Jennifer asks: "Why is it that even though a woman is not happy with her life she doesn't do anything about it?"
Well Jennifer, since I'm not a woman, nor do I consider myself an expert on women, I don't know. That said, one thought that comes to mind is fear. First, one can have fear of the unknown. While a person might not be happy in their current situation, it may seem more comfortable because it's familiar, as opposed to doing something different, which is unfamiliar. Another reason may be that a person has doubts about them self, wondering if they have what it takes to make a change and get along in a new environment. Additionally, it takes effort to change. Despite a person talking about wanting to make a change, they may simply never put the effort into doing so.
So, what do you feel you need to change? What is holding you back?
Q & A
This is a place for questions and (hopefully) answers. First, I will attempt to answer your questions. I don't pretend to speak for all guys, because I'm not your average guy. Nonetheless perhaps I'll be able to give you some insight. To ask a question, simply click on the "Leave a comment" link directly below. In addition I'll probably ask some questions myself. So here it is, your opportunity to ask all those questions you have!
Leave a comment
Posted on 09/24/2008 at 02:09 AM
Posted on 10/19/2006 at 12:03 PM
Article: Get Married! (Sooner Rather than Later)
Do you think that we don't put that much work into choosing whom we marry? "The fact is, you've been created by God with a body that is ready for sexual activity a decade before most people get married." That is true, and certainly goes into creating many problems, including premarital sex, lust and other frustrations. Do you think we are passive in looking for a spouse as the author suggests? Do you think we ought to be more active, or is passivity the way to go?
Three ideas are put forth. First is that God intends most of us to get married. Do you agree or disagree? I would probably agree myself. The second statement is, "You'll never have a larger pool to draw from for a suitable, godly marriage partner than during your university years." Unfortunately, college is a time which has become notorious for students having a low point in following their standards. So I'm not sure that this would be true. I guess one thought is that after that time so many people are already married or in serious relationship that it narrows the "pool".
The author suggests a couple of more ideas. First, that due to sexual desire, people ought to marry younger. Generally, I would agree. However, I think our culture is such that we keep allowing people to "grow up" slower and slower. Therefore it is true that many people are probably not mature enough to get married as early as might be more ideal. So there is unfortunately not an easy solution here. Secondly the author suggests the sexual desire is a better reason to consider getting married than is the feeling of being "in love". In answering the question of "Should I get married at all or not?", then yes, I see the author's point. However, that doesn't seem to be the question most people are thinking of. The question is, who should I marry. That is a question I don't think sexual desire helps to answer. Depending at how you look at it, it either tells you nothing about who you should marry (only that you should marry), or it says to marry whoever you are sexually attracted to, which would be even a worse basis for marriage than being "in love". In the next section the author suggests that finding a person of character is better than waiting for the right feeling. What do you think?
Do you think that we don't put that much work into choosing whom we marry? "The fact is, you've been created by God with a body that is ready for sexual activity a decade before most people get married." That is true, and certainly goes into creating many problems, including premarital sex, lust and other frustrations. Do you think we are passive in looking for a spouse as the author suggests? Do you think we ought to be more active, or is passivity the way to go?
Three ideas are put forth. First is that God intends most of us to get married. Do you agree or disagree? I would probably agree myself. The second statement is, "You'll never have a larger pool to draw from for a suitable, godly marriage partner than during your university years." Unfortunately, college is a time which has become notorious for students having a low point in following their standards. So I'm not sure that this would be true. I guess one thought is that after that time so many people are already married or in serious relationship that it narrows the "pool".
The author suggests a couple of more ideas. First, that due to sexual desire, people ought to marry younger. Generally, I would agree. However, I think our culture is such that we keep allowing people to "grow up" slower and slower. Therefore it is true that many people are probably not mature enough to get married as early as might be more ideal. So there is unfortunately not an easy solution here. Secondly the author suggests the sexual desire is a better reason to consider getting married than is the feeling of being "in love". In answering the question of "Should I get married at all or not?", then yes, I see the author's point. However, that doesn't seem to be the question most people are thinking of. The question is, who should I marry. That is a question I don't think sexual desire helps to answer. Depending at how you look at it, it either tells you nothing about who you should marry (only that you should marry), or it says to marry whoever you are sexually attracted to, which would be even a worse basis for marriage than being "in love". In the next section the author suggests that finding a person of character is better than waiting for the right feeling. What do you think?
Posted on 10/16/2006 at 12:04 PM
Article: The Cost of Delaying Marriage
I've not thought of it as bad to get married early, and I'm not aware of many people taking that view. Do you think one way or another about this? Have you experienced people disapproving of people getting married in their early twenties?
Girls, do you feel a tension between wanting a relationship and wanting to be free, between having a family and having a career? What do you think about "the desire to be protected and provided for" that is mentioned in the article?
What about this subway analogy the author uses? I wonder if she would consider me "too odd" or in some other way unsatisfactory.
I admit that I feel like I identify with the paragraph on the "biological clock".
"Men will outlast her. Men, particularly successful men, will be attractive and virile into their 50s." Whew! Well, I might not be so successful, but it's good to know that I may have a chance. Lol.
"I suspect that few things are more off-putting to a man eating dinner than to notice that the woman across the table is looking at him more hungrily than at the food on her plate, and she is not hungry for his body but for his whole life." I don't know about that. I think it's just a matter of attraction, and can work both ways. If a guy really likes the girl, then I think he'd be excited. On the other hand, if the girl isn't that interested in the guy, she may be just as put off if the guy is that interested in her.
Do you feel like you have to pretend like you don't care much about what you really want? Do you feel like you have to play a game with guys to try to get them to do what you want?
"I often think that moderately attractive bachelors in their 30s now possess the sexual power that once belonged only to models and millionaires. They have their pick of companions..." Um, yeah, I don't see that happening... it hasn't been my experience at least, however much I might or might not want it to be. Heh.
What do you think about the extended adolescence that the author talks about as happening when a person remains single into their thirties?
"The 33-year-old single woman who decides she wants more from life than her career cannot so readily walk into marriage and children; by postponing them, all she has done is to push them ahead to a point in her life when she has less sexual power to attain them." Do you think it is significantly harder for a woman to get married at thirty than twenty? What do you think about the issue of "sexual power"? Do you think being a thirty something single woman is a bad as the author makes it out to be?
I guess one thing I like about the article is that it balances out some of the other article that fault guys for all of the single women in the world.
I've not thought of it as bad to get married early, and I'm not aware of many people taking that view. Do you think one way or another about this? Have you experienced people disapproving of people getting married in their early twenties?
Girls, do you feel a tension between wanting a relationship and wanting to be free, between having a family and having a career? What do you think about "the desire to be protected and provided for" that is mentioned in the article?
What about this subway analogy the author uses? I wonder if she would consider me "too odd" or in some other way unsatisfactory.
I admit that I feel like I identify with the paragraph on the "biological clock".
"Men will outlast her. Men, particularly successful men, will be attractive and virile into their 50s." Whew! Well, I might not be so successful, but it's good to know that I may have a chance. Lol.
"I suspect that few things are more off-putting to a man eating dinner than to notice that the woman across the table is looking at him more hungrily than at the food on her plate, and she is not hungry for his body but for his whole life." I don't know about that. I think it's just a matter of attraction, and can work both ways. If a guy really likes the girl, then I think he'd be excited. On the other hand, if the girl isn't that interested in the guy, she may be just as put off if the guy is that interested in her.
Do you feel like you have to pretend like you don't care much about what you really want? Do you feel like you have to play a game with guys to try to get them to do what you want?
"I often think that moderately attractive bachelors in their 30s now possess the sexual power that once belonged only to models and millionaires. They have their pick of companions..." Um, yeah, I don't see that happening... it hasn't been my experience at least, however much I might or might not want it to be. Heh.
What do you think about the extended adolescence that the author talks about as happening when a person remains single into their thirties?
"The 33-year-old single woman who decides she wants more from life than her career cannot so readily walk into marriage and children; by postponing them, all she has done is to push them ahead to a point in her life when she has less sexual power to attain them." Do you think it is significantly harder for a woman to get married at thirty than twenty? What do you think about the issue of "sexual power"? Do you think being a thirty something single woman is a bad as the author makes it out to be?
I guess one thing I like about the article is that it balances out some of the other article that fault guys for all of the single women in the world.
Posted on 10/10/2006 at 3:14 PM
Moving on...
Article: Marry Her? But What About that Girl over There?
Do you think marriage is over emphasized or under emphasized in our culture? What about in church? "This limbo [the time between getting out on your own and getting married] fosters sexual temptation, loneliness and confusion." What do you think about this? Is putting off marriage problematic?
Article: Marry Her? But What About that Girl over There?
Do you think marriage is over emphasized or under emphasized in our culture? What about in church? "This limbo [the time between getting out on your own and getting married] fosters sexual temptation, loneliness and confusion." What do you think about this? Is putting off marriage problematic?
Posted on 10/09/2006 at 11:51 AM
Article: The Moves (part 2 of 2)
The second part of this article starts off where the first one left off, and provides good transition to the next series of articles. I don't have a lot to add to this article. I agree with the idea that you shouldn't at least seriously date someone that you're not interested in marrying, which is perhaps a primary reason I haven't dated that much. "If you're dating a girl and she says she understands that you're not interested in marrying her, don't believe her." That's pretty funny, but I can understand it. Sometimes things happen and feelings change despite what you may intend. And to be fair, when girls say they don't know if a guy likes them or not, it's my theory that the guy is uncertain himself.
After this, the article transitions to talking about thinking about marriage, which is what the next group of of articles talks about more specifically.
The second part of this article starts off where the first one left off, and provides good transition to the next series of articles. I don't have a lot to add to this article. I agree with the idea that you shouldn't at least seriously date someone that you're not interested in marrying, which is perhaps a primary reason I haven't dated that much. "If you're dating a girl and she says she understands that you're not interested in marrying her, don't believe her." That's pretty funny, but I can understand it. Sometimes things happen and feelings change despite what you may intend. And to be fair, when girls say they don't know if a guy likes them or not, it's my theory that the guy is uncertain himself.
After this, the article transitions to talking about thinking about marriage, which is what the next group of of articles talks about more specifically.
Posted on 10/09/2006 at 11:47 AM
Article: Who's on First (part 1 of 2)
This article highlights the current problem of the vague definitions of relationships types and boundaries. The first question here is about the definition of a date. Is it a date only if the two people both consider it one, or is it always a date if two people of the opposite sex go and do something together?
"And then she said some other stuff, I don't remember what; you can't listen to everything a girl says or it would wear you out." That gave me a good laugh, probably because I can see some guys being like that. Kind of "sad but true" perhaps.
A second issue touched on here is that people may not want to call dates dates. In this story the girl says that they are just friends, even though it seems that she is thinking of them as dating. Whatever the reasons might be, I don't think it's good to be deceptive about how you feel. What do you think about the idea that girls don't want to say they're dating because of the fear of being pressured for sex or getting more physical than they want to?
After this the author talks about some reasons he believes guys don't want to call dates dates. The first one he mentions is that guys are afraid of commitment. This is of course an old complaint women seem to have. I have to say that I don't totally see this, or at least I see it somewhat differently. I think one reason I've seen for this is that it seems that often in a relationship the woman is ready to commit before the guy is. Another place this complaint comes up I think is when a girl likes a guy more than the guy likes the girl. She may complain that he is afraid to commit when in fact he just doesn't feel the same way she does. It's true that guys feel a certain kind of pressure in relationship area. It's like one friend put it, "I realized this was a really big decision and I didn't want to mess it up."
Personally I know that I tend to be pretty cautious. So I will be careful about proceeding too far until I feel more confident. I can also understand the fear of rejection thing. I know that I'll try to get a feel for a girl's amount of interest in me, and take that into consideration in making a decision about trying to get to know her better. So what do you think about all of this?
Overall the article is saying that the lack of definition in relationship causes trouble and confusion. Any other thoughts?
This article highlights the current problem of the vague definitions of relationships types and boundaries. The first question here is about the definition of a date. Is it a date only if the two people both consider it one, or is it always a date if two people of the opposite sex go and do something together?
"And then she said some other stuff, I don't remember what; you can't listen to everything a girl says or it would wear you out." That gave me a good laugh, probably because I can see some guys being like that. Kind of "sad but true" perhaps.
A second issue touched on here is that people may not want to call dates dates. In this story the girl says that they are just friends, even though it seems that she is thinking of them as dating. Whatever the reasons might be, I don't think it's good to be deceptive about how you feel. What do you think about the idea that girls don't want to say they're dating because of the fear of being pressured for sex or getting more physical than they want to?
After this the author talks about some reasons he believes guys don't want to call dates dates. The first one he mentions is that guys are afraid of commitment. This is of course an old complaint women seem to have. I have to say that I don't totally see this, or at least I see it somewhat differently. I think one reason I've seen for this is that it seems that often in a relationship the woman is ready to commit before the guy is. Another place this complaint comes up I think is when a girl likes a guy more than the guy likes the girl. She may complain that he is afraid to commit when in fact he just doesn't feel the same way she does. It's true that guys feel a certain kind of pressure in relationship area. It's like one friend put it, "I realized this was a really big decision and I didn't want to mess it up."
Personally I know that I tend to be pretty cautious. So I will be careful about proceeding too far until I feel more confident. I can also understand the fear of rejection thing. I know that I'll try to get a feel for a girl's amount of interest in me, and take that into consideration in making a decision about trying to get to know her better. So what do you think about all of this?
Overall the article is saying that the lack of definition in relationship causes trouble and confusion. Any other thoughts?
Posted on 10/06/2006 at 11:32 AM
Article: Pulling a Ruth, part 1
"We weren't dating and the relationship was platonic. But I was hopeful." This describes too well the situation that a person can get into. Sure, they acknowledge the fact that they are just friends with with the other person, but they're in the relationship hoping for more.
"Mary talked about why the times we live in make it so hard for marriages to form. 'The culture we live in is anti-marriage,' she said. 'So many of the customs and unwritten social rules that once helped bring young men and women together, now seem to pull them apart.'" I think there's truth in this.
Pullng a Ruth, part 2
It's frustrating that this article seems to place the fault all on guys.
Here's another article on the same topic: Office Hours: Coming Un-Clued
"We weren't dating and the relationship was platonic. But I was hopeful." This describes too well the situation that a person can get into. Sure, they acknowledge the fact that they are just friends with with the other person, but they're in the relationship hoping for more.
"Mary talked about why the times we live in make it so hard for marriages to form. 'The culture we live in is anti-marriage,' she said. 'So many of the customs and unwritten social rules that once helped bring young men and women together, now seem to pull them apart.'" I think there's truth in this.
Pullng a Ruth, part 2
It's frustrating that this article seems to place the fault all on guys.
Here's another article on the same topic: Office Hours: Coming Un-Clued
Posted on 10/05/2006 at 2:33 PM
Article: Not Your Buddy
This is a case of two people looking at the same relationship differently, with different interests and intentions. While the roles that men and women are cast in in this article may be true more often than not, they can work either way. The guy interviewed has a point, if a person wants to see something there, they probably will. However I think a person has a responsibility to not mislead another person, or lead them on. That is a bit of a cloudy area, because different people obviously have different ideas about what actions are leading to what end.
A friend of the guy states that you'd have to give up female friends altogether in order to not lead them on. While that is perhaps overstating the situation, perhaps guys and girls shouldn't get to be good friends if there isn't the intention of the relationship developing further. What do you think? When I first heard this idea, it seemed quite distasteful to me. However I'm just now beginning to consider that it may actually be wise. I've been on both sides of this; I've been the person who has wanted more, and the person who's become a good friend without having any intentions of more. I never thought about things this way in the past. I've always thought that if it isn't stated that more is happening, and if the other person doesn't indicate they want to become more than friends, then there isn't any problem. But now I'll be more aware and more careful.
The author of the article makes a good point when she describes how she can have meaningful friendships with guys who make it clear they are only interested in being friends, and don't act like they want more when they don't. That seems to be one of the main points of the article: don't give mixed signals!
This is a case of two people looking at the same relationship differently, with different interests and intentions. While the roles that men and women are cast in in this article may be true more often than not, they can work either way. The guy interviewed has a point, if a person wants to see something there, they probably will. However I think a person has a responsibility to not mislead another person, or lead them on. That is a bit of a cloudy area, because different people obviously have different ideas about what actions are leading to what end.
A friend of the guy states that you'd have to give up female friends altogether in order to not lead them on. While that is perhaps overstating the situation, perhaps guys and girls shouldn't get to be good friends if there isn't the intention of the relationship developing further. What do you think? When I first heard this idea, it seemed quite distasteful to me. However I'm just now beginning to consider that it may actually be wise. I've been on both sides of this; I've been the person who has wanted more, and the person who's become a good friend without having any intentions of more. I never thought about things this way in the past. I've always thought that if it isn't stated that more is happening, and if the other person doesn't indicate they want to become more than friends, then there isn't any problem. But now I'll be more aware and more careful.
The author of the article makes a good point when she describes how she can have meaningful friendships with guys who make it clear they are only interested in being friends, and don't act like they want more when they don't. That seems to be one of the main points of the article: don't give mixed signals!
Posted on 10/05/2006 at 2:28 PM
Some of you are aware from things I've posted that I've had a bunch of questions about relationships, and I've been trying to figure things out in that area. Well, not long ago I ran across some articles online that deal with this subject, but take a different angle on it than anything I remember being exposed to in the past. The thing is the articles are coming from a conservative type website. Because of that, when I first read them, I didn't expect to really agree or like what they were saying too much. As I was going over what I thought about them, I realized that I was mainly unsure how their ideas could be worked out, but I wasn't actually in arguing with the ideas themselves. So I'm thinking more about what they say, and considering their ideas. I decided I wanted to share them here, because I'm interested in getting feedback and having dialog with other people.
So I'm planning on posting a link to one of the articles periodically along with my reactions and questions. I realize because of the source, some people will probably write this off altogether. I also realize this tends to be a sensitive issue for people, one which is taken personally. I expect some people will strongly disagree, and that's fine. I welcome your comments, but remember, don't take things personally and play nice. Thanks!
I've grouped the articles into a few different categories. The first one has to do with defining dating, and how different people may see the same relationship differently.
So I'm planning on posting a link to one of the articles periodically along with my reactions and questions. I realize because of the source, some people will probably write this off altogether. I also realize this tends to be a sensitive issue for people, one which is taken personally. I expect some people will strongly disagree, and that's fine. I welcome your comments, but remember, don't take things personally and play nice. Thanks!
I've grouped the articles into a few different categories. The first one has to do with defining dating, and how different people may see the same relationship differently.