Women pursuing men

[Atria35]

Pascal, I'm about to hit 23, and for me it's the physical desire to be with someone else, and the emotional desire to have someone to come home to and talk to at the end of the day (more than a roommate), and because I want kids. Eventually. But right now I think I'm driven by the hormones as much as anything else. >.>"

But it's really different for everyone. I know that there are cultural factors at this point- there isn't a drive or a push to marry, it's seen as more acceptable to go through life being single. For men. Women.... yeah no. I'm asked why I don't have a boyfriend. I've been asked since I was 14. My brother? No one cares.

And in this economy, money (car payments, etc) is definitely a big part of it.

[Xeno]

I completely understand where Pascal is coming from, I've even started feeling like that a bit recently. Though to be honest I'll be turning 24 in less than a month and I still notice women all the time. I don't necessarily think it's hormone driven as much as it is a want for companionship. The appeal to being able to come home from work every day and saying "honey, I'm home!", and not be talking to my computer, is still there and it's more of a driving factor than what pursing a girl was when I was 16 or 17.

I feel it's something of a two-way street though. I see nothing wrong with a woman pursuing a man or vice versa, but I do think that if the person being pursued has any interest then they ought to pursue back. I know this sounds like a game of Gender Chicken, but it's upsetting to put time and effort into pursing someone and them accept the pursuit, but not respond beyond that. I wasted 3 good years of my life to a situation like that and I do not plan on doing it again.


Now for Yuki,

what if a girl asked a guy if he wanted to go grab a cup of coffee at Starbucks some time (phrased exactly like that, not explicitly referred to as a date)?

I would still question the intention of the woman. It is possible that she just likes coffee and knows that I too have a soft spot for the "juice." I'd make my decision on if it's a "date" or not based on how it goes and what vibes I'm feeling while I'm there with her.

And I'm assuming that if a girl asks a guy she's interested in to come along with a group as they go out for dinner, that is firmly within the zone of general friendliness.

As far as I'm concerned, that's a simple invitation to a social gathering and there is nothing romantically implied here unless the people we're going with is just one other couple that are actually in a relationship and the dress attire is something unmentionable, in that case it's pretty much a woman coming on strong.

[shooraijin]

Mainly because men are losing interest in the idea and have to be sold on the prospect of forming this traditional relationship.

I think I have a bit of insight here on that. I'm (currently) 34. I've dated a few people, some serious, a couple mistakes (thankfully none recent), and some relationships having lasted longer than others. Even did the eHarmony thing for a bit, and that was an utter mess. A story for a different day.

Would I be still interested in getting married if Ms Right came long? Sure. I'm pretty careful about whom I ask, of course, not merely out of a sense of duty but also because due to my profession I get "gold diggers." Frankly if I got married and the marriage failed, I could come out of it much the worse for wear in divorce court. This is a real and practical concern.

I'm not too interested in a relationship at this point that isn't serious, and I'd prefer to have kids, although I would be happy if that didn't happen, of course. At this point in my life I am well aware of what I'd be giving up if I got married: a fair bit of my ability (well, probably most of my ability) to come and go as I please, a lot of my spare hobby time, and the ability to prioritize my finances and resources to things I like to spend time doing. The kids and the wife would have to come first. On the flip side, if I remain single, I would give up potential companionship and intimacy, the ability to have a lasting legacy through my family, and I would have a significantly more impaired safety net if I became ill or disabled. I'm giving up something either way, and I'm also gaining something.

As it stands right now, I have disability insurance, I am working on setting my estate in order, and I am financially secure and salting money away for retirement if I get that far. I could just as easily live out the rest of my days as a confirmed bachelor as I could a husband and father. I know what I'm gaining and giving up in either approach, and I'm not terribly worried about what happens. But it took years to mentally make that computation.

Question: I know all guys are different and so on, but what, to you guys, constitutes directly asking? Like, what if a girl asked a guy if he wanted to go grab a cup of coffee at Starbucks some time (phrased exactly like that, not explicitly referred to as a date)? And I'm assuming that if a girl asks a guy she's interested in to come along with a group as they go out for dinner, that is firmly within the zone of general friendliness.

Because I've done both. I've never directly asked a guy to go on a date with me, because I have observed that that level of aggressiveness tends to turn a lot of guys off. What I have trouble with are sending the right signals without seeming desperate. Which I'm not. I just tend to know what I like and go for it. Unfortunately there's an art to it that I haven't seemed to master yet.

I think going out with friends and being invited to do so is fine. Good, even: I can observe them in their "natural habitat" and see if there is potential. If we hit it off talking and I enjoy their company, then I'll ask them out. If we don't, everybody saves face; it was just an evening out with friends. That's a good kind of "hint."

[musicaloddball]

It probably doesn't need mentioning, but there has only been one time in my life where I felt driven to ask a girl out on a date or begin a dating relationship (and I'm not gay or even remotely attracted to men) - it happened a few days ago and gave me a window into an experience everyone else seems to have at least once (it was a truly different feeling than anything I've experienced in RL)...

...that was an awesome dream - but she vanished with the daylight along with the feelings.

These days though, I am beginning to wonder if other males feel like me - completely un-driven to consider dating relationships. I mean, what's the prize? If you're not controlled by hormones (and those vanished for me about a decade ago) what causes the drive? Why would people pursue this instead of other things? By the time you hit 25, it's not the sex, and given that age is coming down the turnpike at mach 10, it's not the good looks either. Relationship is cool, but you could just as well find a few good room-mates and have company that you can divorce for a lot less hassle and cost. Money can't be a valid motivator either, marriage pushes for houses and cars and stable jobs and when kids hit the fan that's going to be a big cut. (not to mention the loss of independence from suddenly having to be responsible and being given a new role you are basically made to fulfill)

So unless you're really itching to be a father, or feel horrified that your genetics won't continue down into history, what's the big deal? Why would we be driven to do this?

I think this is why women are starting to pursue this more. Mainly because men are losing interest in the idea and have to be sold on the prospect of forming this traditional relationship. Maybe I'm just out of the loop, so fill me in. What's the experience really like for most people when they reach my age?

That was highly amusing.

It really does depend on personality. I know exactly how you feel. And I'm an 18 year old girl. Part of me is still interested in dating and marriage simply because it's so romanticized and glorified in movies, etc. But beyond wanting to know what it's like to be in my own romance story, I really am not interested in dating. haha Some people are just called to it, I think. I mean, helping God bring new, beautiful people into the world is a noble work. God calls some people to do it, and doesn't call others.

[shooraijin]

I'm asked why I don't have a boyfriend. I've been asked since I was 14. My brother? No one cares.

There definitely is a double standard, but I get asked all the time when I'm getting married. I've run out of funny answers, so now I just start shooting. (current funny answer)

[Nate]

People don't like feeling alone.

Old panhandler: Hey…you’re a woman!
Crazy bag lady: And you’re a three-headed devil dog. DEVIL DOG!!!
Old panhandler: Wanna make out?
Crazy bag lady: Nobody wants to be alone.

[Yamamaya]

Well for me I want a relationship because...

1. I like girls.

2. I don't want to be...



That's pretty much it. I don't have a great desire to have kids. Fun fact: Hitler's grandnephews swore never to reproduce so they could cut Hitler's bloodline off from the planet FOREVER

[Yuki-Anne]

Fun fact: Hitler's grandnephews swore never to reproduce so they could cut Hitler's bloodline off from the planet FOREVER

At first I thought this said "grandparents," and I was like, "buWHAAAA?"

And then I thought, "That's a bit of an overreaction. It's not like being related to Hitler makes you Hitler."

And then I remembered that people are stupid and those guys were probably on the receiving end of some really cruel treatment just because they are relatives of Hitler. :/ I'm not sure I'd want my kids to go through that either.

[ShiroiHikari]

Godwin's Law.

[Seto_Sora]

Forgive my ignorance if I repeat something here, but I've only read the last page of posts and I was totally struck by the "meh" motivation here on marriage. So what I'll do is expound on why marriage is good.
1. Marriage is good because it provides a release both Godly and Biblical for hormonal... er, intimacy. We are told in Scripture that the young should marry rather than burn with lust. However, I put this as the least important reason to marry because through faith and discipline, that same urge can be diminished. It is therefore one means to an end.
2. Marriage is an intimacy of hearts where two grow close to eachother so to learn and discover one another like no one else. I long for that intimacy wherewith I can discover every detail of my love's heart. I wish to share in her every joy, weep in her every tear, comfort in her every fear. I wish to know her like no other save Christ. And although it may sound selfish, and I may never have likewise. I want that also. I want her to know me to want me for who I am, to understand me, to appreciate me. But that isn't the most important reason marriage is good.
3. Finally but probably firstly. Marriage is good because God ordained it for to give us a better picture of Him and His love for the Church. Married couples have a deeper and profound understanding of this love as we singles could only imagine. Marriage should excite our love for Christ Jesus and invigorate our growth in Him. Marriage should teach us such self-sacrifice as help us understand how we ought love Christ. Now this is by no means a universal thing. Paul himself was single. But Christ isn't!
So those are my three reasons why marriage is good... and I want to have a family. XD

SDG

[ShiroiHikari]

I don't think anyone was saying marriage is inherently bad, just that they're not particularly interested in it at this time.

[Seto_Sora]

Right. Rather, I was specifically trying to answer Pascal's question, why marry? Its a good question. But I had to put in my two cents. lol
But in answer to the original topic of the thread (which is what originally drew me here), I don't mind a woman pursuing me as long as she doesn't get freaky stalkerish on me... which has happened before. Besides girls, sometimes a guy just doesn't know you like him so he doesn't consider that sort of relationship until said lady shows interest in him. On the other hand, in my experiences, I've always done the pursuing.

SDG

[Yamamaya]

Seto Kaiba is married to his card games, company, and money. He needs no other forms of marriage! Who needs a girl when you can have a Blue Eyes White Dragon?




I like the idea of marriage, but I've seen enough of the reality of many marriages that it makes me go "meh"

[Atria35]

I like the idea of marriage, but I've seen enough of the reality of many marriages that it makes me go "meh"

Usually, people who are aware of the reality of how marriages work are the ones with the most successful marriages. Go figure.

[Nate]

I wish to share in her every joy, weep in her every tear, comfort in her every fear.

That sounds like what I want to do with all my friends though. I mean if I didn't want to share in someone's joy AND pain, I wouldn't be friends with them. This just sounds like how we should treat everyone.

Marriage should teach us such self-sacrifice as help us understand how we ought love Christ.

I don't understand how marriage teaches that. This sounds like something we should be taught and understand whether we're married or not.

As far as I see it, marriage is only a means of conferring benefits and the like on a partner. Which is, of course, extremely important. Benefits like health insurance, life insurance, hospital visitation, stuff like that. That's really the only reason I see to marry someone. I can't even say "for kids" because that would be insulting to the many single parents out there who work hard and provide well for their children.

So yeah. Marriage is just a way to confer excellent legal benefits on a person you care about. There really isn't any other purpose to it from what I see.

[Yamamaya]

Usually, people who are aware of the reality of how marriages work are the ones with the most successful marriages. Go figure.

Well that's a good way to look at it.

People who are more naive about marriage tend to have more problems down the road.

[Mr. SmartyPants]

Finally but probably firstly. Marriage is good because God ordained it for to give us a better picture of Him and His love for the Church. Married couples have a deeper and profound understanding of this love as we singles could only imagine. Marriage should excite our love for Christ Jesus and invigorate our growth in Him. Marriage should teach us such self-sacrifice as help us understand how we ought love Christ.

Unless I'm misinterpreting what you're saying.. I must absolutely disagree with you. Love between friends and/or family and love between spouses should only differ in that one includes an aspect of romance and eroticism (the healthy kind here) to it. Your love towards a brother should be no different, and thus no less divine.

Everything you mentioned, love itself can and ought to accomplish -- with or without marriage. So it is not marriage which does these things. Plenty of marriages are broken and empty of love. Love is something which transcends even marriage. It is unfair to say that a chase monk or priest has less of an intimate understanding of a deep symbolic marriage with Christ because the priest or monk himself is not married.

Marriage is great, but nothing is better than Love. And love outside of marriage is no better or worse than love in marriage because it is all still love.

[Yuki-Anne]

Unless I'm misinterpreting what you're saying.. I must absolutely disagree with you. Love between friends and/or family and love between spouses should only differ in that one includes an aspect of romance and eroticism (the healthy kind here) to it. Your love towards a brother should be no different, and thus no less divine.

Everything you mentioned, love itself can and ought to accomplish -- with or without marriage. So it is not marriage which does these things. Plenty of marriages are broken and empty of love. Love is something which transcends even marriage. It is unfair to say that a chase monk or priest has less of an intimate understanding of a deep symbolic marriage with Christ because the priest or monk himself is not married.

Marriage is great, but nothing is better than Love. And love outside of marriage is no better or worse than love in marriage because it is all still love.

This.

I might have been a little more inclined to agree with PatrickEklektos if "parenthood" had been stated as what gives one a deeper understanding of the love of God. Because when I see other people's screaming brats I do not understand those people's longsuffering and unconditional love toward their children.

But then, that may also be a parenting style, and if they would DISCIPLINE THEIR CHILDREN they wouldn't have screaming brats.

But that's a topic for another thread.

All's I know is, I know I am not loving and unselfish enough to have a baby at this point in my life. So I fully admit that someone who is a parent probably has a deeper understanding of love than I do.

[Seto_Sora]

LOL well Smarty and Nate, I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with you. I'm quite convinced in this that I simply love some people more than others. For instance, I love my brother more than I love you two. I won't talk as freely with you nor will I care to hang around you as much as I do him. And this carries into all my friends. I have those whom I love more than others and who take higher priority than others; my family, for instance. I know it sounds cruel, but we all do it whether consciously or subconsciously. So since we all do it, we can either gnaw ourselves to death in exasperation at our failure to love everyone equally or we can accept the inevitable fact. So saying, I will love my wife more than anyone excepting only Christ. And only Christ will I love more than her. LOL I just had a thought, meybe thats what drives girls away from me. But I honestly don't want to marry a woman who doesn't feel the same way.
So gentlemen, by all means, you can feel as you do and disagree with me. And I will respect that and you and your opinions. My own opinion is my own and that is how I live my life. Besides, as my avatar indicates, I'm Seto Freaking Kaiba, I screw the rules. lol

Edit: Oh yeah, and as to the marriage analogy and its teaching us about Christ and His Church... well, its not something I pulled out of the air. That is the analogy Christ uses in Scripture and what Paul said was exactly to be for us to learn more about Christ.

SDG

[Yuki-Anne]

But Paul never said married people understood the love of Christ better than he himself as a celibate did. It's a living metaphor, but it doesn't indicate that people who are living the metaphor are somehow more in touch with understanding God than those who aren't.

[K. Ayato]

Hit the nail on the head, Yuki.

[Yamamaya]

I wouldn't be so quick to say that romantic love always has the sexual desire aspect in it. I'm probably just being picky, but there are asexual people out there who feel no sexual desire yet they pursue romantic relationships. They develop emotional attachments to their partners.

Romantic love almost always has a sexual component but the two are definitely not the same thing. Romantic love implies emotional attachment not just sexual desire.

(I wasn't saying anyone here was saying that romance=nothing but sex).

[Yuki-Anne]

Well, I could go even further and say that Paul actually indicated that marriage was a distraction.

[Yamamaya]

Well, I could go even further and say that Paul actually indicated that marriage was a distraction.

Paul was talking to a very specific audience for a very specific purpose. It's important not to make universal statements.

[shooraijin]

Moving a little close to the theology discussion border, ahem.

[Yuki-Anne]

Paul was talking to a very specific audience for a very specific purpose. It's important not to make universal statements.

That's why I said "could".

[Seto_Sora]

Romantic love almost always has a sexual component but the two are definitely not the same thing. Romantic love implies emotional attachment not just sexual desire.

I completely agree with you Yamamaya. For my part, I want and long for a romantic relationship with a woman myself that has a very very low sexual emphasis. And I seek it for the emotional attachment.
Also, on the note of Paul saying that it was better not to marry in 1 Corinthians 7, he followed up in the very same verse saying exactly the opposite. That young people who cannot control themselves should exactly marry. It is also important to note that Paul was not speaking to everyone in this passage. He was only speaking to the young widows of the Corinthian Church.
(man I hope my comment didn't push this too close to the theology border, just wanted to clarify Paul's words)

SDG

[Yuki-Anne]

But he says that he wishes all people could be single like him, and then emphasizes that each person has their own gift from God.

The point here is that married or single, we can still serve God, and you can't point to either set of situations and say, "Now these people understand God's love better." Because how well someone understands God's love is an individual matter, and not a matter of relationship status.

[Nate]

I'm quite convinced in this that I simply love some people more than others. For instance, I love my brother more than I love you two.

Oh, I'm not saying that this isn't the case, I'm just saying that's not how it should be. We should love all other people like the way you're talking about is what Ryan and I are saying. However, we are of course human, and will fall short of what is expected of us.

I'm just saying the kind of love you were talking about in your post is how we should be acting to everyone. Kind of like how we're not supposed to sin after we become Christians, but we still do because we're fallen human beings. That doesn't mean sin is okay or that we're supposed to sin, it means we are falling woefully short of the standard God asks of us.

You love your brother more than you love me, but that doesn't mean it's okay or that it's good for you to do that. You shouldn't do that, you should love me as much as you love your brother, but you are a fallen human being and as such fall short of the standard God has set for us. It's just important to recognize that you're falling short and try to fix it, rather than saying "This is just the way I am!" :p

Also, on the note of Paul saying that it was better not to marry in 1 Corinthians 7, he followed up in the very same verse saying exactly the opposite. That young people who cannot control themselves should exactly marry.

But he also said "I wish everyone would remain unmarried, as I am." He wasn't saying marriage was good, he was saying it was a distraction. He said the unmarried can fully devote themselves to God and His works. He said that a married person is distracted by their spouse. He only said marriage was good as a last resort, if you really just couldn't control yourself.

The verse is saying the opposite of what you're trying to make it say. If marriage is supposed to make us have a better understanding of God, why did Paul say he wishes everyone was unmarried? Did Paul not want people to understand God or something?

[Mr. SmartyPants]

LOL well Smarty and Nate, I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with you. I'm quite convinced in this that I simply love some people more than others. For instance, I love my brother more than I love you two. I won't talk as freely with you nor will I care to hang around you as much as I do him. And this carries into all my friends. I have those whom I love more than others and who take higher priority than others]
I believe that you are making the mistake of confusing "love" with "affection". We all know what Corinthians says that love is. Patient, kind, does not boast, etc. Loving is being a reflection of who God is. Love is NOT a closeness of relationship you have with someone although love can be a part of that. Love is a transcend idea which you embody and thus reflecting Christ.

You cannot "love" your brother as much as you "love" your wife, but in this case we are no longer using the true, "agape" idea of love.

Furthermore, how can you have a hierarchy of love if love by definition must be unconditional? You cannot partially love (agape) someone because to love means to give your all. Love demands a total submission and a total vulnerability to another individual. You cannot love someone "less" than you love your spouse unless you're not loving them at all. You love them or you do not.

Or I can put it this way: If God is Love then when you love people you are being a reflection of God to them. You cannot be "more God" to your wife and then "not-as-much God" to your friend or enemy. Again, there is room for respect and relationship boundaries as well as respecting and loving yourself. But you can't love people at different degrees.

I could possibly even flesh this out and argue that having "degrees" of love is not in fact love, but the opposite: Selfishness. Maybe you're more inclined to love on someone you're closer to because there's a benefit to your self? Perhaps. This is something I certainly deal with.

I guess it's a little funny how I'm being rather black/white on this, seeing that I'm usually all grey and relativistic with stuff.

Paul was talking to a very specific audience for a very specific purpose. It's important not to make universal statements.

Could you perhaps not post so many image memes? I can't help but feel like they're rude and condescending to others as opposed to being humorous.