![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
I wandered around the ballroom, feeling sleepy and bored, waiting for my crew chief to give me a job to do but not really wanting him to come up with anything because I was too sleepy to really be in the mood for work that day. A few yards away, several of my coworkers, including those in my own department, were also not doing anything. Instead, they were standing in a circle, having an animated conversation. I saw John, Phil, and Jim, and a few others who looked like they were peripherally aware of the conversation, but not actively a part of it.
As I got closer John said "Here, let's get a female perspective & ask Joreth."
"Because we're all the same person and have exactly the same perspective. Go ahead, what's the question?"
"No," John said, "I know you're not all the same person, but you're more like them than like a man."
"You obviously don't know me very well," I said.
"Well, ok, whatever, do you like roller coasters?" John said.
"Yes, I love roller coasters, why?" I said.
"Because I have this girl I want to take out on a date and I wondered if Busch Gardens was a good date place?" John said.
Phil jumped in with "I say yes, because they've done studies, and when girls get afraid, they get aroused, and they like to hug on you and be all protected and stuff."
"Yep," I said. "That works GREAT ... for those it works great for. It's a TERRIBLE idea for those girls it doesn't work for. Problem is, you don't know which one she is until you do. I have a novel idea, why don't you ask her if she likes theme parks?"
"Because girls never tell you what they like, they always say 'oh, I like whatever you like' and they want you to take charge and be in control," Phil said.
"Have we met?" I asked. "I don't know a single girl like that. I'm sure they exist, but my point is, again, that we're not all the same person and you have to treat a woman how SHE wants to be treated, and you don't know what that is until you ASK her."
From there, ensued a discussion that involved rising voices and everyone talking over each other, as each of the guys tried to insist that there was a One Right Way to treat women that all involved being "a gentleman", and I tried to explain that being a "gentleman" actually defeated the purpose if the intended recipient didn't actually like that particular behaviour.
"But men are supposed to hold open doors for women and stuff, that's how I was raised and it's a cultural thing." John said.
"I HATE it when men hold open doors for women only and not men. It is most definitely NOT polite, it's insulting and obnoxious. I actually had a guy run from down the street, tripping someone else, in his effort to beat me to the door so he could hold it open for me, but he was on the wrong side, so I would have had to walk under his arm, and he was blocking the people trying to come OUT through those doors. That's stupid and it is no longer a nice gesture when you inconvenience everyone else around you just because you're 'supposed to' do something," I said.
"Well, then I'll know from now on to treat you like a dude," John said, offering me a fist-bump.
"How about you treat me like a human being?" I asked.
"No," insisted Phil, "you're supposed to do these things. Like, when I'm walking down the street, I'll put the lady on the inside, to protect her from cars and stuff."
"I absolutely, fricking HATE that," I said.
"No, it's nice!" Phil said. "Like when you walk with a 5 year old, you put the child to the inside to protect him."
Blink blink.
"You seriously don't see anything wrong with treating an adult woman like a child?" I asked.
"No." Phil said. "It's to show her that I care about her that I want to protect her."
"You put the child to the inside because the child doesn't know any better not to run out into traffic. Putting the woman on the inside & comparing it to the child is implying that she also doesn't know any better and needs you to keep her from running into traffic. You can't see how this is insulting?" I demanded.
"If I let a woman walk on the outside, a Latin dude would think I'm offering her up as a hooker. But if I walk on the outside, the Latin dude will approve and know that I'm protecting her," Phil tried to explain (He's Puerto Rican).
"I don't give a fuck what some random Latin dude thinks, the person you should be concerned about is the woman you are insulting," I said.
This is why I'm bitchy. I'm sick of being treated like a child for the guy's approval rating in the eyes of other guys.
Why the fuck is this concept so difficult to grasp? Is it really so complicated to understand that a gesture of politeness or concern should be based on what the RECIPIENT wants, and not what makes the GIVER feel better, and that the way to find out what the recipient might like is to fucking ASK them what they might like? Don't answer that, I already know the answer and it's too depressing.
"If I ask my girl what she wants, she'll just say she doesn't know," John said, trying to bring the conversation back to the original topic.
"Well then it's her own fucking fault if she doesn't get what she wants, isn't it?" I said.
"Forget it," John said, "I'm not asking you about girls anymore, I'm going back to what the guys say".
So, apparently, the trick to figuring out the "opposite sex", is to poll all your friends of the incorrect gender, ask one random person of the same gender to be representative of that entire gender, and then throw out all the answers that don't confirm your original presumption.
I've had enough chauvenistic sexism for one day.
As I got closer John said "Here, let's get a female perspective & ask Joreth."
"Because we're all the same person and have exactly the same perspective. Go ahead, what's the question?"
"No," John said, "I know you're not all the same person, but you're more like them than like a man."
"You obviously don't know me very well," I said.
"Well, ok, whatever, do you like roller coasters?" John said.
"Yes, I love roller coasters, why?" I said.
"Because I have this girl I want to take out on a date and I wondered if Busch Gardens was a good date place?" John said.
Phil jumped in with "I say yes, because they've done studies, and when girls get afraid, they get aroused, and they like to hug on you and be all protected and stuff."
"Yep," I said. "That works GREAT ... for those it works great for. It's a TERRIBLE idea for those girls it doesn't work for. Problem is, you don't know which one she is until you do. I have a novel idea, why don't you ask her if she likes theme parks?"
"Because girls never tell you what they like, they always say 'oh, I like whatever you like' and they want you to take charge and be in control," Phil said.
"Have we met?" I asked. "I don't know a single girl like that. I'm sure they exist, but my point is, again, that we're not all the same person and you have to treat a woman how SHE wants to be treated, and you don't know what that is until you ASK her."
From there, ensued a discussion that involved rising voices and everyone talking over each other, as each of the guys tried to insist that there was a One Right Way to treat women that all involved being "a gentleman", and I tried to explain that being a "gentleman" actually defeated the purpose if the intended recipient didn't actually like that particular behaviour.
"But men are supposed to hold open doors for women and stuff, that's how I was raised and it's a cultural thing." John said.
"I HATE it when men hold open doors for women only and not men. It is most definitely NOT polite, it's insulting and obnoxious. I actually had a guy run from down the street, tripping someone else, in his effort to beat me to the door so he could hold it open for me, but he was on the wrong side, so I would have had to walk under his arm, and he was blocking the people trying to come OUT through those doors. That's stupid and it is no longer a nice gesture when you inconvenience everyone else around you just because you're 'supposed to' do something," I said.
"Well, then I'll know from now on to treat you like a dude," John said, offering me a fist-bump.
"How about you treat me like a human being?" I asked.
"No," insisted Phil, "you're supposed to do these things. Like, when I'm walking down the street, I'll put the lady on the inside, to protect her from cars and stuff."
"I absolutely, fricking HATE that," I said.
"No, it's nice!" Phil said. "Like when you walk with a 5 year old, you put the child to the inside to protect him."
Blink blink.
"You seriously don't see anything wrong with treating an adult woman like a child?" I asked.
"No." Phil said. "It's to show her that I care about her that I want to protect her."
"You put the child to the inside because the child doesn't know any better not to run out into traffic. Putting the woman on the inside & comparing it to the child is implying that she also doesn't know any better and needs you to keep her from running into traffic. You can't see how this is insulting?" I demanded.
"If I let a woman walk on the outside, a Latin dude would think I'm offering her up as a hooker. But if I walk on the outside, the Latin dude will approve and know that I'm protecting her," Phil tried to explain (He's Puerto Rican).
"I don't give a fuck what some random Latin dude thinks, the person you should be concerned about is the woman you are insulting," I said.
This is why I'm bitchy. I'm sick of being treated like a child for the guy's approval rating in the eyes of other guys.
Why the fuck is this concept so difficult to grasp? Is it really so complicated to understand that a gesture of politeness or concern should be based on what the RECIPIENT wants, and not what makes the GIVER feel better, and that the way to find out what the recipient might like is to fucking ASK them what they might like? Don't answer that, I already know the answer and it's too depressing.
"If I ask my girl what she wants, she'll just say she doesn't know," John said, trying to bring the conversation back to the original topic.
"Well then it's her own fucking fault if she doesn't get what she wants, isn't it?" I said.
"Forget it," John said, "I'm not asking you about girls anymore, I'm going back to what the guys say".
So, apparently, the trick to figuring out the "opposite sex", is to poll all your friends of the incorrect gender, ask one random person of the same gender to be representative of that entire gender, and then throw out all the answers that don't confirm your original presumption.
I've had enough chauvenistic sexism for one day.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 4/4/11 03:08 am (UTC)From:This doesn't apply anymore, of course. But it does somewhat taint the gesture. And the issue of being splashed by passing cars only applies under certain weather conditions. So, most of the time it's totally irrelevant.
Roller coasters would, however, create a heightened sense of arousal, and this would be likely to lead to a misattribution of emotion to cause both people to feel more attracted to each other than they would otherwise. This can be seen as beneficial, in the sense that it increases the likelihood of things continuing. Or it can be seen as a drawback, in that it increases the likelihood of two people who don't actually have much compatibility tricking themselves into thinking that they appeal to each other and trying to make things work when they'd both be better off spending their time on someone else. If they really are compatible, they will likely figure it out in a more mundane setting anyway.
It will also backfire with people like me who will simply refuse to go on the roller coaster and will find very little to do at most amusement parks. I would have much preferred to have been asked first, but then, I've only ever dated people I've been friends with for a while first, so they tend to know me and know what I like already. And when they aren't sure, they tend to already know how to talk to me to get more information.
Oh, on a side note, the studies have nothing to do with "being all protected". And it works equally well with males. In fact, the study I was thinking of, the famous one, was done by making men afraid (or in the control group not doing so) and showing that it increased their attraction to a reasonably attractive female. It's called the Shaky Bridge Study and it's an adorable experimental design. But there have been countless followup studies and variations and so forth on the basic ideas.
no subject
Date: 4/5/11 03:36 am (UTC)From:Although, the reason this guy (and others) gave regarding "protecting the wimmenfolk" didn't have to do with splashing from cars, it had to do with being hit by a car. My point is that if a car ran off the road and onto the sidewalk, there's little that a guy walking on the street-side can accomplish, and the comparison to the child only reinforces my position that it's an infantilizing gesture.
I had read that study, and it was interesting, but I didn't have the details stored in accessible memory to address that specific point. So thank you for reminding me of the details.
As you pointed out, this method of courting would backfire if used on you, which was my point that the method works great on those it works great on but not so good on those it doesn't work on. So, yes, that's it exactly!
It also doesn't work on me, since 1) I'm much more self-aware and often can tell which factors are contributing to which mood, and 2) roller coasters don't have the same effect on me because I get more aggressive with thrill-seeking activity, not more sexually aroused. I'm more likely to want to pick a fight than have sex.
Although, with a partner I have already established these parameters with, that's not necessarily an either/or option!
no subject
Date: 4/5/11 04:30 am (UTC)From:This would be in-line with a followup study where they gave people a placebo and either told them it would give them a host of random side effects (I forget what weird things they invented, maybe things like dry mouth) or side effects that mimic physical affects of anger/frustration (sweating, increased heart rate, etc.). Then they ad them in a waiting room with someone deliberately being annoying and measured how they responded. People told to expect physical symptoms of arousal acted less annoyed - presumably because they chalked up their real annoyance to the drug they had been given, so they didn't blame the person they were with.
Misattribution is a tricky thing. It can easily backfire. Plus, it's just not generally a good plan for you attempt to woo someone to be based on making them deceive themselves.
no subject
Date: 4/5/11 04:39 am (UTC)From:Definitely agreed! There is so much about "normal" dating that I just don't get. I don't understand dating people you don't like, I don't understand "tricking" people into liking or dating you, I don't understand making your partners read your mind & then getting pissed when they can't, and I don't understand holding your lover hostage (i.e. if you cheat on me, I'll slash your tires). It's these kinds of things that I don't understand that have caused many people with Asperger's Syndrome to think that I have it too (I don't quite fulfill enough items on the AS checklist to qualify, apparently). They all seem so ... inefficient & self-defeating. I have too many other interesting things to do, to be spending time with people I don't like, forcing them to spend time with me.