So, I don't have a great deal of dating experience. I asked a girl out to dinner. She said we could go out tonight. She then left a message on my machine cancelling the date. I don't know what time she left it exactly, but it wasn't enough time to keep me from going to her apartment and finding out she wasn't there, thus resulting in me feeling like crap between the time I gave up knocking on her door to the time I heard her message. Now, my normal gut reaction to cancelled dates at the last minute is to never ask that girl out again. So, if someone would like to help me out and tell me if this is a good idea/bad idea, I'd appreciate it, because I'm really tired of screwing up with dating. It seems like it would be selfish of me not to give her a chance, but at the same time, it's hard to think that she is really interested in me if she couldn't take 30 minutes to have dinner with me...Help?
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Did she give a reason for canceling?
Good reasons:
dog died
relative died
family emergency
work emergency
Bad reasons:
needed to wash hair
dog's relative died
better offer
Posted by Boris (Member # 6935) on :
"I am way behind in a lot of stuff right now and am going to be in Idaho Falls" (Paraphase in quotation.)
Posted by newfoundlogic (Member # 3907) on :
I think your options are to ask her if she honestly wanted to go out, but really couldn't or to leave yourself with the "upperhand" by choosing not to ask her out again.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Hmmm . . . well, that could be legit. Did she say anything about making it another time; or did she just cancel tonight, with no reference to the possibility of another time?
Posted by Boris (Member # 6935) on :
She didn't ask for a different time, and said she'd see me in class tomorrow.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Well, I'd try to get a read on her attitude in class (does she seem glad to see you, for instance), and casually ask if she wants to reschedule. See how that goes. Posted by Boris (Member # 6935) on :
quote: asually ask if she wants to reschedule
Man, wish I knew how to be casual...
Posted by Book (Member # 5500) on :
All good points. I can honestly say, however, that videotaping her front door is never the answer.
EDIT: To be casual, try a Costanza- chewing gum or eating something. It says, "This interaction is SO casual and NOT important that I can just eat and not care what it looks like." That, or you could juggle.
But seriously, just ask her how things are going. How her weekend went, how her classes are going, etc.
[ November 09, 2004, 11:47 PM: Message edited by: Book ]
Posted by Boris (Member # 6935) on :
Oops.
Posted by quidscribis (Member # 5124) on :
Ooops? Oooops what?
Posted by Lupus (Member # 6516) on :
if when you see her in class she apologizes and asks for another time, I'd go for it.
If she does not make it clear that she really is sorry she missed the date, and that she would want to have it another night...I'd not bother asking again.
My guess, is that if she does not act like she is sorry that she missed the date, and she clearly wants another, she is just not that interested. Of course even if she is not that interested you could ask her out again, she might say yes (and then maybe or maybe not stand you up again) but you would start out at a disadvantage. But who knows, maybe you could win her over. Though, unless you think this girl is something special, I'd not bother.
[ November 10, 2004, 12:10 AM: Message edited by: Lupus ]
Posted by Boris (Member # 6935) on :
quote: but you would start out at a disadvantage.
How does that work? (Like I said, I'm not very experienced with dating.)
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
My advice? Stop seeing it as "winning" and "losing". If you really like the girl and want to see her again, ask her if she'd like to reschedule. If she says again she's too busy, drop it. Find someone else to be with, and don't get down on yourself. If she reschedules, great! Go have fun. But when it becomes a contest, a test, or something you have to do right, you're not being your real self, and who wants to be with a guy who won't be real?
Posted by Boris (Member # 6935) on :
quote: who wants to be with a guy who won't be real?
Apparently a lot of the girls at this school do(Just a gripe at the general fakeness of most of the guys here. Being a guy, I get to see the fake guys admitting it to other guys, and then get ticked off when I can't even get a second date for...a year...wait. Two years now.)
[ November 10, 2004, 01:23 AM: Message edited by: Boris ]
Posted by quidscribis (Member # 5124) on :
Boris, there's someone out there for you. It doesn't matter that you're not the same as the guys who are getting the dates. You obviously don't like the kind of people they are, so don't sell out and become them. Work on being the best you that you can be, and it'll all fall into place.
There are a lot of women who like nice, decent, kind men. There are a lot of women who hate fake. Perhaps try hanging out where the kind of women you want to date would hang out? And perhaps work on becoming the kind of man that the woman you want would be attracted to?
And finally, remember this one very important thing. It only takes one.
Posted by Boris (Member # 6935) on :
I know. Just sometimes gets a little frustrating not having had a relationship and being 24...
Posted by quidscribis (Member # 5124) on :
Boris, I understand what you're saying. In my own limited way.
One of my best friends finally got her first - and only - boyfriend when she was around 27 or 28. They dated for a half year or a year - something like that. They broke up - not because they didn't like each other. There were no problems between them, it just wasn't right for them to continue from there. So they broke up and remained friends - best friends - for a long time.
Then, a year ago, they got engaged and were married last January.
He's the only guy she ever dated, the only guy she ever kissed. Their relationship was hardly normal, but it was right for them. They're perfect for each other.
There was nothing wrong with her and no reason at all why she shouldn't have had a ton of guys chasing her around. But she didn't. No one asked her out on dates - ever - until this guy. She also moaned and groaned and complained. I didn't blame her. But it all worked out.
I'm not saying that that's exactly what will happen with you. I don't know. All I know is that non-standard things happen, especially to non-standard people.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
Hnn Try being 26 and having no experience at ALL!! It is so deeply shameful....
Posted by quidscribis (Member # 5124) on :
NOT shameful, Syn. NOT shameful at all.
Cheese whiz, you guys! Will you stop beating yourselves up over lack of relationship experience? It happens! It happens to a lot of decent people. And it is not in any way shape or form something to feel ashamed over.
[WHINE] At least you weren't dumped because of things that happened to you as a child that you had no control over. At least you didn't have your heart wrenched to absolutely broken dozens of times. At least you didn't have a boyfriend stalk you or try to kill you. At least . . . [/WHINE]
I dunno. We all have things about our lives we don't like. I know it's hard, but it can get better.
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
This is true. I just wish I would have gotten this over with when I was 16 so I can just get on with my life and not worry about it so much... Or, at least I wish my social skills were better.
Posted by quidscribis (Member # 5124) on :
quote: I just wish I would have gotten this over with when I was 16 so I can just get on with my life and not worry about it so much... Or, at least I wish my social skills were better.
So you're no longer 16. But you can get it over with now. And you can develop better social skills now.
Question is. . . are you going to? [/TOUGHLOVE]
Posted by Synesthesia (Member # 4774) on :
I'm working on it... Though, it doesn't come natural to me, I am trying.
Posted by Raia (Member # 4700) on :
Boris, I understand the griping about a school full of artificial people... my high school was the exact same way. It seemed that all the people in relationships were blond cheerleader/jock types, who were in those relationships just for their outward image, and for physical satisfaction between classes.
Trust me, not everyone is this way. I got lucky, and managed to find someone who wasn't like that at all. I really couldn't be happier about it, too. You'll find her too... once you find the girl who's not out just to improve her status among her friends, you'll find a healthy relationship that will probably result in a much happier union than otherwise. Not that I've had that much dating experience, but that's my take on it. Posted by quidscribis (Member # 5124) on :
Syn, it's never easy, but it's still worth it. Good luck and good for you!
Posted by Raia (Member # 4700) on :
Syn, I'm all for trying to improve social skills...
But don't try to find a relationship. I've tried it, it doesn't work... it really doesn't. Do what comes naturally. For a long time, I was really miserable because I was the only one of my friends who didn't have a boyfriend... that was dumb. On my part. And now, the majority of those friends have broken up (not all, but most), and here I am, in a happy healthy relationship. Don't give up, Syn... but don't try too hard. If you look for it too hard, you'll miss it when it sneaks up behind you. Posted by Xavier (Member # 405) on :
Boris, I suggest spending some time in Hatrack chat. If you don't know how to get there I can tell you.
Many hatrackers have found signifigant others in there, including me.
You'll develop social skills in there too I bet.
Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
Hm. Well, from your paraphrasing of her message it doesn't sound to me like she's probably interested. In your situation, I would feel like the ball was in her court--if she wants to go out with you, it's her turn to do the asking. I would be friendly enough toward her, but wouldn't ask her out again. Hope I'm wrong, and that she's beating herself up for having had to cancel a date with such a great guy.
Let us know how it goes.
Posted by Sara Sasse (Member # 6804) on :
I would do what Noemon said.
However, if I were someone who had to know for sure (or I'd keep agonizing and analyzing and second-guessing), I'd do it casually like this:
"Hey. Sorry I missed you last night. You want to reschedule, or are things going to be busy for awhile?"
If answer is along the lines of "Yeah, well, things are going to be kind of busy for awhile, but you're a really nice guy, and blah blah blah ..." then = death knell for relationship prospects. Period. This is translated girlspeak: any combination of "yes it is going to be very busy for me" plus "I am not going to set a firm date" means no, sorry, no matter what filler comes with it.
Asking her in terms of "things being too busy" gets you the answer while allowing you and she both to save face. Of course, things really may be too busy right now, but if she wants you, she will acknowledge her current stress and set a firm date. Not "I'll call you sometime" or "maybe we can get together later" or yadda yadda, but rather "November 15, Monday, right after class, we can go for coffee."
Exact date means "I'm so sorry and I can't wait to see you," no exact date means "please stop bugging me."
Saving face and finding out for sure can be good, though. You can shrug it off and offer her support or condolences ("Gee, sorry to hear that, hope things get smoother for ya") and come out of this the good guy.
But if you do what Noemon and I would do and leave the ball in her court, then really leave the ball in her court. No hanging around her, no cryptic phone messages, no stalking-y behavior. It wouldn't work, for one thing, and it would make you seem both pathetic and scary (in the creepy unwashed Unabomber sense, not in the buff and intriguing Angel sense).
(((Boris)))
You can do this! Good luck -- and it does get a little better as you get older.
[ November 10, 2004, 09:28 AM: Message edited by: Sara Sasse ]
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
Sara and Noemon offer excellent advice. It's a fine line to walk, though - you shouldn't look like you're shunning or ignoring her, either.
Dagonee
Posted by Sopwith (Member # 4640) on :
On the dating front, I had a horrible time of it for a long while. Had that, "I wish I was what they wanted" or the hopelessly romantic "If she would just give me the chance, I can be everything she needs" ideals.
Guess what? They were wrong, way wrong.
I got over it when I just decided to quit searching for love, looking for it in any girl that caught my eye. I quit basing myself on what I thought would attract them or keep their attention.
I just started being me. Just who I was. If I met someone casually, I just asked them out, for no other reason than to have a good time. Just to do something for fun and enjoy their company. I didn't go out to "see if this could be love" but to learn a bit about them and let them learn a bit about me.
And yanno, that led to some fabulous relationships. Sometimes, too, it didn't lead to a second date. No biggie. If there's no second date, then chances are you two certainly won't going to be an item.
Look, if all you have is a first date, then no biggie. Go on. Someone else will be along before too long. But if you put all of your hopes and dreams into a girl who says she will go out with you, then you've put too much pressure on yourself and the triviality of a first date.
Take it easy. One date is no big deal. And truthfully, only one of them will ever be the "One." And trust me, when that one happens, it'll be different and better than you could ever imagine. But you can't make it happen. And you shouldn't try to make it happen. Just let things be as they are on the surface. Depth develops on its own.
But if you find yourself waiting over a date with someone, especially if it is a first or the possibility of the second, then you are putting your life on hold. And trust me, you are at your least attractive when you put your life on hold.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
There is a trick to this. There really is. And it is the hardest trick in the world to learn, if you really like people -- and, for that matter, really like the opposite sex -- and really hate being alone.
But here it is:
Need them less than they need you. Don't just act like you don't need them as much, because that'll go sour fast. Genuinely don't need them. This doesn't mean that you shouldn't ask them out -- but it means that when you ask them out, you honestly, deep down, won't be heartbroken if they say no. And why? Because you like yourself, you have other things you could be doing or people you could be hanging out with, and whether they find you attractive or not is not going to inconvenience you beyond requiring you to ask someone else to the movies on Friday.
In my experience and through my observations, it takes about two years to get here. You have to make friends, real friends, and do real things with them. You have to be interesting enough on your own time that when you ask out interesting, attractive people, you've done things since the last time you saw them that they might be interested in hearing about or doing.
You do not have to be handsome. If you are not handsome, you'd damn well better have learned how to be charming. If you are both handsome and charming, but still can't get dates, you probably haven't figured out that you're gay.
What do you do for fun, Boris? Are any of your hobbies social ones? If so, I can give you some specific advice from there. Posted by Sara Sasse (Member # 6804) on :
quote:Genuinely don't need them.
Yep. The Principle of Least Interest.
Posted by Sopwith (Member # 4640) on :
Tom's right, with one caveat...
While you are out with your friends, doing things you enjoy and have fun doing... there you are most likely to find someone of the opposite sex who likes the things that you do.
If you really enjoy reading and browsing bookstores, do you think you'd have better luck finding a mate at a bookstore or at a singles bar?
If you enjoy going to hockey games, logic says that the gals who enjoy hockey the most will also be at the games. If you enjoy computers, hang out at the computer lab and make some friends there.
If you like hiking, then join a local club for it. Just make sure you are doing it because it is something you enjoy, not just to find women. Your first duty is to yourself and pursuing what you enjoy in your life.
Basically, you've got to progress along that line that is your life if you plan on finding another line that runs parallel to yours.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
I've ever gotten hit on much more often when I was dating someone else and she wasn't around at the moment.
There's something about being at a party with absolutely no intention of meeting someone of the opposite sex that women seem to find appealing. I never really noticed any difference in my behavior in those instances, but they sure did.
Of course, there's also the possibility I couldn't tell women were hitting on me when I wasn't dating. Historically, I'm bad at that, apparantly. Maybe I was clogging my own radar.
Dagonee
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Everyone has given excellent advice, especially the girl translation.
The last time I cancelled a date on someone, it was because I didn't really want to go. My guess is that she isn't interested. That's okay - just be happy, don't close yourself off, and ask someone else that you think you'd like to spend time with.
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
quote: I've ever gotten hit on much more often when I was dating someone else and she wasn't around at the moment.
There's something about being at a party with absolutely no intention of meeting someone of the opposite sex that women seem to find appealing. I never really noticed any difference in my behavior in those instances, but they sure did.
OMG-YES!
-o-
Lot's of good advice here, but I will quibble on a couple of points relating to the specific question.
She didn't cancel the date; she stood you up. She canceled with too little time for you to get the message . . . that's a TSU: Technical Stand-Up. Just like intentional grounding in the NFL is not an incomplete but a sack, this sounds like a half-assed attempt to appear polite.
So start with the assumption that it means she's Not That Into You.
However, if she seems genuinely apologetic, etc. etc., I recommend you lead in with the maybe some other time/feel her out and see if she will be busy indefinitely or not, as some have suggested. If she does not indicate that she will be busy for the forseeable future, and you decide to believe that the stand-up was unavoidable, then go ahead and ask her again. It's all well and good to say the ball is in her court, but many women will not ask a guy out, period. So if you think she might want to go out for real, go ahead and ask her; you don't really have much to lose.
But don't do this if all signs continue to indicate she's not interested--and that's where things already stand.
Posted by advice for robots (Member # 2544) on :
I remember wishing sometimes that girls would just say what they meant instead of floating some vague excuse and expecting me to catch on. And then making me feel like a complete idiot when I didn't.
But that was just sometimes, because I only asked girls out sometimes.
Getting turned down frankly still stings, but at least you don't keep making an a$$ of yourself later.
However, it's water under the bridge now, as I'm married and living happily ever after. Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
You know, my instinct is to agree with you, but, once you learn to read the signs, there's something to be said for allowing everybody to save face.
I think women (sorry for the sexism, but I'm just reflecting on what our current gender roles are) don't need to change this altogether, but simply need to learn that when the face-saving answer is not understood, they need to follow up with a more direct rejection.
Men, on the other hand, would do well to have somebody (who is not a total ass) giving them objective advice. Maybe a female friend who already is in a relationship or something, or a sounding board like Hatrack. Because I think sometimes we refuse to read the signs, not because they are too subtle, but because we want to much for something that is not there to be there.
In this vein, though, is telling a woman you will call her and not doing so really so wrong, or is this just the man version of the same thing?
Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
I can remember wishing that too, AFR, but I can also remember not handling it to well when a girl I wasn't interested in asked me out. I didn't really know what to do--I didn't want to go out with them, but I also didn't want to hurt their feelings. As a result, I wasn't particularly upfront myself. Rejecting someone well, not veering unwittingly into cruelty, is a skill that has to be learned like any other.
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
quote: I can remember wishing that too, AFR, but I can also remember not handling it to well when a girl I wasn't interested in asked me out. I didn't really know what to do--I didn't want to go out with them, but I also didn't want to hurt their feelings. As a result, I wasn't particularly upfront myself. Rejecting someone well, not veering unwittingly into cruelty, is a skill that has to be learned like any other.
Seriously, lots of good advice in this thread. I could stand to take some of it myself. Funny thing is, I've been seeing advice like this for the last 5 years, but it's only just started to make any sense.
Posted by advice for robots (Member # 2544) on :
OK, I know, I know. I did figure it out, but it took me a while and plenty of pain. And I *really* tried hard not to be a jerk.
I met my wife in the dinner line at the dorm cafeteria. She was just ahead of me, and she turned around and asked me if I wanted to have dinner with her.
The next time we met, we were attending a meeting to find out about becoming staff at a summer camp. We were both hired. She had a friend track down my phone number off of her vague recollection of my name, and asked me if I would ride up with her to the orientation (and actually drive her car, because she was nervous about driving in the snow).
I finally returned the favor by getting her ice cream and initiating other little get-togethers once we got to camp. We couldn't date in the formal sense, but I did my best. I really thought she was cute. I paid a good deal of attention to her and tried to be as thoughtful and chivalrous as I could. It was easy, since we got along so well.
We were an item all summer long. But in the fall, standing at one of our favorite spots overlooking a mountain valley, we decided to break up. The time just wasn't right.
Three years later, she called to see how I was doing. We talked on the phone for a while, and then, since I finally had my own car, I asked her if she wanted to go out for hot chocolate. I drove up to her house, and when she opened the door my heart did a flip-flop. That was our first date the second time around, and naturally, we got engaged some months later.
I had dated other girls in those intervening years, and I had not expected to ever date my future wife again until that hot chocolate night. But when we met again, it was the only reasonable decision. She was perhaps the only girl with whom I could completely be myself from the moment I met her, and the moment I met her again. That, I think, was the difference.
[ November 10, 2004, 11:31 AM: Message edited by: advice for robots ]
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
Did you see Napoleon Dynamite? You're in Idaho, so you're part of that culture. There's this idea that Nice Girls Don't Say No. Saying no means you're a wench. So, what do you do if you want to be nice but don't actually want to go? That's where the prevarication comes in.
The more I think about it, the more I'm sure that she's not into you. If she liked you, it would have been handled much better. If you think there's still a chance, talk to her, tell her you'd love to get together when she isn't busy, and then tell her to call you to set a time. If she likes you, then she will.
Posted by Hobbes (Member # 433) on :
So I'm coming in late in the game but:
quote:I've ever gotten hit on much more often when I was dating someone else and she wasn't around at the moment.
I'm not attractive, not other-end-of-the-mule ugly either, but I've never been hit on ... until I was dating Annie, and then I got hit on. Which is ridiculous, I mean it's not like I go to a lot of parties with her, she's about 1500 miles away (1513 by road), so it's not like someone could actually tell I was dating anyone. Was it just something subconcious that can be picked up on? And why would it make someone more likely to be hit on?
Hobbes Posted by Sara Sasse (Member # 6804) on :
Relationships in this culture all bow to the Principle of Least Interest, at least initially.
The Principle of Least Interest: the person who has the least interest in the relationship holds the power. This is why when you are happily dating someone (or married), you become attractive. You have no vested interest or intent in getting something from the people you happen to meet, so you are in the position of power. Power is attractive.
Same thing for business relationships. If you are being interviewed and you are desperate for this job (like, can't-pay-rent desperate or no-skills desperate), then you are not an attractive candidate. When you could take it or leave it, you become attractive.
I'm not sure whether it is an innate attraction to power or an aversion to weakness which drives this, or maybe some combination. Regardless, it is true.
So when you are out in the world doing interesting things and having a good time (like Tom said), or when you are happily committed to another (like Icarus and Dagonee said), you are in the catbird seat regarding romantic and friend relationships. When you are doing exciting and important things in your work life and have no need of a new job, you get headhunted.
All relationships start out this way. In intimate relationships (romantic or close friends), this stage of mutual demonstration of power and attractiveness is followed by a stage of sharing vulnerability. You show your softer side, admit failures or fears, ask for help. This is a bonding time. But if it comes before the first part (the demonstration of power, and even power in the sense of being excited and interested in the other parts of the world, other than the person in front of you), then you freak people out.
Or you attract people who are primarily attracted to weakness, like predators.
So there is the display of pretty plumage, which is as far as most everyday relationships go. Then there is the confession of vulnerability and bonding at the appropriate time for intimate relationships. And for the strongest long-term intimate relationships, some mix of shared power (mutual strength, mutual vulnerability, ebb and flow of shared and balanced interest) has to come, too.
But it all starts with the Principle of Least Interest. Care more about something bigger than what is going on right in front of you, and you become nigh irresistible. Still care about what is going on, but have other things and other people (like yourself ) be more imortant than what you have invested in this meeting, and you can't fend 'em off with a stick.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
"Was it just something subconcious that can be picked up on? And why would it make someone more likely to be hit on?"
My gut feeling on this:
1) Men who are dating other people are not only safe to play with, but represent intriguing challenges to a certain type of girl.
2) More importantly, men who are currently happy in a relationship are generally not needy, emotional wrecks, desperately pawing at strangers in hopes of making a connection. Women, like wolves, can smell desperation; when you're feeling self-confident, you appear more attractive.
Posted by Hobbes (Member # 433) on :
On your first point Tom, I just don't think these people knew I was dating anyone ... it's not like Annie's been introduced to a lot of the people I hand out with.
I like your (Sara and Tom's) point on "power" so to speak, gained from being secure, but I don't know, most of my life I wasn't interested in a relationship, and I'm un-humble enough to think I've always looked confident in most social situations, romantic attachments or not. Maybe I didn't though, I don't know, I think whatever all the causes are, you're certainly right that the power from having an attachment is a signficant one at the least.
Hobbes Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
"I just don't think these people knew I was dating anyone...."
Hobbes, having seen you with Annie, and having seen you even when Annie was briefly in another room, I find it inconceivable that someone might look at you and not think you were dating someone. Posted by Miro (Member # 1178) on :
Wow. I feel a lot better after reading this thread. I'm in college and I've never been on a date or anything even approximating one. Good to know I'm not alone. Posted by Sara Sasse (Member # 6804) on :
Hobes, the signals we send out are often too subtle even for us to understand and catch in ourselves.
The above article references the original coining of the term "principle of least interest" in 1937 by Waller in "The rating and dating complex" from the American Sociological Review.
Posted by Hobbes (Member # 433) on :
Fair 'nough.
Hobbes Posted by Sara Sasse (Member # 6804) on :
I have little comment on Tom's point #1, despite the fact that I am pretty sure it is true.
Although I find people of all sorts who are happy and healthy and fulfilled to be attractive, I make it a point to actively encourage those fulfilling relationships in my friends. That is, I think happily committed guys are great and neat and cool, and if they are my friends, I try to keep them that way.
Unfortunately, I suspect this is not always the case, so I can see why he makes the point.
Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
Wow that was an interesting article. I couldn't help trying to figure out where my own relationship would be according to the questions asked. I wish they'd used a larger data sample that was more equitable in gender since they had only 20% male respondents.
Do you know of any article which discusses how strongly the Principle of Least interest applies in long-term or married relationships?
AJ
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
When does the principle of least interest stop being necessary? In other words, do you always, always have to not care completely?
Posted by Mike (Member # 55) on :
I don't think the principle of least interest is ever necessary. That is, acting disinterested in order to increase your power is not necessary. If you do decide to become more emotionally involved, though, you run the risk of losing an edge in the relationshop, powerwise. I'm not a big fan of judging relationships in terms or power, myself.
Posted by Sara Sasse (Member # 6804) on :
quote:When does the principle of least interest stop being necessary? In other words, do you always, always have to not care completely?
*grin
A good chunk of my last post on the prior page addressed this. To recap, in my view:
quote:All relationships start out this way. In intimate relationships (romantic or close friends), this stage of mutual demonstration of power and attractiveness is followed by a stage of sharing vulnerability. You show your softer side, admit failures or fears, ask for help. This is a bonding time. But if it comes before the first part (the demonstration of power, and even power in the sense of being excited and interested in the other parts of the world, other than the person in front of you), then you freak people out.
Or you attract people who are primarily attracted to weakness, like predators.
So there is the display of pretty plumage, which is as far as most everyday relationships go. Then there is the confession of vulnerability and bonding at the appropriate time for intimate relationships. And for the strongest long-term intimate relationships, some mix of shared power (mutual strength, mutual vulnerability, ebb and flow of shared and balanced interest) has to come, too.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
*hugs Sara*
People confuse me.
quote: "She (Madame Bovary) had that indefinable beauty that comes from happiness, enthusiasm, success - a beauty that is nothing more or less than a harmony of temperament and circumstances." --Gustave Flaubert
[ November 10, 2004, 03:51 PM: Message edited by: katharina ]
Posted by Sara Sasse (Member # 6804) on :
quote:That is, acting disinterested in order to increase your power is not necessary.
"least interest" does not equal "disinterested"
It can just mean you are interested in something else more. For example, a person may be in a position of least interest when he is more interested in making friends of all backgrounds and sexes than he is in getting that one particular chick at this particular ski resort vacation. Not disinterested in her, just that getting her is not his primary interest for the trip.
So if she is looking for someone, she is more invested in their possible relationship than he is.
Amazing any of us ever get together.
I don't think "acting disinterested" usually works, though -- the cues are too subtle to fake. You have to be more interested in something else for it to have that effect, for the most part. So, for Boris Tom's offer at the bottom of page 1 is like gold.
quote:If you do decide to become more emotionally involved, though, you run the risk of losing an edge in the relationshop, powerwise.
See my post at the bottom of page 1 or the summary in the above post.
quote:I'm not a big fan of judging relationships in terms or power, myself.
I agree to disagree, then. I think anytime there is a relationship, there is some flow of power.
Doesn't make it bad -- power itself isn't evil. It is just a descriptor of dynamics. And any relationship has dynamics.
[ November 10, 2004, 03:59 PM: Message edited by: Sara Sasse ]
Posted by Sara Sasse (Member # 6804) on :
(((katharina)))
And it isn't a certainty, only a theory. I think it works, though.
Some landmarks are ritualized displays of both plumage and vulnerability. And yes, we feel closer after, no? But when some new person comes in and just lays out a huge achy miserable mess, people react differently, no? It is a different context.
People are confusing. But it's okay.
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
I like the theory - it makes sense, it fits in with my experiences, and it offers some hope. I like it. Posted by BannaOj (Member # 3206) on :
Yeah, I started thinking about my own relationship in terms of power. My first reaction was to say we were totally equal. And the net balance of power between Steve and I probably is. But when you actually look at most of the easily visible and quantitative things, the article Sara posted above would probably say that I'm in the position of power, I think. (And then you get into the interesting thing of are we actually equal but because of the cultural bias discussed of relationships with higher power from the male in a relationship generally being more stable do I feel like I'm more powerful than I actually am.)
The things that I have power over, are probably more traditionally male roles. The checkbook and finances for example. He asks me if we can afford something, I don't ask him. He uses it against me though.
Because I am a certifiable cheapskate. If we are in the store and I'm drooling over something like a sweater, he'll go, can we afford it? And most of the time the answer is "yes". Then he's the one that actually makes me buy it. He knows that with me drooling I'll go back 20 times and continue to drool and never buy it. My father is the exact same way as I am, and it is a bit of de ja vu, when I hear Steve echoing my mother's words and sentiments.
Our division of social life is pretty equal. A funny example is that, we know a group of people that go to a particular pub every Thursday night. For a while, Steve and I never showed up on the same night. You'd only see one of us, because the other person was too tired and worn out from work or had other stuff going on. When we both ended up there on the same night it was pretty amusing.
With our home life, though Steve has the "power" balance distinctly in his favor. He's the one that cooks and does the mowing etc. I'll do laundry and put an occasional load of dishes in the dishwasher, but the place isn't actually clean unless he decides it should be, because he's far more effective at cleaning and decluttering than I am.
So like I said I think it does balance out, but a lot of our roles are reversed from the norm. I've seen this in several other technical-technical person relationships too.
AJ
Posted by Sara Sasse (Member # 6804) on :
Dave and I go through times of equilibruium, and then we go through times when one of us needs to be taken care of. When that happens, the power shifts.
One of the ways we deal with it is for the one who is needed to do more than help, or even take charge for awhile, but also to be careful to talk about those times of neediness from the other in the past. Times when things went the other way. Or, to talk about needy elements of the helper still now: "I know I am taking care of you, but I still need you to do this for me. You help me so much. And I can't do it without help, either -- I lean on my friends and on you, too."
We keep it pretty balanced, and we talk a lot, and we've learned each other's language, both verbal and non-verbal.
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
You know, I had a pretty good Intentional Grounding analogy on page one that nobody appreciated.
Just saying . . .
Posted by Sara Sasse (Member # 6804) on :
I thought it was awesome. And I understood it, even though I have no idea what most of sports talk means.
Bravo!
*admiring
Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
*sits cross-legged at feet of advice-dispensers*
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
Katie, you still know what I think you should do, vis-a-vis your love life. Posted by katharina (Member # 827) on :
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Mad]](mad.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)