I just read this article and wanted to vomit. Instead, I’m going to bitch about it here.
The article is one of those ones that panders to women and offers the magical key to finding the love of your life. Ha.
This particular one is all about dispelling so called “love myths” or “bit of blarney” as they are calling them for some weird reason.
(Note: I just looked up ‘Blarney’ in the dictionary. It’s a real word, meaning talk that aims to charm, flatter or persuade. How ironic.)
The first, “It’s impossible to fall in love at first sight”, states this:
“Men can fall in love instantaneously when they lay eyes on someone attractive because they’re so visual,” says Dr. Helen Fisher, a noted anthropologist at Rutgers University and author of Why We Love. Women, on the other hand, are biologically programmed to “fall” differently: since women aren’t as visual, they’re slower to feel smitten. “Women at least have to talk to the person!” Dr. Fisher says.
Uh huh. I like how this dresses up lust and gives it a pretty name. Oh men really are romantics at heart! He can fall in love with you straight away! It’s you with your withered heart and need to actually TALKTOHIMOMG that’s blocking the way forward to happiness!
This is bullshit. Number one, women are the ones “biologically programmed” to be more visual. Way back when to the hunter gatherer times, women had to be able to spot detail in order to find and gather food. For survival. In the modern world, most things to do with aesthetic and the visual are catering to women: clothes, shoes, interior and exterior decorating, plastic surgery, magazines.
Attraction doesn’t mean love. Being ‘smitten’ at first sight does not mean love! This first point may paint a romantic picture, but think about it. By this logic, the way to scoop the man of your dreams is to look pretty and keep your mouth closed.
Now the second. “Men should always pay for the first date.”
The article starts off by saying this isn’t true because if the women asks the man, she’s the one who should pay. Fair enough, I guess, BUT THEN:
She says that dividing the check is a bad way to begin a new relationship, because it sends a message that neither one of you is investing in the bond.
Number one, that is not logical. Neither of you are investing in the bond? Actually, you both are!
Number two, the symbolic resonance actually means very little. If you’re out with friends and split the bill, does that make you any less invested in the relationship? If you’re with your brothers or sisters, your mum or dad, any freaking person alive? No! It means you’re being fair to the other person, and to yourself. You’re sharing something, your showing a mutual respect for the others independence and for your own. No person has any kind of power over the other, there is no implication of debt or owing anything.
This is backward logic and I’m not entirely sure why they felt the need to mention it, especially in the form of a ‘rule’.
Number three, “Single women rearrange their schedule to see a guy they like.”
The article says that men are more likely to change their day to day life for a women.
So, if a man is interested in a woman, he might actually be the one waiting by the phone or obsessively checking his email so that he can redo his schedule to see his sweetie.
Isn’t this supposed to be about single people? In that case, wouldn’t that be classified as stalking?
And even if it isn’t, this is pandering in it’s most pure form. Yes, he might be the one spending his days moping about wanting to see his “sweetie” (vomit) but just because it’s possible, does that mean it’s probable?
And this point doesn’t actually ‘dispel the myth’ about single women moving heaven and earth to catch a fish (metaphor mixing like a boss), all it does is make the said single women who would be so lacking in self respect to do so, not feel quite so pathetic.
Don’t feel bad, he does it too! Yeah, not likely.
The fourth point confuses me. The ‘myth’ being dispelled is “If a guy doesn’t immediately show interest, he doesn’t really like you.”
But the following paragraph goes on to say,
If a guy likes you and doesn’t want to mess things up, he’s more likely to move slowly. “Some of the worst dating disasters I’ve heard of involve men who dazzle with their insistence that you’re The One right after they meet you,” says Dalma Heyn, therapist and author of Drama Kings: The Men Who Drive Strong Women Crazy. “You feel flattered and thrilled, get intimate, and then he’s gone! He only wanted to woo you, not win you.”
This kind of contradicts their very first “Blarney”. Men fall in love at first sight, but they also want to use you so only trust them if they take it slow and show no interest whatsoever. Yep. That’s bona fide logic right there. Need I go on?
According to my male friends, if they like a girl, they will go for it. The whole “he likes you he just doesn’t want to mess it up!” ideal is toying with the feelings of the infatuated women. I like him, but he doesn’t like me. But he might like me and doesn’t want to mess it up! That’s it, of course it is! I’ll just put on a pretty face and keep my trap closed shall I?
Oh yes, and not ever, EVER, split the bill!
Number five makes me laugh out loud. The ‘Blarney’ is titled “You should play hard to get to land a man!”
And goes on to claim,
“When it comes to dating, there are no hard-and-fast rules to follow.”
Need I say more? The irony is killing me.
By the way, I’ve never understood and don’t really think anyone actually believes the play-hard-to-get thing. I suspect that might just be in the movies, or with really stupid people. If you’re interested in someone, how is pretending you’re not going to help in any way? Just chill the fuck out!
And ‘myth’ number seven! “Sex is just an animal urge for men!”
Hectic lols. Again, it’s contradicting number one, lust at first sight.
Actually, Dr. Fisher says that men tend to regard it as a more intimate act than women do. “It’s easier for a woman to find someone to have sex with her if she wants it,” she explains. “For women, sex is a real gift to men. Men have to do the courting, so when they do sleep with a woman, they feel a closeness because they’ve ‘earned’ it,” says Dr. Fisher. Too bad that doesn’t always extend to cuddling!
And doesn’t this put weighting towards the myth rather then dispel it? They hunt down the challenge, and reap the rewards. Sounds pretty animal to me.
And again, the hilarity at both “men tent to regard it as a more intimate act” followed my “Too bad that doesn’t always extend to cuddling!” Men are such romantic assholes aren’t they shitty article? Whatever shall we poor women folk do?
Number eight is the final and yet again, entirely pointless point. “Women can’t deal when a relationship ends.”
The article says that in fact the BLOKES are able to get hurt too. Aww. Apparently they haven’t the ‘tools’ women have to deal with a breakup.
This point I think is kind of missing the point. Getting upset over a breakup isn’t exclusive to men or to women. But I think we can generalize and say the burden lies on the one who was dumped, regardless of gender.
This last point is for the sorry lass who just got ditched. Don’t worry! He’s probably at home in tears too!
Nah, more likely he’s out falling in love at first sight all over again.
Adam Hills put it best. “Don’t read women’s magazines, they’re all full of shit.”
Amen to that.