textualdeviance (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
textualdeviance) wrote2011-06-27 10:58 am
textualdeviance) wrote2011-06-27 10:58 am
Romance: Novel
A bunch of random thoughts about gender, love and instinct inspired by an exasperating conversation from this morning...
---
Flowers and jewelry are fine, but what's really romantic is knowing what the person you love likes, and doing that. If s/he really does want flowers and jewelry, then do that. If s/he'd rather have 3 weeks traipsing around the UK, then do that. ;) The trick is being observant enough to know what's really important and meaningful to the person in question, and not just guessing based on gender stereotypes or some vague set of vital statistics.
Romance, at it's core, is about the feeling one gets when it's clear that someone truly does like you and pays attention to you. You want romantic gestures to say not just "I Love You" (tm Hallmark) but "I know who you are, I like thinking about you and being with you, and I enjoy doing things that make you happy."
And from the other side: If you don't know what makes your beloved happy and thus go looking for generic advice on that? You're doing it wrong.
---
There is no such thing as "what women/men want." One may as well say there's such a thing as what Earthlings want. We are all products of our cultures and individual experiences, and even though cultural gender stereotypes (and deliberate training to fit them) do mold many of us in some way or another, we're all still individuals. If you're single and looking, and wondering what you should do to attract a mate, don't ever go reading gender-split advice. It's wretched and wrong. In short, don't try to attract "men" or "women." Just be yourself, do the things you love in a way that involves meeting other people, and you'll attract the people who are right for you.
Conversely, if you try to be something you're not, you're only going to attract people who want that other thing. Not people who want you. Granted that if you're an unusual sort (hi!) it can be hard to find people who are tuned to your particular frequency. And if you're lonely, there's a temptation to try to change yourself to be something that's going to cast a wider net. But truth is: Any relationships you get out of an attempt at that won't ever be satisfying, because you'll always have to keep polishing that mask to avoid your partner finding out that that's not the real you.
Oh, and women? This includes crazy beauty routines. If you have fun with clothes and makeup for their own sake, go for it. If you're tarting yourself up because you're afraid you're not attractive without it, the only people you're going to attract are the ones who will make you feel bad when you start aging. A perfect way to ensure that you're divorced by 45 is to marry someone who's primarily attracted to your perky ass when you're 22. If your mate has ever--ever!--used the phrase "let him/herself go" in reference to anyone? Leave. Now. Don't ever look back.
---
Ignore evolutionary psych and anything else that claims how humans do relationships is all or mostly about biology. Yes, for higher mammals, a female's base instinct is to attract a mate who will protect us and our offspring while we're vulnerable. But humans are way more than base instinct. We are highly evolved creatures capable of adapting to a modern life that requires different skills and knowledge than just avoiding predators and getting enough food. Our biological imperative tells us we need to pee. Our more complex social evolution tells us we need to do it in an appropriate place.
--
Only barely related, and only because I was trying to figure out why some women insist on trying to disempower strong women in one way or another, I came up with an armchair analysis of why Joss Whedon isn't a feminist:
He and some of his fans have long argued he's a feminist just because he has a lot of female characters, many of whom who kick ass. That's certainly true. Problem is, that's not all that happens to those characters. More often than not, every one of his supposedly strong women is eventually rendered powerless in some way or another, from broken hearts right on up to murder. I don't think he's really attracted to strong women so much as afraid of them. He sets them up as strong and then does everything he can to tear them down so he feels safer and more in control of them. Chica can slaughter a roomful of mooks? Make sure she's small and damned close to naked every time she's on screen. Tough-talking chica who seems to have a gun permanently attached to her hand? Kill off the person she adores--and who adores her just the way she is. Throw in a few sexual assaults, a "secretly girly" side and/or an exploitative girl-on-girl makeout sesh or two for good measure. I think somewhere in his lizard brain, he thinks that as long as he controls the fate of these women, and has the freedom to torture and exploit them at will, they can't hurt him. And that? Is not feminist.
---
Flowers and jewelry are fine, but what's really romantic is knowing what the person you love likes, and doing that. If s/he really does want flowers and jewelry, then do that. If s/he'd rather have 3 weeks traipsing around the UK, then do that. ;) The trick is being observant enough to know what's really important and meaningful to the person in question, and not just guessing based on gender stereotypes or some vague set of vital statistics.
Romance, at it's core, is about the feeling one gets when it's clear that someone truly does like you and pays attention to you. You want romantic gestures to say not just "I Love You" (tm Hallmark) but "I know who you are, I like thinking about you and being with you, and I enjoy doing things that make you happy."
And from the other side: If you don't know what makes your beloved happy and thus go looking for generic advice on that? You're doing it wrong.
---
There is no such thing as "what women/men want." One may as well say there's such a thing as what Earthlings want. We are all products of our cultures and individual experiences, and even though cultural gender stereotypes (and deliberate training to fit them) do mold many of us in some way or another, we're all still individuals. If you're single and looking, and wondering what you should do to attract a mate, don't ever go reading gender-split advice. It's wretched and wrong. In short, don't try to attract "men" or "women." Just be yourself, do the things you love in a way that involves meeting other people, and you'll attract the people who are right for you.
Conversely, if you try to be something you're not, you're only going to attract people who want that other thing. Not people who want you. Granted that if you're an unusual sort (hi!) it can be hard to find people who are tuned to your particular frequency. And if you're lonely, there's a temptation to try to change yourself to be something that's going to cast a wider net. But truth is: Any relationships you get out of an attempt at that won't ever be satisfying, because you'll always have to keep polishing that mask to avoid your partner finding out that that's not the real you.
Oh, and women? This includes crazy beauty routines. If you have fun with clothes and makeup for their own sake, go for it. If you're tarting yourself up because you're afraid you're not attractive without it, the only people you're going to attract are the ones who will make you feel bad when you start aging. A perfect way to ensure that you're divorced by 45 is to marry someone who's primarily attracted to your perky ass when you're 22. If your mate has ever--ever!--used the phrase "let him/herself go" in reference to anyone? Leave. Now. Don't ever look back.
---
Ignore evolutionary psych and anything else that claims how humans do relationships is all or mostly about biology. Yes, for higher mammals, a female's base instinct is to attract a mate who will protect us and our offspring while we're vulnerable. But humans are way more than base instinct. We are highly evolved creatures capable of adapting to a modern life that requires different skills and knowledge than just avoiding predators and getting enough food. Our biological imperative tells us we need to pee. Our more complex social evolution tells us we need to do it in an appropriate place.
--
Only barely related, and only because I was trying to figure out why some women insist on trying to disempower strong women in one way or another, I came up with an armchair analysis of why Joss Whedon isn't a feminist:
He and some of his fans have long argued he's a feminist just because he has a lot of female characters, many of whom who kick ass. That's certainly true. Problem is, that's not all that happens to those characters. More often than not, every one of his supposedly strong women is eventually rendered powerless in some way or another, from broken hearts right on up to murder. I don't think he's really attracted to strong women so much as afraid of them. He sets them up as strong and then does everything he can to tear them down so he feels safer and more in control of them. Chica can slaughter a roomful of mooks? Make sure she's small and damned close to naked every time she's on screen. Tough-talking chica who seems to have a gun permanently attached to her hand? Kill off the person she adores--and who adores her just the way she is. Throw in a few sexual assaults, a "secretly girly" side and/or an exploitative girl-on-girl makeout sesh or two for good measure. I think somewhere in his lizard brain, he thinks that as long as he controls the fate of these women, and has the freedom to torture and exploit them at will, they can't hurt him. And that? Is not feminist.
no subject
I stumbled to your blog out of curiosity from a comment on an xkcd comic, and I want to give you a hive five for:
So awesome.