As I mentioned earlier, aggressive action helps if finding a compatible partner is important.
That's true.
quote:
Another matter that I've discovered from personal experience is the high percentage of emotionally and physically abused female victims of childhood. I'm sure this effects many males also, but since my emotional interaction with them is on a different level, my experience of the problem with regard to women is biased. It seems many female victims reach middle age without finding a personal resolution to the abuse which continues to color their relationships with men. It's difficult to imagine a person committing themselves to an open, honest and loving relationship with a partner who subconsciously symbolizes pain and insecurity. Many times that lack of resolution can be purposely buried under academic, career or "intellectual" priorities.
I definetely feel I've seen this in some people, and was just discussing this sort of thing with a (female) friend last night in fact.
Sometimes the problems get expressed in the work too, which can complicate things even further. It takes real clear-sightedness to be able to handle the connection between both spheres. IME there are some women like this who don't necessarily help because they pass on a cynical view of men into the academic culture (for example), and this then influences younger women who are just starting off, but who have problems of their own that need dealing with. So it becoms a vicious circle.
![[Help]](graemlins/help.gif)
--------------------
If I had a coat, I would get it.
Posts: 1272 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anselmina
Ship's barmaid
# 3032
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by saysay:
quote:
Originally posted by Anselmina:
quote:
Originally posted by Gort:
They can start by being honest with themselves about their priorities. Many "intelligent" women have more important personal issues than finding a mate.
A 'more important personal issue' can include anything from caring for needy relatives, health issues or needing to put a roof over one's head. Is it really dishonest to prioritize these things over finding a mate?
I read this differently. I don't think Gort was saying that it's dishonest to prioritize those things over finding a mate, but that women should admit that that's what they're doing.
Which is to say that, of course, women are not admitting that's what they're doing. I'm wondering why the assumption that women aren't being honest with themselves, as in this: 'They can start with being honest with themselves.'
Gort, thanks for your reply, much of which I agree with to an extent. I still don't see why a woman should prioritize marriage in a way a man doesn't have to, apparently, despite the fact she may not be in a position to do that. Your message still seems to assume that there is a lot of free and easy choice in how some people live their lives, and that certain 'priorities' can be easily subjugated in favour of others. In which case it might be reasonable to suggest that if only a woman could pick and choose the 'marriage' priority her singleness problem would be solved.
But it's no easier for a woman to cooly select the 'I'm hunting for a man' option in the game of life than the 'I'm trying to earn a living' or 'I'm trying to be a good daughter and take care of my invalid parents' options.
And it really does sound as if you're saying that women who wish to be married ought not to give a priority to the same extent that men do to 'intellectual pursuits'. Otherwise they've only got themselves to blame! I know what you're saying is a bit more complex than this, but so is living life as it comes and doing what needs to be done regardless of what one might wish to do.
Posts: 10002 | From: Scotland the Brave | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Emma Louise
Storm in a teapot
# 3571
|
Posted
ok - so if a single woman was going to "prioritize" marriage - er, what would she do then?! Im puzzled.....
(im not desperate to jump into it again - just curious as to the asnwer!)
Posts: 12719 | From: Enid Blyton territory. | Registered: Nov 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alfred E. Neuman
What? Me worry?
# 6855
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anselmina:
[...] But it's no easier for a woman to cooly select the 'I'm hunting for a man' option in the game of life than the 'I'm trying to earn a living' or 'I'm trying to be a good daughter and take care of my invalid parents' options.
And it really does sound as if you're saying that women who wish to be married ought not to give a priority to the same extent that men do to 'intellectual pursuits'. Otherwise they've only got themselves to blame! I know what you're saying is a bit more complex than this, but so is living life as it comes and doing what needs to be done regardless of what one might wish to do.
You're focusing on a 'men vs. women' debate that wasn't my intention. I apologize for implying that. I admitted my view of the problems were biased because I can't experience the same effect in my relations with men. Maybe it's expressed in the common 'control freak' attitude, I dunno. I'm a highschool graduate, speculating on psychological stuff, using a limited vocabulary.
There is no "blame" in the sense that someone is "guilty" for not accomplishing what they desire. I recognize there are plenty of complex issues that demand our attention daily. However, I try to the best of my ability to accept responsibility for using everything in my power to accomplish those things that I firmly desire. When I set myself to a task, failure is not an option. I've discovered that when you are completely convinced that your goal is achievable (in practice it means being convinced it's already accomplished... visualization, etc.) then things tend to arrange and conform themselves to your expectation. I'll just shutup about this. It's beginning to sound like an amateur self-help treatise. quote:
Originally posted by Emma.:
ok - so if a single woman was going to "prioritize" marriage - er, what would she do then?! Im puzzled.....
(im not desperate to jump into it again - just curious as to the asnwer!)
Keep it upper most in your thoughts. Make yourself available. Seek out groups of singles. Dress up. Flirt. Be friendly, outgoing, fun... pinch an arse once in awhile.
--------------------
--Formerly: Gort--
Posts: 12954 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Papio
Ship's baboon
# 4201
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by LatePaul:
So, not to split hairs, but I feel that whilst emotional literacy is undoubtedly a desirable trait in a partner it is not, IMO, a necessary part of intelligence per se.
(btw so long as I'm nit-picking I think you mean that AS affects those qualities. If it effected them then your brother and my friend would be more, not less, emotionally literate. )
Yes, I kind of realise that I was subsuming things into the catergory of intelligence that were not strictly the same thing. I certainly would not want to claim my brother was dim. He isn't...
And, yes, I do tend to confuse "affect" and "effect". ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
LMM - I hadn't realised until I re-read this thread a minute ago just how bitchy my reply to you must have sounded and probably, in fact, was. FWIW, I enjoyed meeting you at the 2004 (?) Artists meet and I enjoy chatting to you in the cafe. I apologise for the horrible comment.
--------------------
Infinite Penguins.
My "Readit, Swapit" page
My "LibraryThing" page
Posts: 12176 | From: a zoo in England. | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
EnglishRose
Shipmate
# 4808
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gort:
However, I try to the best of my ability to accept responsibility for using everything in my power to accomplish those things that I firmly desire.
Ultimately I accept responsibility for the fact that I'm single. Yes, it is very difficult to meet potential dates but on the rare occasion that I am not exactly the ideal date ![[Disappointed]](graemlins/disappointed.gif) However, going back to the OP, that doesn't stop me from getting really, really cross with God sometimes. He knows exactly why I find it so hard to trust people and why I run away if there's any chance that I'm going to get hurt. I struggle to understand why God leaves me to battle my problems on my own. I used to pray that God would help me find a situation where I would meet someone special. Now that I've realised that a relationship/marriage is highly improbable I ask Him to give me strength to accept the fact that I'm single. So far He doesn't seem to listen to that request either! I'm rapidly coming to the conclusion that God is deaf when it comes to human relationships.
Posts: 544 | From: London | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Curiosus:
Now that I've realised that a relationship/marriage is highly improbable I ask Him to give me strength to accept the fact that I'm single.
But that's exactly like a hungry person asking for the hunger to go away, rather than for food.
Desires for companionship, company, friendship, love, sex, mutual aid, children, economic security (all of which we at least fantasise about getting from marriage even if we know that in real life most marriages achieve only some of them) are completely natural, inbuilt, as much as part of us are breathing and eating and drinking. They're not even specifically human things - we share most of them with other animals.
We can live with them not being satisfied but that's not the same as wishing them away.
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
scoticanus
Shipmate
# 5140
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
But that's exactly like a hungry person asking for the hunger to go away, rather than for food.
It isn't "exactly" like. Without food, you'll die. You won't die without a relationship, although life may be difficult and unfulfilled.
Posts: 491 | From: Edinburgh, Scotland | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gort:
quote:
Originally posted by Emma.:
ok - so if a single woman was going to "prioritize" marriage - er, what would she do then?! Im puzzled.....
Keep it upper most in your thoughts. Make yourself available. Seek out groups of singles. Dress up. Flirt. Be friendly, outgoing, fun... pinch an arse once in awhile.
And in what way is that different from the advice you'd be giving to single men?
Also you are sort of asking people to act a part to pretend to be someone they are not. What happens when this prioritising person, of whatever sex, lands their fish and then goes back to being someone who doesn't like dressing up or flirting, or isn't outgoing & friendly, or who wouldn't dream of pinching anyone's parts uninvited in a month of Sundays? Is there a law against misrepresentation of goods?
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anselmina:
I suspect most men have a perfectly fair and reasonable expectation that they can have satisfying work, should they need it, mental stimulation and a partner should they wish it. And I'm disappointed that anyone should feel that oughtn't to apply for both sexes.
Most men work in jobs they hate, or at any rate are totally bored with, because they need the money.
Unless we are only thinking about a minority of men in professional or managerial or technical jobs, or the tiny rump of old-style craft jobs. And not always even then - I do rather techy work in offices, but at previous places of emplyment the people I worked with found my notion that one of the things I'd like to get out of work was fun to be rather strange. And not something you say at your annual appraisal if you have any desire to get promoted.
People do get enjoyment out of work but its usually the incidental or accidental features of the work rather than the job itself. People they meet or places they go.
The idea that work is an exercise in self-fulfilment is in an industrial age something that is pretty much the province of an affluent minority who have choices and opportunities that most people never get. And - this is me sticking my neck out here to get chopped off - that minority perhaps has included more women than men, a large proportion of them being women who derived some economic security from their husbands. But most women, like most men - and almost all working-class women and men - work because they have to.
Maybe I've been reading too much. Stuffing my head with William Morris and Kropotkin and Eric Gill... This crazy notion that there has to be abetter way to do things than this...
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anselmina
Ship's barmaid
# 3032
|
Posted
Ken, I wrote that men have a fair and reasonable expectation of these things. Not that they always achieved it, but that in a perfectly fair and reasonable way they perhaps expected such things. This was in reply to my interpreting Gort's post - rightly or wrongly! - that women shouldn't expect similar things. So I was suggesting that women's expectations are in many cases no different than men's.
I said nothing about men always getting what they wanted workwise, or in any other sphere of life, come to that.
[ 19. September 2005, 11:43: Message edited by: Anselmina ]
--------------------
Irish dogs needing homes! http://www.dogactionwelfaregroup.ie/ Greyhounds and Lurchers are shipped over to England for rehoming too!
Posts: 10002 | From: Scotland the Brave | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
I_am_not_Job
Shipmate
# 3634
|
Posted
I disagree strongly that it is a minority privilege to do work one enjoys. I agree it is the case that a minority do this, but that is more to do with cultural expectations and people not knowing how to open their minds. Very few people have guns held against their head making them go into that office. If I left school at 16 I would still have a wide range of options like working in a bank, working in a supermarket, working in a fashion shop, working as a bin man, working as a postman, making something in a factory, all manner of things. I would look at all of these and think about my hobbies and interests, could a job include an aspect of these, or do I want to work hours that give me more time for them? What are my friends doing? Which have prospects or on the job training and do I want that or do I just want 9-5 and beer money? I did a job I hated for 18 months. I got up and left. I would say 50% minimum of my colleagues hated it to (it was accountancy afterall ) but did they leave too? No, they thought I was mad. They were all educated but couldn't think beyond a standard world view. Very sad.
--------------------
Hope for everything; expect nothing
Posts: 988 | From: London | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alfred E. Neuman
What? Me worry?
# 6855
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
quote:
Originally posted by Gort:
quote:
Originally posted by Emma.:
ok - so if a single woman was going to "prioritize" marriage - er, what would she do then?! Im puzzled.....
Keep it upper most in your thoughts. Make yourself available. Seek out groups of singles. Dress up. Flirt. Be friendly, outgoing, fun... pinch an arse once in awhile.
And in what way is that different from the advice you'd be giving to single men?
It isn't any different than I would advise single men.
quote:
Also you are sort of asking people to act a part to pretend to be someone they are not. What happens when this prioritising person, of whatever sex, lands their fish and then goes back to being someone who doesn't like dressing up or flirting, or isn't outgoing & friendly, or who wouldn't dream of pinching anyone's parts uninvited in a month of Sundays? Is there a law against misrepresentation of goods?
None that I'm aware of, but you do have a point. I suppose it's better to remain shabby, introverted, unfriendly, anti-social, boring and blame your fate on God. At least you're being true to yourself and others.
--------------------
--Formerly: Gort--
Posts: 12954 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
RuthW
liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13
|
Posted
I must say, I resent seeing introverted there in the list with unfriendly, anti-social, and boring. It's not an inherently negative personality trait, even if it's not everyone's cup of tea. I score off the chart for introversion, and I'm attracted to introverted men. Extroverted people can be exhausting for me and sometimes even irritating.
[clarification]
[ 19. September 2005, 20:30: Message edited by: RuthW ]
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Joan_of_Quark
Anchoress of St Expedite
# 9887
|
Posted
A lot of people don't have much clue about the difference between "introverted" and "shy"/"unconfident"/"socially inept" and just tend to use the two notions interchangeably. Sigh. I'm off-the-scale introvert too. Of course, the two things CAN go together, and in my case did for much of my life. Now I'm not quite as scared of the rest of humanity as I used to be, it's still not that easy getting across to other people, esp in a would-be-dating situation. In relationships I have run into the problem that I need more people-free space/downtime than almost everyone else.
--------------------
"I want to be an artist when I grow up." "Well you can't do both!"
further quarkiness
Posts: 1025 | From: The Book Depository | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
andrew1066
Apprentice
# 10360
|
Posted
Um. Perhaps I am dense (emotionally illitrat?) but I am finding this hard to follow, it seems to be a bit off-track, and to have devolved into a discussion focussed on
What qualities does a person need to attract an available life-partner?
IME these qualities include:
be in the right place at the right time
be capable of independence rather than clinging / needy / dependent
exhibit, or at least be capable of, those qualities you find attractive in others, which typically include: kindness, capacity to empathize, and to communicate (incl listen) GSOH, etc
this is where eddikayshun comes in, because it can (tho does not always) signal the capacity to communicate; and the capacity to be independent, including financially self-supporting [like, people with degrees are higher earners, etc]
but none of these are specifically Christian markers
It is not God who with-holds marriage. God wants us to be fulfilled complete human beans, and if we are (to the extent that we are) capable of marriage (companionship, intimacy, mutual support, commitment) God wants us to take the risk of going out there and meeting people.
If the parameters I apply, or the [social] circle I move in, is such that the pool of availables is small, then the probability of my meeting a right person is naturally less; but this is not "God with-holding", it is a natual consequence of my choices and situation.
And, given that I am single, but am willing not to be; I can either accept the fact of singleness, or do something about it, by e.g. change my choices, and situation. I do not have to do everything all at once, step by step, small manageable / achievable / under-my-control changes.
Or am i not accurately following the emotional register & subtext of this discussion?
--------------------
the better it gets is better than the better it was
Posts: 12 | From: truro | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Joan_of_Quark
Anchoress of St Expedite
# 9887
|
Posted
Andrew, I think that's true. I suspect it might be useful to have a thread on All Saints on how to stop being single (for those who want to!) - I know there's one for the aftermath of split-ups, but not AFAICT for those of us who are mostly over the fallout from our last debacle but feeling a tad wobbly about getting out there again. Anyone think that's a good idea?
--------------------
"I want to be an artist when I grow up." "Well you can't do both!"
further quarkiness
Posts: 1025 | From: The Book Depository | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anselmina
Ship's barmaid
# 3032
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gort:
I suppose it's better to remain shabby, introverted, unfriendly, anti-social, boring and blame your fate on God. At least you're being true to yourself and others.
So once again we're back to Sine's point that wonderful people get husbands if they want them and if you're not married you must be some kind of dysfunctional misanthrope. Because as everyone knows nobody who is either dysfunctional or misanthropic ever gets a marriage partner. And no wonderful people ever remain unmarried.
Still, good to know that so far as Gort goes, if someone is remaining true to themselves and is still unmarried, the truth they are remaining true to is that they must be shabby, introverted, unfriendly, anti-social, boring. It's clearly not possible to be rather an ordinary, likeable, straightforward human being with the same quota of gifts and faults as most other people and still not have found the right person to have spent one's life with. No, that's obviously out of the question .
--------------------
Irish dogs needing homes! http://www.dogactionwelfaregroup.ie/ Greyhounds and Lurchers are shipped over to England for rehoming too!
Posts: 10002 | From: Scotland the Brave | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
andrew1066
Apprentice
# 10360
|
Posted
good idea
yes i am open to meeting people
most strangers can be friends who havn't met yet
I am very new and shy of starting a thread - am I as an apprentice of standing to do so?
hows about a thread, like Ms Lilith suggested, on How is a valid sacramental/ theological marriage created? It may be also legally (according to the law of the land) valid, but what are the conditions necessary to the creating of a sacramental marriage?
if there was a thread for singles who are truly single, and open to the possibility of not being single, yes I'd be interested?
but, it's like politics and power
- just as the desire to exercise political power should be an absolute disqualification from ever doing so; so,
Am I sure I want to meet (or be) someone who joins a singles club? ![[Confused]](confused.gif)
--------------------
the better it gets is better than the better it was
Posts: 12 | From: truro | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ms Lilith
Shipmate
# 1767
|
Posted
Andrew1066, anyone can start a thread. I believe the apprentice thing is just so people know that you are new and can be welcoming but also so they can be aware that any breaches of etiquette are usually unintentional. Don’t be shy. Start your debate thread off in purg. People will be nice cos you are new.
Posts: 266 | From: birmingham | Registered: Nov 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alfred E. Neuman
What? Me worry?
# 6855
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anselmina:
quote:
Originally posted by Gort:
I suppose it's better to remain shabby, introverted, unfriendly, anti-social, boring and blame your fate on God. At least you're being true to yourself and others.
So once again we're back to Sine's point that wonderful people get husbands if they want them and if you're not married you must be some kind of dysfunctional misanthrope. Because as everyone knows nobody who is either dysfunctional or misanthropic ever gets a marriage partner. And no wonderful people ever remain unmarried.
Still, good to know that so far as Gort goes, if someone is remaining true to themselves and is still unmarried, the truth they are remaining true to is that they must be shabby, introverted, unfriendly, anti-social, boring. It's clearly not possible to be rather an ordinary, likeable, straightforward human being with the same quota of gifts and faults as most other people and still not have found the right person to have spent one's life with. No, that's obviously out of the question .
Yes, it's all true, Anselmina. Thank you for your insightful and objective analysis of my attempt at irony. Tell me, do you consider a good sense of humour desirable in a potential partner? Do you think that sometimes those seeking mates become so bitter with failure that they project a defeatist persona? Can they become so defensive that even innocent, objective advice is taken as an attack? Is it possible for people to reach such a fragile state that any suggestion of help is a personal stab in the heart?
After all, It's clearly not possible to be rather an ordinary, likeable, straightforward human being with the same quota of gifts and faults as most other people and still blame God and every single member of the opposite sex for their failure. No, that's obviously out of the question.
--------------------
--Formerly: Gort--
Posts: 12954 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anselmina
Ship's barmaid
# 3032
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gort:
None that I'm aware of, but you do have a point. I suppose it's better to remain shabby, introverted, unfriendly, anti-social, boring and blame your fate on God. At least you're being true to yourself and others.
And the clue that this was 'ironic' and humourous was ? The above appears to my mind to be a very plain and straightforward statement of what you wanted to say. It also largely reflects what's gone before. That you didn't want people to take it seriously this time is rather hard to spot. But then what else can you expect from a woman who's probably only 'intelligent' .
For goodness sake, Gort. Did you really think you could offer the 'innocent objective advice' that women, who want to be, could probably be married if only they were less obviously intelligent and more marriage-obsessive, and have people gratefully receive it without challenge and debate? That, in short, they've only got themselves and their work-related ambitions to blame if they're partnerless?
I feel an objective distance in this argument, because I've never experienced much of a pull towards marriage myself. But on behalf of so many dear friends and other acquaintances who would love to be married but who are not, through no fault of their own - or certainly not through the faults you've listed - it's important to challenge such assumptions, I think.
I don't deny that it's easy to look at some folks - female and male - and think 'no wonder they never married', in exactly the same way one looks at others and thinks 'who on earth would have taken him/her on?'! But, I suggest, your 'innocent objective advice' isn't much use to the majority of ordinary singletons who simply haven't (yet) had the luck, timing or opportunism to find the right person for them.
I know the old cliche is partially true that to find the right person you need to be the right person; but in real life, it just ain't as simple as that.
Posts: 10002 | From: Scotland the Brave | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alfred E. Neuman
What? Me worry?
# 6855
|
Posted
The "clue" was here. Looks a little different in context huh? quote:
Originally posted by Anselmina:
[...] For goodness sake, Gort. Did you really think you could offer the 'innocent objective advice' that women, who want to be, could probably be married if only they were less obviously intelligent and more marriage-obsessive, and have people gratefully receive it without challenge and debate? That, in short, they've only got themselves and their work-related ambitions to blame if they're partnerless?
Nowhere have I said that ANYONE (let alone "women") should be "less intelligent or more marriage-obsessive" or that "they've only got themselves and their work-related ambitions to blame". It's difficult to discuss this with you Anselmina, when you continue to assume I've taken positions that I haven't. One clue that you have a chip on your shoulder is your continued insistance on using "women" in your responses when I have clearly corrected your assumptions in that regard... what? four times now?
There's nothing constructive to be gained from my further comments here. Apologies for stirring up a can of worms and offending anyone.
--------------------
--Formerly: Gort--
Posts: 12954 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anselmina
Ship's barmaid
# 3032
|
Posted
Sorry. Could have sworn this was you.
quote:
Originally posted by Gort:
They can start by being honest with themselves about their priorities. Many "intelligent" women have more important personal issues than finding a mate. It shouldn't be surprising if they're alone because career or intellectual pursuits take precedence over fulfilment in a relationship.
However, if it helps to write it off as 'chip on the shoulder' feel free. As you say, no point in attempting debate.
Posts: 10002 | From: Scotland the Brave | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gort:
The "clue" was here. Looks a little different in context huh? [QUOTE]
No, it doesn't really.
It still boils down to "no-one loves you because you are a dog".
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alfred E. Neuman
What? Me worry?
# 6855
|
Posted
I concede to all of your points, Anselmina, and apologize again for offending everyone.
--------------------
--Formerly: Gort--
Posts: 12954 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alogon
Cabin boy emeritus
# 5513
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
I must say, I resent seeing introverted there in the list with unfriendly, anti-social, and boring. It's not an inherently negative personality trait, even if it's not everyone's cup of tea. I score off the chart for introversion, and I'm attracted to introverted men. Extroverted people can be exhausting for me and sometimes even irritating.
So do I, and I agree that extroverted people can be exhausting (or at least "high strung" people, perhaps that's a little different), but it also seems that opposites attract. With the roommates and significant others I've had, the most successful relationships were with different personalities, although we had interests in common. I think it can be even harder to live with someone too much like yourself than with someone who has more complementary strengths.
--------------------
Patriarchy (n.): A belief in original sin unaccompanied by a belief in God.
Posts: 7808 | From: West Chester PA | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
andrew1066
Apprentice
# 10360
|
Posted
irony, huh?
Years ago I was an utterly dysfunctional immature wierdo, and _as such_ got married etc and had lots a GF's etc, got divorced; after that my late [2nd] wife and I met and got together, we were kind to one another, and I was a good and faithful H.
Now I am more emotionally grown up and mature and living a disciplined life as an OK and real [single] person.
There's nothing 'wrong' with me that I am single, just how it is for me right now.
God made me, and God don't make junk - I am "fearfully and wonderfully made"; so, yes, I am a wonderful person. And this is so even though I still have my original talent for screwing up and falling flat on my face sometimes!
Or am I missing irony/sarcasm etc?
--------------------
the better it gets is better than the better it was
Posts: 12 | From: truro | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jahlove
Tied to the mast
# 10290
|
Posted
Posted by Andrew1066
quote:
Years ago I was an utterly dysfunctional immature wierdo,
So what happened/what's new?
![[Smile]](smile.gif) ![[Cool]](cool.gif) ![[Yipee]](graemlins/spin.gif) ![[Killing me]](graemlins/killingme.gif) ![[Two face]](graemlins/scot_twoface.gif) ![[Angel]](graemlins/angel.gif)
Luv ya
[ 21. September 2005, 00:15: Message edited by: Jahlove ]
--------------------
“Sing like no one's listening, love like you've never been hurt, dance like nobody's watching, and live like its heaven on earth.” - Mark Twain
Posts: 6477 | From: Alice's Restaurant (UK Franchise) | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
