Thank you, I appreciate you taking the time to reply. I know I write rather dense walls of text, and it really does take time out of your day to go through it all. And you're rather active in other threads too, so I know you're investing quite a bit of time into these discussions. I'll chunk this post to not make such an assault on everyone's scroll wheels.
If I can offer unsolicited advice, (to everyone, not necessarily you in particular)
never tell any man he's like a brother to you, unless he's your brother-in-law. "You're like a brother" has been programmed into us as a giant red flag, a blaring klaxon to warn us. Perhaps you your intention in saying "you're like a brother" is supposed to convey "you are very close to me", but from the male perspective it is issuing a challenge. What they hear is "sex with you is as forbidden as incest. Not happening." Saying they're like a brother is emasculating, it's saying they are not seen as sexual beings, lacking in sexual capacity and agency. As much as what you said about telling them you will not date them makes them try harder, telling them they are very close to you does too. They see it as "close, but no cigar." They want to disprove that your assessment is correct.
Of course, that's all on them. That's their beliefs and attitudes, and it's not your fault what they think. It is not your responsibility to correct their attitudes or educate them. But you are directly affected by their behaviors as a result.
You've detailed a few situations that certainly sucked for you, and I'm sorry for that. Having a story to match up with a point of view is certainly helpful to me. I don't want this conversation to be argumentative or contrarian, so let me reiterate I'm not trying to find faults or break down the logic of your explanations. I'm only opening a dialogue to share viewpoints. That having been said:
I realize the scenario I laid out in my previous post is unrealistic. People just don't do that. No one actually says such things. There's pros and cons to any approach, and evidently the social and interpersonal blowback from taking such a stark and hard-nosed approach is too much to consider it a reasonable option.
I don't know if there is any way to be sensitive to a man's feelings when it comes to the domain of his sexual desires. To the best of my knowledge, it's entirely dependent on whether he has a healthy attitude towards interpersonal relationships and handling rejection. At that point, it's not about him as man, it's him as an individual.
I agree with your assessment that women "really can't win". It is a lose-lose situation. I think a lot of it, mostly all of it, comes down to a few assumptions and cultural norms:
1) That men are expected to be sexually active, married or not, from adolescence onwards
2) That men who fail to be sexually active are deemed to be failures, losers, low-status, etc., because they are incapable of attracting a suitable partner. (It's essentially a social status barometer.)
3) That men are expected to be the initiators in relationships of a sexual nature
4) That being attracted to someone is indicative that they could or should act upon it and pursue their desire
5) That any woman who is not in an exclusive relationship with a man is "available"
I would expect most of us here to take exception to those. It goes without saying that those five points above can be woven into any argument for feminism.
As for "These expectations are not placed on male/ male friendships," I'm assuming you are not referring to homosexual relationships. The male/male relationships you're talking about do not require it because they aren't sexual in nature. You could say that female/male relationships are not or should not be sexual in nature either, and I see that, but that's making assumptions about the individuals having independently arrived at a consensus. Some people won't see eye to eye. Some men will enter female/male relationships carrying the attitudes in those 5 points.
Now, I can imagine a scenario in which gay men are together as a group of friends, and no one explicitly states who they will and will not date. Someone misinterprets signals, makes a move, and then the other guy who isn't interested rejects his advances. Is that much different than having to say who you won't date in a mixed female/male group? I suppose that's a bit far off-topic, and as a hetero male I can't really presume, so I digress.
If I can, I'd just want to put forward a male's perspective when he makes a move on his female friend.
For guys, there's a lot of expectations, some of them listed above. Women have got theirs too, for our purposes it's not necessary to compare and decide who has it worse. It's been said many times before, patriarchy hurts men too, just not as much as women.
So this guy, who just happened to be born male in a society dominated by the patriarchal system we all know and love, buys into and believes the mainstream views on sex and relationships, because that's what the majority says it is.
Consciously or unconsciously, he wants sexual satisfaction, he wants acceptance, he wants safety. Human desires, really, there's nothing special going on there. He decides that he wants to be in a relationship with a woman, he wants to raise a family with a wife. He wants his own family, not adopting, not marrying into and taking on step-children, but his own children, just as his father & grandfathers had their own children with their spouses. So far, nothing unreasonable. And yet, neither is it guaranteed or entitled to him.
He wants to treat women right. Some women tell him that they know instantly whether they are attracted to a man, and this must be present when they met in order for her to ever consider him as a sexual partner. In this case, it's in the man's interest to make his intentions of a sexual relationship clear and obvious immediately, by means of flirting, talking up, hitting on, and making physical contact (light flirty touching) with this woman right away. She will either accept his advances, or reject him. He gets his answer on whether she was attracted to him.
Some other women tell him that they do not ever feel attraction to a man instantly, but instead they become attracted to men over a period of time. He must earn their trust by demonstrating good behavior, respecting them and others, possess an agreeable personality, and generally be a good, compatible match. In this case, it's in the man's interest to not approach her with flirting and making his intentions clear at the outset, because she does not currently have those feelings toward him, but under the right conditions, could potentially reciprocate those feelings in the future.
So this is the man's lose-lose dilemma.
He can flirt with women he just met, and maybe it'll result in getting her number and an eventual date. Or they could reject him and call him a creep for making unwanted advances on strangers he doesn't even know. Many women detest men for this.
For a woman, it lowers the quality of her life to have to constantly reject unwarranted solicitations. For a man, it may lower the quality of his life if he takes rejection hard, but when a man learns to cope, making it water off his back, it simply fails to improve the quality of his life.
For the sake of this discussion, let's set aside the casual harassment women endure on public transit, and such. For now.
Going back to how a man initially approaches women, he alternatively does not flirt with them upon meeting them. Either, he's (1) the much-discussed "nice guy" who intentionally disguises his sexual desire for her with friendly behavior as genuine interest, expecting to arrive at an end point as having meet a set of criteria. Or (2) he is too shy/incompetent/oblivious to make a move, and does harbor those desires, but is incapable through his own limitations or decides not to act upon them. Later, he works through his anxiety and does make his desires known, in an extremely awkward fashion. She may either reciprocate, having developed those feelings for him, or she must reject him.
Then there is the case (3) when he did not intentionally enter the relationship with her with the intention of having a sexual relationship. He really is just friends with her, and is not trying to obtain sex. Then, either (a) he becomes attracted to her slowly, over a period of time, much as that type of woman becomes attracted to men described above. Or (b) some event in his life triggers him to reconsider what his friendship with his female friend is. It could have been a breakup, or being rejected by someone else, or maybe he was just dissatisfied with not having a significant other and decides to gamble on traveling the path of least resistance, so to speak. (Resistance in this case being effort into finding a suitable, compatible mate.)
When it comes to pursuing women, some men think they have to either be all up-front about it, which can possibly result in harassing women on the street at its worst. Or, mask it entirely so that they don't reject him immediately, which can possibly result in him becoming "friend-zoned", in his own assessment.
Just to be clear, it's obvious to me that this is nowhere near the scale of inequity that a woman faces in her lose-lose scenario. For men, it's about obtaining the opportunity to copulate, for women, it's about being selective and having a choice over who they do (and more importantly who they do not) copulate with. So now, we've arrived at the root biological divide.
So, what then is the correct behavior for a man looking for a woman to date, to possibly become a spouse, to possibly raise a family? There's some obvious ones we can toss right out, like a woman not being in an exclusive relationship makes her available. We can toss out that a man is ever owed or entitled to anything, and so on. Beyond that, he is to be respectful, have a good personality, share common interests, but he must also communicate to her that he intends to pursue her romantically. And it can't be all stilted and unnatural like the text I'm typing, it's got to be something that flows naturally in the course of conversation.
Now, as much as I am a budding psychologist, I ought to stop here before breaching the topic of how much of this correlates with sex-based biological impulses, and how much of this is by choice and free will. I imagine you'll agree and we can just shelve that as a discussion too time-consuming to have.
So that's ultimately what this is all about for me, I'm trying to refine and clarify my feminist perspective on the appropriate way to treat woman I'm interested in pursuing romantically. What a twist, I've been incredibly selfish this entire time! :V
No, seriously, if you've read this far, thanks. If I keep posting in this thread, I'll keep it under... oh, five hundred words next time.
tl;dr: Yeesh, what am I, a novelist? Uhh... if you really need a tl;dr, you can just skip this. Really.
I appreciate well thought out posts and do not mind length. It isn't length, it is content!
I would have thought telling them " I will never date you" would be worse than telling them that you care for them and see that they are a perfectly healthy sexual being, and that it is that you just do not view your relationship with them in a sexual way. Which is what you would consider a family member. You don't look at your siblings as "not capable of sex with someone else" you just look at them as " not someone you want to have sex with."
When you say " I will never date you" of course they would question " why?!!" and want answers. When the answer is " you consider them like family" you are essentially going back to the whole " brother" issue anyways. Why make it multiple steps when it is easier just to explain that in the first place?
Actually, people do say such things, and much worse. Such as "get lost loser" well that does make it pretty clear that nothing is going to happen. Yes, that comes across as something very harsh to say to a guy, but in certain situations nothing short of that is going to make them back off when they are of the sort that walks up to every girl they see and says "can I have a party in your mouth?" and some how think this is going to lead to somewhere. Of course the next guy who walks up after that guy is going to get unwarranted wrath, even if he is most respectful because the girl is already going to be aggitated from the guy before, and then he is going to think the girl to be some really hateful person, when the truth is they are still pissed about the obnoxious asshole that just came up 5 minutes before he did.
I do agree that men have it hard when it comes to relationships and expectations of themselves, from other men and from women. I grew up with guys, I watched them go through absolute hell and do not envy them a bit when it comes to their expected roles. This is also why I tried not to be one of " those heartless bitches" but seems like there is no avoiding it in the end because when you try to make them understand that you care about them, it just seems to make things worse as well. I try to be understanding, that does make it more difficult, and then ultimately find myself distancing myself, because honestly, if they have feelings towards me, me hanging around them isn't going to help them, they sure as hell aren't going to find someone who will return their affection if they are hanging out with me hoping things will change.
I actually tried to work around that aspect by setting them up with people who I thought would be a good match for them, although I would never want to be set up by anyone, that actually worked surprising well. Two of my friends I set up got married to the person I set them up with and are still married to this day. I didn't go out of my way to " find someone" for every guy who hit on me, instead it was I just recognized similar personalities in friends and made sure they met and lured everyone else in the area away so they would be alone. One of my friends I did this to, I came back after 10 minutes and they were already macking down. I figured that was more helpful than them continuing to pursue me.LOL!
I honestly don't see how the mechanics really can change all that much due to how varying personalities are, both men and women. We can say " patriarchy is responsible for this.." but then when you look at matriarchal societies such as Hopi, the men still are the primary ones to "ask first" and it was left up to the women to decide whether or not she wanted to be with them. It still put a great deal of pressure on the guys, and leaves them open to receiving the majority of rejection.
I have never been rejected, every guy I ever wanted to have a relationship with I did, and although I have consoled many male friends who have, and try to be as compassionate as I can be, I have never been forced to experience that first hand. I have never even had a guy break up with me, I don't know what that feels like. I have seen the impact these things have had on my friends, and it is a very difficult thing for them to endure, but then I also feel they resent me, and shift blame to me for "representing" something they feel has hurt them since I have never had to deal with it myself.
Ultimately it is a bad situation for all involved when one party has affection for someone and it isn't returned, but I do not see a real way to resolve that. I also understand guys can't win here when that happens as well, it really is hell on them. On the bright side however, at least they don't have to fight to the death as other species do when it comes to women. Not sure if that is a " beneficial thing to say" but it could be a bright side? Maybe? LOL
EDIT: Also I have many walls of text, but I haven't researched how to make those nifty hide boxes as you do.
Honestly, I think this is just some girl looking to present herself as big herself up online by using a fairly selective memory. The guys probably weren't as into her as she remembers; and she probably wasn't as considerate to their feelings as she remembers. That's usually how these things go. For all the arguments and debating over 'entitlement' the definition of words yada yada that people have on here; I can't actually remember the last time I met anyone in R.L. who was genuinely resentful that someone they fancied denied them a relationship. Most people I've known (m or f) who've complained have complained about how their crush gossiped about it to others for self-aggrandizement; how they now realise that that person was knowingly manipulating their feelings to get favours and is now playing innocent; how their crush had dealt with the issue in a patronising or demeaning way. Now maybe I'm wrong, but I think it's much more likely that most of these guys cut all ties with this girl because they felt she'd done one of these things. If she'd given them space for a while after, and then shown interest in staying friends without holding their former crush on her over their heads, most probably would have returned as friends. Of course, there will always be exceptions.
Ya know, is it really worth discussing such topics beyond saying: "Do unto others as you would have done to yourself"? That's really the fairest thing anyone can do when rejecting another person. Anything beyond that requires mind reading and anything below that is a bit shitty.
Honestly, I think this is just some girl looking to present herself as big herself up online by using a fairly selective memory. The guys probably weren't as into her as she remembers; and she probably wasn't as considerate to their feelings as she remembers. That's usually how these things go. For all the arguments and debating over 'entitlement' the definition of words yada yada that people have on here; I can't actually remember the last time I met anyone in R.L. who was genuinely resentful that someone they fancied denied them a relationship. Most people I've known (m or f) who've complained have complained about how their crush gossiped about it to others for self-aggrandizement; how they now realise that that person was knowingly manipulating their feelings to get favours and is now playing innocent; how their crush had dealt with the issue in a patronising or demeaning way. Now maybe I'm wrong, but I think it's much more likely that most of these guys cut all ties with this girl because they felt she'd done one of these things. If she'd given them space for a while after, and then shown interest in staying friends without holding their former crush on her over their heads, most probably would have returned as friends. Of course, there will always be exceptions.
Ya know, is it really worth discussing such topics beyond saying: "Do unto others as you would have done to yourself"? That's really the fairest thing anyone can do when rejecting another person. Anything beyond that requires mind reading and anything below that is a bit shitty.
When you say " do unto others as you would have done to yourself" though that is where you run into issues. For example, I cannot imagine that I would be offended in the least if a guy were to say " I love you like my sister, so I can't think about you any other way", and take that as genuine caring for me as a family member, however, when you tell a guy that he is " like your brother" they seem to find this as insulting. What I think would be a good way to approach me, is not the same as they might feel is a good way to approach them, and I think that is why more discussion on this matter should take place to help bring about a better understanding on the subject.
In regards to how a guy responds to rejection, it really depends on the guy, as I have seen quite a few strange reactions in my time as well, and they span the entire spectrum of reactions and do not see how her side of this really is that far off.
Honestly, I think this is just some girl looking to present herself as big herself up online by using a fairly selective memory. The guys probably weren't as into her as she remembers; and she probably wasn't as considerate to their feelings as she remembers. That's usually how these things go. For all the arguments and debating over 'entitlement' the definition of words yada yada that people have on here; I can't actually remember the last time I met anyone in R.L. who was genuinely resentful that someone they fancied denied them a relationship. Most people I've known (m or f) who've complained have complained about how their crush gossiped about it to others for self-aggrandizement; how they now realise that that person was knowingly manipulating their feelings to get favours and is now playing innocent; how their crush had dealt with the issue in a patronising or demeaning way. Now maybe I'm wrong, but I think it's much more likely that most of these guys cut all ties with this girl because they felt she'd done one of these things. If she'd given them space for a while after, and then shown interest in staying friends without holding their former crush on her over their heads, most probably would have returned as friends. Of course, there will always be exceptions.
Ya know, is it really worth discussing such topics beyond saying: "Do unto others as you would have done to yourself"? That's really the fairest thing anyone can do when rejecting another person. Anything beyond that requires mind reading and anything below that is a bit shitty.
When you say " do unto others as you would have done to yourself" though that is where you run into issues. For example, I cannot imagine that I would be offended in the least if a guy were to say " I love you like my sister, so I can't think about you any other way", and take that as genuine caring for me as a family member, however, when you tell a guy that he is " like your brother" they seem to find this as insulting. What I think would be a good way to approach me, is not the same as they might feel is a good way to approach them, and I think that is why more discussion on this matter should take place to help bring about a better understanding on the subject.
In regards to how a guy responds to rejection, it really depends on the guy, as I have seen quite a few strange reactions in my time as well, and they span the entire spectrum of reactions and do not see how her side of this really is that far off.
I see what you mean. I agree, the choice of words isn't insulting. To be honest the focus of my point is on actions rather than choice of words. If someone's been accepting lots of personal support, favors and other things typically falling under the umbrella of boy/ girlfriend territory without returning many of them; most people I know would assume that statement just means "I've been using you, but I'm still lying about it so you'll either keep letting me take advantage; or let me walk away without feeling guilty". Obviously going out of your way for a friend of you're preferred gender doesn't entitle you to a relationship; but the general consensus amongst most my friends is that if you accept a lot of favors without offering to reciprocate them, you're a selfish user.
I think that's really what most people get angry about: Their crush's actions not meeting up with what they say. Same applies to a friendship.
I might be being a overly cynical about this girl, but my past experiences have shown me that most people cut lose of an unrequited crush because they believe that person is a manipulative friend, rather than because they just didn't get exactly what they want. There are exceptions, but I don't think enough to explain what she's implying. I also kept this post gender neutral because I've heard it from both sides, so I don't think this sort of thing is a guy problem at all, I think its just an individual problem.
Honestly, I think this is just some girl looking to present herself as big herself up online by using a fairly selective memory. The guys probably weren't as into her as she remembers; and she probably wasn't as considerate to their feelings as she remembers. That's usually how these things go. For all the arguments and debating over 'entitlement' the definition of words yada yada that people have on here; I can't actually remember the last time I met anyone in R.L. who was genuinely resentful that someone they fancied denied them a relationship. Most people I've known (m or f) who've complained have complained about how their crush gossiped about it to others for self-aggrandizement; how they now realise that that person was knowingly manipulating their feelings to get favours and is now playing innocent; how their crush had dealt with the issue in a patronising or demeaning way. Now maybe I'm wrong, but I think it's much more likely that most of these guys cut all ties with this girl because they felt she'd done one of these things. If she'd given them space for a while after, and then shown interest in staying friends without holding their former crush on her over their heads, most probably would have returned as friends. Of course, there will always be exceptions.
Ya know, is it really worth discussing such topics beyond saying: "Do unto others as you would have done to yourself"? That's really the fairest thing anyone can do when rejecting another person. Anything beyond that requires mind reading and anything below that is a bit shitty.
When you say " do unto others as you would have done to yourself" though that is where you run into issues. For example, I cannot imagine that I would be offended in the least if a guy were to say " I love you like my sister, so I can't think about you any other way", and take that as genuine caring for me as a family member, however, when you tell a guy that he is " like your brother" they seem to find this as insulting. What I think would be a good way to approach me, is not the same as they might feel is a good way to approach them, and I think that is why more discussion on this matter should take place to help bring about a better understanding on the subject.
In regards to how a guy responds to rejection, it really depends on the guy, as I have seen quite a few strange reactions in my time as well, and they span the entire spectrum of reactions and do not see how her side of this really is that far off.
I see what you mean. I agree, the choice of words isn't insulting. To be honest the focus of my point is on actions rather than choice of words. If someone's been accepting lots of personal support, favors and other things typically falling under the umbrella of boy/ girlfriend territory without returning many of them; most people I know would assume that statement just means "I've been using you, but I'm still lying about it so you'll either keep letting me take advantage; or let me walk away without feeling guilty". Obviously going out of your way for a friend of you're preferred gender doesn't entitle you to a relationship; but the general consensus amongst most my friends is that if you accept a lot of favors without offering to reciprocate them, you're a selfish user.
I think that's really what most people get angry about: Their crush's actions not meeting up with what they say. Same applies to a friendship.
I might be being a overly cynical about this girl, but my past experiences have shown me that most people cut lose of an unrequited crush because they believe that person is a manipulative friend, rather than because they just didn't get exactly what they want. There are exceptions, but I don't think enough to explain what she's implying. I also kept this post gender neutral because I've heard it from both sides, so I don't think this sort of thing is a guy problem at all, I think its just an individual problem.
If a guy were to be bringing me presents in the first place would be a HUGE red flag. Now there is a big difference between picking up an extra coffee or a t-shirt from a concert or what not as you would do for another regardless of gender or interest and say Jewelry/flowers/heart shaped boxes of chocolates or something that is generally seen as a romantic gesture... yea If it is not something that you would normally do for ANY friend, than it should be discussed the moment it happens, or at the very least shortly there after once you had time to think about it and find the appropriate words to discuss this. Now in the case of " secret admirers" which I have had to deal with, you cannot really discuss these things if you have no idea who it is doing it, so I would not fault the girl for not discussing those of course, and that is all on the guy.
I do think however, that gifts and such are not really the problem here moreso than just the unspoken feelings and building up of resentment. The whole " how can she not know I like her?" when it wasn't told or expressed properly over and extended period of time, and then when it was communicated they often feel as if the other party is responsible for their own feelings, and for not recognizing them for what they were.
But I get the feeling (from reading a few hundred words of text on an internet forum, so I know I'm onto something) that you have never explicitly stated with no uncertainty or room for doubt who you will and will not date among your close friends. There might have been assumptions about the boundaries of your friendship. If your expectation is that absolutely zero of your guy friends will ever ask you out, you have nothing to lose by telling each of them, to their face, that you are not available for dating. If you expect that some of them will ask you out, and you don't want them to, why shouldn't you communicate it explicitly? Why leave it open to interpretation? Why leave yourself open to unwelcome solicitation if you are certain you will take no one up on their offers?
Do you think your friendships would suffer by setting such strict boundaries? Do you think you'd lose something? Would you suffer from lowered esteem among your peers for asserting yourself? And if you lost a guy friend because you were so clear, so unambiguous, and so direct about it, would it have been alright to instead just let the friendship to continue without correcting his thoughts and feelings toward you?
Dude, seriously? Maybe she doesn't want to do that because pre-emptively rejecting people would make her seem completely stuck up. Have you never heard the vitriol directed at women who "think they're so hot"? I don't know about you but if I made a friend with someone who felt the need to explain to me that they had no intention of dating me, I would be offended that they assumed dating them had even crossed my mind, and think they were pretty arrogant. I think any friendship would suffer from that.
I do think however, that gifts and such are not really the problem here more so than just the unspoken feelings and building up of resentment. The whole " how can she not know I like her?" when it wasn't told or expressed properly over and extended period of time, and then when it was communicated they often feel as if the other party is responsible for their own feelings, and for not recognizing them for what they were.[/quote]
I agree it's unreasonable to expect someone to know another person has feelings for them based on subtle hints. Like I said, that's a little too close to mind reading. And we're drifting away from the original point you rose with me: Choosing your actions towards someone based on what you'd have done to yourself. I'm saying (admittedly kind of pointlessly, given it's some strangers blog) that my experience has taught me it's more likely her friends cut all ties with her because they felt she'd been a selfish or manipulative friend rather than because they didn't get exactly what they hoped for. The fact that she didn't make any attempt to look at the situation from her old friends point of view is a potential clue to me. Really the only point I've made that I hoped someone might take away was aiming for is: A willingness to put yourself in the shoes of you friends is pretty important if you want it to survive the rough patches. If you're focusing on your own moral superiority over your friend after they've taken a bit of a blow, you can't be too surprised if they walk away from you.
Unless you've got a very pressing point, I'd rather not go too much further into this. Not to sound aloof, but I don't often have the time to come on here very frequently, so this could go on for weeks otherwise.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
