Overlay
07-01-2010, 09:12 PM
My single days are long over, but I still click on the occasional relationship/dating article, just to see what purports to pass for accepted guidance (on the female side, at least) these days regarding that subject.
Under the heading "8 Dating Mistakes Even Smart Women Make" (excerpted from an article in Glamour magazine), the very first "mistake" listed is "being too available", for which the accompanying commentary reads, "We're not suggesting you play games, but we are telling you to indulge your passions and resist the urge to abandon your social circle every time your new man sends an invitation. Take Sebastian, 34, from Chicago, for example: 'When I was single, there were women I initially liked who seemed to be waiting by the phone for me to call, which let me know if I didn't meet someone else I wanted to date, I had a standby. There just wasn't anything to work for, and that turned me off,' he says. The more you engage in and enjoy your life, the more he'll work to be a part of it."
Since when is wanting to be with someone, letting them know it (not in a desperate or stalking way, but just getting to know the other person), and making an effort to make time for that in your schedule a turn-off? And what kind of guy worth getting to know would relegate a woman to "standby" status just because she wanted to be with him (as long as she wasn't equally available to multiple other men, as well, which would have been a turn-off -- at least for me)? (No wonder I didn't get married until I was 32!) Women supposedly resent being pigeonholed, but this excerpt abounds with the traditional hard-to-get, man-as-the-pursuer stereotype.
As I said, I don't personally have a dog in this fight anymore, and it's apparently a good thing, because I'd be hopelessly, cluelessly out of touch. It does make me wonder, though, how I can give advice to my daughter -- if she ever asks for it, that is!
Under the heading "8 Dating Mistakes Even Smart Women Make" (excerpted from an article in Glamour magazine), the very first "mistake" listed is "being too available", for which the accompanying commentary reads, "We're not suggesting you play games, but we are telling you to indulge your passions and resist the urge to abandon your social circle every time your new man sends an invitation. Take Sebastian, 34, from Chicago, for example: 'When I was single, there were women I initially liked who seemed to be waiting by the phone for me to call, which let me know if I didn't meet someone else I wanted to date, I had a standby. There just wasn't anything to work for, and that turned me off,' he says. The more you engage in and enjoy your life, the more he'll work to be a part of it."
Since when is wanting to be with someone, letting them know it (not in a desperate or stalking way, but just getting to know the other person), and making an effort to make time for that in your schedule a turn-off? And what kind of guy worth getting to know would relegate a woman to "standby" status just because she wanted to be with him (as long as she wasn't equally available to multiple other men, as well, which would have been a turn-off -- at least for me)? (No wonder I didn't get married until I was 32!) Women supposedly resent being pigeonholed, but this excerpt abounds with the traditional hard-to-get, man-as-the-pursuer stereotype.
As I said, I don't personally have a dog in this fight anymore, and it's apparently a good thing, because I'd be hopelessly, cluelessly out of touch. It does make me wonder, though, how I can give advice to my daughter -- if she ever asks for it, that is!