Dating and Verbalization

I have received a request to write on a topic. I’m always willing to entertain ideas for discussion on this blog, and if I believe I have time and anything of value to write concerning the issue, I’ll put something up. So, if any of my readers have something they’d like to be addressed, feel free to drop me a line or leave a comment.

I was asked by smoothreentry:

I am interested in articles that discuss women acting one way, and freaking out if the obvious is verbalized. If you have written on the subject, or read a good article on it, I would appreciate being pointing in the right direction.

But I am talking about the phenomenon of women acting one way, and being okay with it as long as the elephant in the room isn’t verbalized. This characteristic is causing me much grief as I continue to date.

First, I would direct you to Rollo’s two pieces, Female Dating Advice and Just Get It. Essentially, what both argue is that women want you to know how to approach dating and relationships, to “just get it”, without having to be told. By being told what she desires, you kill the “naturalness” of the relationship.

Having read that, we can continue.

The modern woman (at least until she’s hit the wall and is desperate) does not choose a mate for such practical reasons as reliability, provision, protection, fatherhood potential, etc. She has a surrogate husband, the state, to take care of all those things for her.

Instead, what she is looking for is “chemistry.” By chemistry, she means she is sexually and emotionally excited by you. But the modern woman can’t call “chemistry” by its real name, sexual attraction, because sexual attraction is what shallow guys who are only after immature, big-titted sluts rather than mature, ‘real women’ feel. She’s not shallow, she’s looking for “chemistry”, which is much deeper than looking for some young, perky slut.*

That little mind game aside, she wants to feel chemistry; she desires you to sexually and emotionally excite her. To be sexually and emotionally excited, your romance has to feel “natural” to her. Deliberate romance feels “artificial”, and artificial love can’t be “true love”. If you have to work at it or verbalize, it kills the “chemistry”. You need to “just get it”.

Essentially, the modern women wants spontaneity, to be “swept off her feet”. She wants it to “just happen.” As soon as you start verbalizing things, then it is no longer just happening, it is planned; it has become artificial. Verbalized romance is no longer “true love” (under this warped definition of love) because it is no longer “natural”.

As per one of the original examples from smoothreentry, by calling a date, “a date”, you are robbing the date of all sponteneity. It has become planned and no longer feels natural.

I’m going to guess the same with the example of sleeping over at her house. The times you slept over at her place, it probably “just happened”. It felt natural. When you assumed you were sleeping over, you killed the spontaneity of the sleeping over at her house. It became planned, and was no longer romantic. She didn’t feel excited about it.

****

“Chemistry” is not the only possible reason, there’s also the issue of dating scripts. Back before contraception and feminism destroyed modern relationships, there were accepted dating scripts for society. While the details might differ between people, there was a general, socially accepted way of doing things. You’d go on a date: dinner, a movie, a walk in the park. You’d kiss on the third date, then you’d start going steady a date or two after. After dating for a year or two, you’d ask her hand in marriage, then get married, have kids, etc. Physical intimacy would escalate in conjunction with both emotional intimacy and commitment. Before this script other, more patriarchal, scripts existed, but there was usually a script of some sort.

There is no longer any generally accepted dating script, or societally accepted ways of doing things. Commitment, emotional intimacy, and physical intimacy have all be completely delinked. Depending on the individual, sex might occur on the first date, the third date, without a date at all, in a relationship, or not until marriage. Dating has been replaced by hook-ups, at least for some people at some times. Marriage has been replaced with common-law relationships, at least for some people. FWB has both physical intimacy and (maybe) emotional intimacy, but no commitment. The increased acceptance of close inter-sexual friendships creates emotional intimacy without physical intimacy or commitment. There is no accepted script; just chaos.

Everybody, including you and the girls acting weird, are all making it up as they go along. When do we first have sex? When do we get engaged (if we do)? When is a date a date? Are we friends, friends with benefits, or dating? At what point is sleeping over ok? How many dates until we are dating? Does going on a date imply anything? What does “it’s complicated” mean?

Who the hell knows?

I don’t, you don’t, and neither do the girls you are with. Dating has devolved from its earlier purpose of spousal selection and preparation for marriage into who the hell knows what.

Even apart the larger issues, there’s the more practical issues. Is holding a door open chivalry, good manners, or sexism? Is chivalry appreciated or insulting? Is this drunken sex going to be a good time or rape? Who pays for the meal? Is a kiss appropriate on the first date? Is sex?

Who the hell knows? It all depends on who you ask.

And nobody knows how to handle it; few people know what they are doing. The only two groups that really know what they are doing are the players/sluts who are just looking to score and the extreme traditionalists who are still following an even older script. The vast majority of people don’t really have a goal or a path to get there. They vaguely want a relationship (of some kind), vaguely want sex (in some manner), and maybe want to get married (at some point, for some reason) but don’t know the when, what, or how. Everybody is trying to navigate chaos without a map.

The girls you are with are trying to do this as well. Is that time with that guy really a date or are they just friends? Is getting together for coffee really a date? Does going on a date imply we are dating? Does going on a lot of dates imply I’m easy? Does him assuming he’s sleeping over mean we’ve advanced to a higher level of commitment? Am I ready for that? Is this a lead up to moving in together? Am I being taken advantage of?

She doesn’t know because she does not have a social script of what normal, appropriate relationship behaviour is. Just like you don’t know what’s up with her because you do not have a script.

****

Another reason could be a form of cognitive dissonance. There is who she thinks she is and what she thinks she’s doing, and how it interacts with what she is actually doing, which may not be the same. So she engages in cognitive dissonance.

For example, only desperate and/or slutty women go on lots of dates. I’m neither desperate nor a slut. I go on lots of dates.

Obviously, at least one of these statements must be logically false, but there’s a problem: she can’t stop going on dates because she wants a man (probably desperately, even if she won’t admit it to herself), her “self-esteem” would be ruined if she thought she was either a slut or desperate, and she still wants to be able to judge Jenny, that desperate slut at the office, so they all have to be true.

The easiest, most psychologically appealing way to get around this contradiction between logic and emotion is to simply change the definition of “a date”.

I go out with men a lot, but I’m not a desperate slut (like Jenny), so it’s only a date if we know each other. Therefore, I’m not going on lots of dates, therefore, I’m not a slut and I’m not desperate.

Or it could be: I’m a nice person. Rejecting men you have dated is not nice. I’ve rejected many men I’ve dated. Therefore, they weren’t dates, we were just friends. no one was rejected.

This kind of cognitive dissonance could also works its way in as a cover for straightforward manipulation.

She’s simply embarrassed. She thinks going on a lot of dates makes her look slutty, desperate, easy, etc. to you, so she tries to manipulate you/herself into not thinking she’s been on a lot of dates by simply maintaining that she has not been. This works often enough, because most men find it too much of a bother to call women on this kind of silliness.

Or she wants a free meal/drink without feeling guilty about taking advantage of guys, so she’s not going on dates, she’s going out with “friends”.

If this is unconscious on her part, it’s cognitive dissonance and/or self-delusion, if it’s conscious on her part, she’s lying, a hypocrite, and/or engaging in self-justification.

****

As for smoothreentry’s other example:

Calling an obese women “fat”, or a women that sleeps with many men a “slut”, are more extreme examples.

That is something else. A modern woman does not like being judged, she does not like being held to standards. By calling a fat woman fat or a slut a slut, you are holding that woman to a standard and judging her by it. If you are holding another women to a standard, that implies you are also holding her to that standard, and *horror* you are judging her by that standard.

By thinking you might be judging her, you might cause her to feel shame or guilt about things she may be doing that are shameful. She doesn’t want to feel shame, therefore, you can’t judge her, therefore, you can’t judge other women either. Therefore, being judgmental is wrong, it says so in the Bible. Therefore calling a fat person fat or a slut a slut is wrong.

Read my post Fat Acceptance for some more of my thoughts on this.

****

The actionable take-away (oh, corpo-babble, how you have ruined my writing):

If you are simply looking to fuck random sluts and have short-term relationships, do not verbalize things. Act. Let things “just happen”. This does not mean you don’t have a plan; you need to plan, you need to run game, but don’t let her see it, make it seem natural. Let her see the finished sausage, but not the killing floor.

As well, do not fight her hamsterizations, she’ll just get angry and block you on FB. Ignore them without buying into them like a dupe.

On the other hand, if you are looking for a wife, don’t date a modern woman. Find a nice traditional gal who’s hamster is mostly in check and who’s more rational in her expectations for a relationship.

If you’re looking for an LTR or a girlfriend. Just don’t; it’s stupid. If you want sex, get sex through an STR, FWB, or ONS. If you want companionship, get a male friend or a dog. If you want a family and life-partner, get a wife. Getting a girlfriend is the worst of all three worlds while minimizing the benefits of any of them.

****

* As an aside, note the feminine imperative at work here. “Chemistry”, ie: that which sexually excites a woman, is something promoted as being important and is a perfectly acceptable reason on which to accept or reject a relationship. “Looks”, ie: that which sexually excites a man, is shallow and derided and any man who accepts or rejects a relationship because of looks is a shallow jerk. Society is trying to normalize female sexual attraction while marginalizing male sexual attraction.

Advertisements

38 responses to “Dating and Verbalization

  • adiaforon

    It’s all very confusing, to say the least. My brain reels.

    I have something else to add. Some women have called me “patronizing” or “condescending” when I tried to explain something in a logical way, or described something that, I suppose implicitly, showed that I knew more about and had thought more about the subject than they did. In short, I made them feel stupid and/or inadequate, and so came out the shaming language. When they first started telling me this, I thought, for sure, that I had done something wrong. Now, I just laugh at them.

    Also, finding a quality male friend can be its own challenge. Your choices can be quite constrained. Where to find a guy who isn’t emotionally crippled by the women in his life, or who’s socially retarded himself and who does the same kinds of things that the “modern” women does, like flaking on meeting up?

  • zhai2nan2

    >If you have to work at it or verbalize, it kills the “chemistry”. You need to “just get it”.

    >Essentially, the modern women wants spontaneity, to be “swept off her feet”. She wants it to “just happen.” As soon as you start verbalizing things, then it is no longer just happening, it is planned; it has become artificial.

    Women want you to give them whatever they want BEFORE they consciously realize that they want it.

  • Tim

    I think that that is the best summary of the situation that I have read.

  • smoothreentry

    Reblogged this on Smooth ReEntry and commented:
    The Free Northerner is the biggest intellectual badass on the block. He is fucking Morpheus as far as I am concerned. I lost count of the “aha moments” contained in this article. My eyes are slowly opening….You have the same choice. You can take the blue pill, and continue to be a pawn in the same giant game of charades you have played for your entire life. Or you can read this article….

  • smoothreentry

    I am officially blown away. I will have to read this many times before I absorb it all. And like all good readings, new questions arise with every answer. The most notable being: why is girlfriend the worst of all three worlds?

    Again, this post is beyond amazing. I want to fire my therapist now for being a dingbat / waste of money.

    Thank you Free Northerner!

    Les laisser être à mon frère…

  • deti

    Smooth:

    “why is girlfriend the worst of all three worlds?”

    Didn’t used to be, but it is now.

    I think the answer is simply because of all the ambiguity that accompanies the titles “girlfriend” and “boyfriend”. The terms imply exclusivity, but you’re not really married or even committed to each other because the “relationship” lasts only as long as you both agree and has only the characteristics you both decide it has. The relationship’s duration and contours can change at any time, without notice, and unilaterally. He usually agrees to “exclusivity” to get sex, but she isn’t obligated to have sex with him. By the same token, he isn’t required to be exclusive. But if he’s less than alpha, he can forget about sex if he starts pressing the relationship’s boundaries. If they are Christian, sex isn’t biblically sanctioned anyway so they have to abide that external pressure. It’s limiting also because being a “boyfriend” and having a “girlfriend” requires him to make the mandatory investment of time and money, with no real “teeth” to the deal — he can’t expect reciprocation for his time and money. She might be a fine sex partner but that doesn’t necessarily mean she is the best companion.

  • When is a Date a Date? | Smooth ReEntry

    […] (4/13/2013): Click here to see the ultimate response to this post, courtesy of Free […]

  • smoothreentry

    @deti: Doesn’t seem bad to me. Because you have the right to bail at any time, she doesn’t have a true monopoly. Therefore, the sex should remain good.

    I just signed a paramour clause anyway. So my next marriage will probably come sooner than I want. What a mess. (Paramour clause is an incentive to rush marriage. Stupid Ex an attny).

  • smoothreentry

    My head is swimming because of this article. My M.O. is I like to drink and analyze/philosophize about everything in life. But by philosophizing about life, I ruin the impression that I “just get it”. This is quite the Catch 22, because that is a feature I want in a mate.

    Regarding sex, my Ex frequently said “I ruin it” by talking about it. This completely fits will everything else Free Northerner and Rollo say.

    Surely there is a woman on the planet that appreciates my inquisitive mind.

    Also, surely there is a woman who appreciates the fact that when it comes to making MAN decisions, I can make them without hesitation. However little shit, like where to go eat, I like to discuss….

  • adiaforon

    @smoothreentry

    In my view, women have a point when they say that talking about sex “ruins it.” Indeed, if sex is largely about being “swept up in the moment,” generally speaking, then analyzing it will kill the mood. After all, you’re hot for each other, blood rushes to the respective body parts, you breath faster, heart rate goes up . . . in-and-out . . . orgasm . . . It’s all animalistic at its core. You do it, then you rest and have a cigarette. 🙂

    But, given how things are today, you can’t help but talk about it. As someone who spent his teenage years in the 80s, the age of AIDS, you were talking about sex most of the time, because you didn’t know if one act of intercourse would be fatal. Yeah, it kills the mood, but what were you going to do back then? On a less lethal note, there’s also the fear of pregnancy.

  • Emma the Emo

    Sure there are women who can talk about sex and not get very turned off. But I think you have to look in another country, not USA. I have read this behavior (wanting the sex to just happen in just the right way) is an american feature.

  • smoothreentry

    @Emma: and I think it is the worst down here in the Bible Belt. They women put their pussies on a pedestal and want harps to play angels to sing every time they spread their legs.

    That is ridiculous expectation for a woman in her 40s! Ain’t nobody got time for that!

  • Chin Up, Chest High!

    Emma. I’m male and have just read through the entire article. I’m British and I cannot relate to any of this. Perhaps it is an American thing and the USA needs to take a long hard look at how it views sex, dating, relationships etc.

    On the chemistry thing, I think that is an incredibly cynical view of it. For me, chemistry is about the intellectual match. I want a woman who will talk to me, tell me about what amazing things she has done with her life as well as listening to me. Do I want a home bunny who will only tell me how amazing I am every time I open my mouth, and will point out every few minutes how much she can’t wait to bring up our children and bake me cakes?
    NO
    FUCKING
    WAY
    Give me a woman who will tell me when I’m wrong (and tell me why I’m wrong), will support me when I’m right, pick me up when I’m down, make me laugh and will fight for us every step of the way. I want a woman who will blow my mind – will amaze me with her passion, her intelligence, her sense of humour.

    I’m just sorry for them men who require only a woman who will massage their ego and clean up after them – they are missing out on so much.

  • nightskyradio

    I plan too much, I think.

    However, I don’t believe it matters, since plans rarely survive contact with action, so I just end up winging it anyway.

    “The actionable take-away (oh, corpo-babble, how you have ruined my writing)”

    I disagree. I think it has synergized the core competencies of your writingness and introduced elements of a shifted paradigm which brings agreeance to your operative statements.

  • zhai2nan2

    >Give me a woman who will tell me when I’m wrong (and tell me why I’m wrong), will support me when I’m right, pick me up when I’m down, make me laugh and will fight for us every step of the way.

    Such women are remarkably easy to find, romance, and retain, of course.

    The manosphere is full of men who talk about how very rational their women are, and how women can use evidence and logic to tell men when the men are wrong.

    > Do I want a home bunny who will only tell me how amazing I am every time I open my mouth, and will point out every few minutes how much she can’t wait to bring up our children and bake me cakes?

    Don’t worry about those. The ones who act like that usually drop the act as soon as the first child is born.

  • sunshinemary

    There is no longer any generally accepted dating script, or societally accepted ways of doing things.

    That must be really stressful for those who are trying to navigate the SMP/MMP. As a parent, it worries me a little because I don’t exactly know how to advise my daughters, other than the obvious stuff that I will tell them when they are little older, like “Don’t sleep around”. But I’m not sure what I will tell them about finding husbands.

  • Chin Up, Chest High!

    Your entire argument (from the article and your comments) is based on a one-size-fits-all mentality – you assume that all women are the same and all men are the same? That is a completely untenable position. People are individuals – we all want different things in the end

  • zhai2nan2

    >you assume that all women are the same and all men are the same?

    No, I don’t make that assumption.

    Next time, you can try using the auxiliary verb “do” with your questions, as in, “Do you assume that all women are the same?”

  • smoothreentry

    @nightskyradio re your comment: “I disagree. I think it has synergized the core competencies of your writingness and introduced elements of a shifted paradigm which brings agreeance to your operative statements.”

    Excellent. Scott Adams would be proud. 😉

  • Chin Up, Chest High!

    No, I don’t make that assumption.

    It certainly seems like it! However, you chose to initiate a pissing contest – and I’m not interested in childish games no matter how “alpha” it might make you feel. I don’t comment to massage anybody’s ego so let’s have a civil and intelligent discussion about this? What do you say?

  • Free Northerner

    @ adia: It is confusing, and I’ve been told I can seem arrogant when using logic as well. Just don’t worry about it. As for finding male friends; take a hobby you enjoy and find others who enjoy the same hobby. If you don’t have a hobby, get one.

    @ smooth: thanks for the praise. Glad you liked it. As for the girlfriend thing; that’s a bit long for a comment; when I ahve the time, I’ll put a post up on it.

    @ chin up: I’m an incredibly cynical person, so this blog will often sound cynical. It shouldn’t be too hard to find a woman willing to constantly criticize you, but that’s not something I’m looking for.

    Also, I did make the distinction between a “modern” woman and traditional women. You do realize that any analysis must, of course, make certain generalizations. Otherwise, it becomes impossible to analyze at it gets bogged down in detail.

    @ zhai: However cynical I might be, you always seem to outdo me.

    @ nightsky: That made me laugh.

    @ SSM: That is a problem. You could try becoming actively involved and pairing them off young with the children of parents you know who raised them right or with older, godly, more established men you know.

  • Tia

    “First, I would direct you to Rollo’s two pieces, Female Dating Advice and Just Get It. Essentially, what both argue is that women want you to know how to approach dating and relationships, to “just get it”, without having to be told. By being told what she desires, you kill the “naturalness” of the relationship.

    That little mind game aside, she wants to feel chemistry; she desires you to sexually and emotionally excite her. To be sexually and emotionally excited, your romance has to feel “natural” to her. Deliberate romance feels “artificial”, and artificial love can’t be “true love”. If you have to work at it or verbalize, it kills the “chemistry”. You need to “just get it”.”

    – Women are damned if we do, damned if we don’t.

    When I was younger I thought a relationship would enfold smoothly and me and my partner would just “get” each other like you sometimes read, hear, or see about.

    I certainly never anticipated the communications problems I faced when I had my first relationship.

    So then I wised up and “got” that men supposedly want women to articulate clearly and concisely rather than expect them to be mind readers who “just get” what she means.

    OK fine. I started articulating clearly and concisely only to find out that is supposedly some sort of “turn off”.

    I’m at my wits end. What gives?

  • Free Northerner

    I’d need more specific information to give much true help, but I can give a some generalizations .

    Men like things articulated clearly and rationally. The key is rationally, do not get (negatively) emotional about it. Do not take offence at anything. Do not get angry; no crying, no sulking, etc. As soon as things get emotional, a man will get turn-offed. (Positive emotions like girlish excitement, happiness, barely concealed lust, etc. are okay, and will often work in your favour).

    Just say what it is and the logical benefits for it.

    Second, no nagging. There is no turn-off greater than nagging. Never ask for something more than once a day, never ask for something more than twice a week, never ask for something more than 4 times a month. What you may see as helpful reminders, he sees as nagging. Also, do not ask when he is busy. If he is watching the game, wait until commercials. If he is reading, wait until he puts the book down. If working on something, wait until he’s done. If he is playing video games, wait until he finishes the game. Etc, etc. Asking him while he’s busy (no matter at what; video games and napping count as busy) is nagging. Ask him once when he is not busy and treat him like an adult; do not act like his mother. Do not nag.

    Third, do not demand something, ask. Men hate demands and hate being told what to do, especially by a woman. Ask for something.

    Fourth, tone is important. Do not have a negative tone. Do not be snippy, do not be bitchy, do not be motherly, do not be naggy, do not be whiny, do not be demeaning, do not threaten, do not be negative, don’t be defensive, don’t be argumentative, and don’t question his manhood, integrity, honour, or any such thing.

    Be positive. Have a pleasant demeanor, be flirty, smile, boost his ego, talk about the benefits, etc. Flatter him; most men don’t get complimented by woman that much, so a bit of flattery from a pretty girl goes way further than you would think.

    Hope that helps.

  • yousowould

    I’d consider one of the main reasons to be plausible deniability, which you touched on with the “it just happened” excuse that women’s hamsters love so much.

    The date is going well, you both know where it is leading, but as soon as you spell it out, she is confronted by the act of sluttery she’s about to wantonly engage in, and her ASD is activated. Appearing to be a slut is one of the main things that a (normal) woman tries to avoid.

  • Tia

    “The date is going well, you both know where it is leading”

    Or someone assumes they know where its going. Just because a date goes where there appears to be chemistry doesn’t mean she necessarily wants to hop into bed with you, on that day, or ever.

    It may have nothing at all to do with so called “slut defense”.

    FreeNortherner, Thanks. Your comment doesn’t really apply to my situation. There’s a few factors;

    1. Basically when we discuss our wants and needs sexually he barely puts in the effort to meet those needs. No matter how specific I spell it out.

    2. The man I’m with is not very rationale. He thinks because he can argue psuedo-science that he is of scientific mind.

    3. He’s always trying to one up me and I don’t get. Tell him I’m a vegetarian? He has to one better and say he’s a vegan. Tell him I just went vegan? He has to one better and say he’s raw living foods now. I recently ate only raw living foods for a week? He’s now living solely on wheat grass juice. LOL!

    That’s fine, if he were all those things, but he’s lying. Its so bizarre.

    I never nag or over emote. Nagging is for people who care about inconsequential small sh*t like socks on the floor or something. I couldn’t care less if socks are left on the floor for 6 months. I know when he needs them, he’ll pick them up and wash them. Really I don’t even notice stuff like that.

    Over emoting? Its drama. I like peace, calm and to be left alone most of the time.

    Our best times together are when we are just laying at the beach in total silence soaking up the sun and sounds of the waves, or when we are both bundled up in blankets on cozy chairs reading books on a rainy day. Or hiking through a forest and taking in nature.
    I don’t nag.
    Don’t do drama.
    Don’t talk too much.

    But as certain things do need to be communicated in a relationship, I do so in a calm, clear, nag and drama-free manner.

    I thought I was dealing with a guy who was compatible to me in nature, temperment and intellect but I’m slowly finding out that might not be the case.

  • yousowould

    I wasn’t replying to you Tia, so I’m not sure why you felt the need to reply to me.

    What I stated is completely true in the context of interpreting the opening italicised paragraph in terms of a couple being on a date, where all the indicators are that you’re into one another, kissing etc, and then the man verbalises the “let’s head back to mine and shag” part.

  • Tia

    “What I stated is completely true in the context of interpreting the opening italicised paragraph in terms of a couple being on a date, where all the indicators are that you’re into one another, kissing etc, and then the man verbalises the “let’s head back to mine and shag” part.”

    And I’m saying this is complete nonsense. What makes you think that just because someone appears into you (and very well may be) and is kissing you, that they will want to have sex with you on that night?

    Explain to me the bridge between kissing and then having sex on the same day.

    How is it that you make the connection – logically?

  • Tia

    Smooth Reentry and everyone else wrt talking about sex. Its very important. Lovemaking is a skill set and like everything else there is a learning curve. But as it is highly personal and subjective, there’s a learning curve for every new sexual partner.

    What usually happens is a couple makes love and while somewhat satisfying, nothing to write home about because they don’t know each others bodies, preferred techniques and erotic temperments yet.

    That’s when the talking and exploring starts.

    I can’t imagine anyone being “turned off” by communicating sexual needs and desires.

  • O Brave New World! | Sunshine Mary

    […] Northerner wrote a post last week entitled Dating and Verbalization which gave me a slight anxiety attack, not because I will ever be dating again but because I […]

  • O Brave New World! |Viva La Manosphere

    […] Northerner wrote a post last week entitled Dating and Verbalization which gave me a slight anxiety attack, not because I will ever be dating again but because I […]

  • deti

    Tia:

    Your problem is that you have little respect for your man. You say he’s not rational. Essentially you’re saying he’s not very smart. You say he tries to one-up you. You find this exceedingly irritating.

    Why are you even with this man? You don’t seem to like him very much.

  • Tia

    He’s not extremely smart. Average intelligence. So what? I respect everyone because I was raised right by my parents who taught me to honor all life. Has nothing to do with their smarts. I find most people to be merely of average intelligence because most are. Does that mean we cannot respect them. Nonsense.

    What I find odd about his one upping is that none of it is true. He lied when he said he was raw vegan and again when he said he was only on juices. He’s insecure and I’m going to find out why.

    I do like him. My friends or family have never had to be as smart as me in order for me to like or love them.

    There are other characteristics that make people interesting and attractive besides big brain.

  • Free Northerner

    @ yousowould: That is a distinct possibility.

    @Tia:The man you just described to me sounds like a irrational, pathological liar with little emotional investment in your relationship. If your description is accurate, communication is not the problem; he is the problem, because you just described an asshole and a jerk.

  • Tia

    He’s not an asshole but might be a jerk. 😉

    He’s very nice, personable, kind to people, family oriented, etc.

    But I think he must be incredibly insecure if he feels the need to one up his girlfriend on her vegetarian eating habits.

  • Thoughts on Avoiding LTRs | Free Northerner

    […] the end of my recent post, Dating and Verbalization, I left this little […]

  • The Tao of Badass

    Do you mind if I quote a few of your articles as long as I
    provide credit and sources back to your site?

    My blog is in the exact same niche as yours and my users would really benefit from a lot of the
    information you present here. Please let me know
    if this ok with you. Regards!

  • Free Northerner

    Go ahead. You can quote whatever you want as long as it links back.

  • Smooth’s Rules Put to Test | Smooth ReEntry

    […] been discussed around here lately, women like men who “just get it”, and don’t verbalize unattractive truths, no matter how obvious they are. So bringing up the subject of sex in any capacity is risky early […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: