Tuesday, June 3, 2008

Where do I begin? . . .

The Cold Feet of Bachelors

http://merecomments.typepad.com/merecomments/2008/06/bachelors-were.html#comments


Kamilla

Addendum:

The discussion over at MC has been interesting, to say the least. However, I always find such topics frustrating because the men and women seem to have such different views of each other and why they may have been rejected or otherwise unsuccessful. I am tempted to just tell the men (young and not-so-young) to "man up". Did you give up driving the first time you failed? Did you give up anything worth doing the when it didn't work out as planned?

You see, there's only so much we gals can legitimately do to attract your attention or encourage your pursuit. That is, if we want a marriage worth the name and not some vanilla-flavored equal-partnership pseudo-marriage thingy.

10 comments:

Anonymous said...

What law is it, that you constrain yourself by?

Michael said...

> there's only so much we gals can legitimately do to attract your attention

In my book, the first step is to always dress several notches above the slovenly norm. If dressing like a mature, respectable, feminine woman doesn't ping a decent guy's radar at first glance, I don't know what will.

Women seen to have an unwritten peer-pressure code: don't out-dress each other. "We want to be comfortable and liberated, don't forget -- and if you look nice, what will that say about us?"

I'd suggest women ignore that herd-mentality, lowest common denominator nonsense.

> men and women seem to have such different views

Yes. That's why women dressing to please (appease?) women is not the name of the game. A dead end street for getting a real man's attention. It's all such a drab denim blur anymore.

I know I'm a bit radical, but I hope it still makes some sense.

Sincerely,

Michael

Kamilla said...

Anonymous,

I'd like to ask you a question in return, if I knew whether you were a man or a woman.

I can only say that I have known the beautiful moment of freedom that occurs when you're dancing with a man who knows how to lead.

I also happen to think that's God's way of arranging things.

Kamilla

Diane said...

Michael,

I'm curious where you live. In the south, we don't have much of a drab-denim-blur problem.

'Round here, the girls quite evidently dress for the guys, but that's not an especially good thing either. Trading a slutty norm for a slovenly one is not much of an improvement.

I do realize that's not what you were suggesting. Your point is actually a very good one. You might want to read Question 14 on my website.

Stacy McDonald said...

I would have to agree with Diane. I see plenty of women dressing for men...in an undressed sort of way. It does seem to be an either or situation: Either dress like a strumpet or dress like a sloppy guy just so you can prove you don't care what guys think.

It's interesting - I have come across a lot of women who struggle with dressing modestly because they're afraid they'll never find a husband. And then they wonder why they attract all the jerks. Problem is - there are a lot more jerks than there are godly men - and some of those "jerks" claim to be Christians!

Michael said...

Well, I agree with what both Stacy and Diane have said. There's either slovenly or slutty, and *very* often they overlap. Blue jeans are slovenly, and tight blue jeans (the norm) are slutty. Even slutty used to be more feminine than it is today.

I'm in Texas. Jeans are very common. And any other kind of tight pants. Now shorts, of course.

Yes, they dress to get attention, but do it by dressing trashy. Tight jeans aren't good enough -- they have to buy the artificially worn kind. How attractive is that?

It's ironic: trashy is supposed to look sexy and get attention, but when it's the norm, what's so exciting about it?

There's a big difference between pretty, feminine, and flattering clothes which get the wearer noticed, and clothes which are only there to show off one's underlying stuff. The body is more of the focus than the clothes. That is wrong. Even women who don't intend to do this often end up in a similar situation. Old women, too. It is embarrassing what women who have absolutely nothing to brag about publicly go around in.

This is the background static (pollution) that the decent guy's radar will filter out. There's so much of it. And why would he pursue someone like that? He wouldn't want her to go showing off her rear (or whatever) if they were married, would he? Too many Christian men *do* let their women do this. Even in church. It's amazing.

Men dress trashy, too.

Me, I still judge books by their covers. There's so many millions of books, you've got to start somewhere. I'm more interested in reading a book if it has an attractive cover. If it looks like trash at first glance, why bother looking further? No one has time to investigate the content of all the books with mediocre, dumb or junky covers.

That was my original point. A smart-dresser will ping a smart guy's radar.

--Michael

Anonymous said...

Blue jeans are either slovenly or slutty? That's in the eyes of the beholder. I love seeing my wife in a nice pair of jeans and casual blouse. In fact, she was wearing jeans when I first met her, and it was one of the things that first attracted me to her - an attractive, confident, down to earth kind of gal. And approachable, too. We were friends before we ever got romantically involved, and I can say that all these years later, we are still best friends.

Peter

Michael said...

> Blue jeans are either slovenly
> or slutty? That's in the eyes of
> the beholder.

Hello Peter,

To each his own, alright. Levis are the epitome of cross-dressing, as they were rugged trousers designed for gold miners grubbing around in the dirt and mud. Coarse, riveted britches aren't the feminine ideal in my book. What ever happened to bows and lace?

> ...wearing jeans ...was one of the things that first attracted me to her

You definitely must be from a younger generation. Are they okay for worshipping God, too? For attractiveness, I'll take a long, flowing skirt any day. Besides, most female jeans are immodest (in my humble opinion). A real turn-off.

If women can wear these, why can't men wear pretty dresses and heels?

I believe there's more to it than just my personal preference. God expects the sexes to dress differently, and for women to be modest.

Women in Levis is definitely part of the feminist package deal. And non-feminists who think they are conservative don't even realize it.

Makes me feel more and more that I'm not from around here.

--Michael

Here's what Wikipedia has to say about Levi Strauss' invention:

[Levi] Strauss and his brother-in-law David Stern opened a dry goods wholesale business called Levi Strauss & Co. Levi ...was often found leading a pack-horse, heavily laden with merchandise, directly into the mining camps found throughout the region. The story goes that both prospectors and miners, often complaining about the easily torn cotton "britches" and pockets that "split right out" gave Levi the idea to make a rugged overall trouser for the miners to wear. These were fashioned from bolts of brown canvas sailcloth made from hemp, with gold ore storage pockets that were nearly impossible to split. ...On May 20, 1873, Strauss and Davis received United States patent #139121 for using copper rivets to strengthen the pockets of denim work pants.

Michael said...

re: "The Cold Feet of Bachelors"

Admitting that our hedonistic society is prone to want to extend childhood and delay maturity, I admit that young men may not be willing to commit due to a self-centered mentality.

But I have to put myself in their shoes a bit and that makes me cringe at the thought of how to navigate the real minefield out there.

Young women today have been born and bred in a strongly feministic, anti-authoritarian, anti-male atmosphere. At the same time, inexplicably, they are encouraged to be sex objects by society.

The young women who are dying to be married -- do they have any notion of respecting their husband as the head of the home, or do they just want a provider, a permanent relationship and a family? I suspect most would recoil at the idea of actually submitting to their husband, putting his career before their own.

Feminism is about competing with men, which is not something men instinctively are looking for in a wife. The more masculine women become, the less strongly opposites attract.

And even our feminist culture will revert to patriarchal notions when it involves keeping men in their place (alimony, child custody, threats of sexual harrassment charges, etc). Financially-independent women can divorce their husbands if they start to think they are something when they aren't. They can kill their children without his permission.

The mindset is bad enough with the ones born before the sexual revlution.

--Michael

Anonymous said...

You definitely must be from a younger generation.
Thanks, Michael, you made my day. I'm 48. My brain still thinks I'm 25, but my body says otherwise.

And yes, of course jeans are okay for worshipping God, as long as they are modest.

Peter