T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|
210.1 | Another Nice Girl .... | BEES::PARE | | Thu Feb 12 1987 14:19 | 13 |
| Gee, ...I could have written this note. It is very confusing isn't
it. Especially today with AIDS etc., but even before AIDS it was
confusing. Women feel so vulnerable when they sleep with a man.
Much more so than men do I think. Must come from all those thousand
of years of evolution when,...if you slept with someone who was
going to be off swinging through the trees in the morning...you'd end
up having your baby alone with the tigers and dinosaurs prowling
about looking for lunch.
>Are we nuts? ...maybe
>Are we properly cautious? ...In this day and age? -definitely.
>Are we hopelessly insecure? ....(God, where did I put that shrink's
phone number...)
|
210.2 | Insecure? No, this teddy bear is surgically attached | HPSCAD::WALL | I see the middle kingdom... | Thu Feb 12 1987 15:25 | 26 |
|
Women are not the only ones who fall prey to this sort of thing.
Usually, at the first hint of possible relationship I go down a
stream of consciousness that goes something like this:
"Well, there could be something happening here..."
"Don't be an idiot... Why should she even consider you..."
"Well, we get along pretty good..."
"So what? YOU? Relationship with YOU?"
"Yeah, why not?"
"Look in a mirror, why don't you? If she's going to burden
herself with a male, she can do better..."
"It COULD happen!"
"It's about as likely as congruent snowflakes..."
Fortunately, I have a couple of friends who recognize these
symptoms and thrash me as necessary. Nevertheless, insecurites
abound, from a number of sources.
I've run into the "men are only after one thing" more than once.
It's one of a myriad of things that makes me wonder if a person
is going to be worth my effort, if she's going to jump to conclusions
like that without even knowing me. I realize you have to be careful,
but geez, at least make some effort to find out, is what I say.
DFW
|
210.3 | shattered | CEODEV::FAULKNER | my sharona | Thu Feb 12 1987 16:38 | 1 |
| but nice boys do :-)
|
210.4 | Who me? I'm keeping Nivea in business... | ZEPPO::MAHLER | I can relate! | Thu Feb 12 1987 20:40 | 9 |
| Maybe one day <---- will write an intelligent/sincere comment
and the Mill will start to shake and rattle from the
sound of the Lord 'screaming at his shoes'...
-------------------------------------------------------
You are not insecure, just that MOST MEN ARE just
after sex.
|
210.6 | I need some SUN bad | NANOOK::SCOTT | Looking towards the sun | Thu Feb 12 1987 23:24 | 51 |
|
Re. 0
First off, Welcome aboard MaryAnn. Always glad to see
a new VTxxx.
I don't think you are the only one left with hang-ups
from our past growing up, as we are a lot like our parents
in more ways than we sometimes like to think. But I don't
feel that the feelings of insecurity in a new relationship
are past down in genes nor do I feel they are taught to us
as much by our parents as they are by our overall
environment. Protection of our inner self must be a
dominant trait as most of us build some sort of wall around
us when we are hurt in some way. As we experience more let
downs the thicker the wall gets and the more insecure we
feel.
Me? After some 15 years of dating and 5 years of a
failed marriage, the wall is pretty thick and I find it to
be a long time knowing someone before I begin to feel secure
enough to even let my feelings be known by the woman I might
be seeing at the time. Hold a woman's hand? Dare I kiss
her? I have a hard enough time asking for another date.
Why do I subject myself to possible rejection? If a woman
can't feel secure enough to make the first move, then I
can't either.
Your feelings about your relationship (to me anyway)
seem quite natural. A year ago I spent two months with a
woman only to find she was just along for the ride. That
was the real killer for a first relationship after a
divorce. We are just feeling secure enough to want to try
another but then I'll have to give that some serious thought
first.
As far as "Nice girls don't" and "Men are only after
one thing". Both are few and far in between. How about
"Nice boys don't" and "Woman are only after one thing".
That also is few and far in between. We're all human and a
human dealer would be hard pressed to stock a standard
model.
The SUN always provides us with the sense of security.
Lee
(Oh god, I feel a bad case of the CTRL/Z's. Why doesn't the
sun shine at midnight?)
|
210.7 | | APEHUB::STHILAIRE | | Fri Feb 13 1987 08:53 | 5 |
| Re: "Nice Girls Don't!", people tried to tell me that when I was
growing up, too. Fortunately, I didn't pay much attention.
Lorna
|
210.9 | | CARLIN::MAHLER | I drank WHAT? - Socrates | Fri Feb 13 1987 13:41 | 7 |
|
Finally understood!
I agree with Steve...wait, what?
|
210.10 | Nice girls don't let hangups get in the way | FDCV03::RAYNA | | Fri Feb 13 1987 16:21 | 27 |
|
>> Does anybody but me have real left-over hangups from having been
>> taught from the time they were 10 that 'nice girls don't' and 'men
>> are only (always!) after one thing'?
I agree with Michael (.4) that MOST men are after only one thing.
However, I have several female friends who are only interested in that
same "one thing" (I know you guys are thinking "I want to meet these
women!" :-)) so it isn't fair to make that generalization just about men.
We both have the same needs, right? So why are women told that "nice
girls don't" and men are encouraged to go out and put as many notches
in their belt as they possibly can before getting tied down with one
woman?
I think most girls chose to forget about what their mothers told
them until they are reminded of AIDS, herpes, unwanted pregnancies and
abortion. Not to mention, the premise that if you do, you're a "sleazebag,"
if you don't you're a "prude," and if you are somewhere in between then you
get labled a "tease." And, the guys aren't much better off in today's
society either. Now if a guy doesn't "make a move," the girl may
ass*u*me that he's gay instead of trying to be a gentleman and if he
does, then he's an "animal."
Hey, what are we doing???
It's only a hangup if one allows it to be a hangup.
|
210.11 | Finding balance isn't easy | YAZOO::B_REINKE | Down with bench Biology | Fri Feb 13 1987 22:17 | 8 |
| How about it's better when it is of equal importance to both
partners? And if you are the kind of man or woman who is
not comfortable with physical intimacy outside of a close,
freindship/commited relationship then you won't be satisfied
with anything less. Just be careful not to test the relationship
to death. It is possible that you can be so overly concerned with
trying to be sure about someone that you drive them away with your
anxieties.
|
210.13 | [an update] | NECVAX::HODGES | | Mon Feb 16 1987 13:08 | 31 |
| There are certainly some interesting comments in here! Some different
points of view (that I hadn't thought about!) and also a couple
that I don't understand. Maybe some 'noters' jokes that it takes
a while for a newcomer to catch up to!
As an update, I think .11 put into words what I've now seeing in
myself. Maybe I'm looking for 'this is permanent; we're not ever
going to hurt each other' sort-of committment from him, even though
I'm probably not capable of making that right now & I'm SURE he's
not! (His last HURT went a LOT deeper than mine! And maybe men
do heal slower; seems like there is another note in here about that!)
Anyway, I think there is a real risk that I (or anyone else) can
turn into a sniveling idiot (maybe that's a bit strong, but I can't
think of a descriptive phrase for the image I have in my mind!)
looking for assurances of how the other is going to feel in the
future.
As for my particular situation, I just returned from a long week-end
of sharing an activity we both enjoy (tournament bridge) and I feel
a lot more comfortable with this particular situation. I do REALLY
feel that a lot of my insecurity comes from 'breaking this rule
out of the past' and sort of anticipating that something bad will
happen because I'm breaking a rule.
Maybe it's time to go back to the shrink for a tune-up . . . .
Thanks for all the comments and feel free to keep responding!
Maryann
|
210.14 | If it feels good do it! | FDCV13::CALCAGNI | A.F.F.A. | Mon Feb 16 1987 16:35 | 19 |
|
So what's wrong with sex? Sure I like sex and so does my
partner as much as we both want it!
The key here is "WE BOTH!"
That's not to say one might want it more than the other, but
it's a mutual decision that makes it.
I can't believe all the hangups imposed upon our generation! From
our parents, teachers, and some of these so called shrinks, and
religious people. It's no wonder we can't think straight!
Perhaps I'm off the track, but sometimes you just reach a point
when you get totally disgusted with some of these views.
No such thing as a Bad Girl!
Cal
|
210.15 | The statement keeps changing | MARCIE::JLAMOTTE | the best is yet to be | Mon Feb 16 1987 17:18 | 10 |
| Perhaps the statement has changed...
The 50's "Nice girls don't until they are married"
The 60's "Nice girls don't until they are engaged"
The 70's "Nice girls don't until they are in a committed
relationship"
What is it for the 80's?
|
210.16 | I don't wana die! | NEXUS::GORTMAKER | | Mon Feb 16 1987 20:50 | 5 |
| For the 80's "Nice girls don't until they have seen the health
card" 8^)
|
210.17 | Walden II | YODA::BARANSKI | Searching for Lowell Apartmentmates... | Tue Feb 17 1987 11:31 | 9 |
| I've been reading a book (fiction) which says that the right thing to do is for
childhood sweathearts to marry when they are physically ready for sex and
children. First love is often the strongest, and you have the advantage of
knowing each other real well. The *problem* is that todays economic system
makes it impossible.
What'cha think...?
Jim :-)
|
210.18 | got any stats? | GUMDRP::MCCLURE | Who Me??? | Tue Feb 17 1987 11:47 | 11 |
| re .17
Seems like another myth to me. I know a couple that went together
all the way from grade school til marriage after college. They
lived on the same street. Their divorce was quite messy.
Childhood sweethearts are subject to the same stresses after
marriage as anyone else.
Bob Mc
|
210.19 | While we are on the topic of ***! | SSVAX::LAVOIE | | Tue Feb 17 1987 12:13 | 22 |
|
Nice girls do but they usually wait for the right moment. After
all what sort of relationship does one have if half the time is
spent in bed not really talking or getting to know someone.....no
one should pressure you (both genders here) to sleep with them.
I feel if I guy is very pushy and agressive he usually gets booted
out of my house or if we are somewhere in public I usually make
sure he understands either to cut it out or I will find my way back
home.
Back to the subject.........
doubles standards exist everywhere, especially between the sexes
and what is right and wrong. You have to do what you feel is right
for you and not "Will he still love me if I don't?" Chances are
if he really does love you he will understand.
Debbi
a.k.a. Sunshine
Hi Mike!
|
210.20 | "Nice Girls Do" | FOGGYR::MURPHY | down the foggy ruins of time... | Tue Feb 17 1987 12:19 | 25 |
|
Re. .17: Hogwash. At the age when people are first ready for sex and
capable of childbearing, emotions may be strong but are quite changable
both in the sort and long term. That's not a function of our society.
What is a function of our society is that, at some age, people are largely
allowed to make their own mating/marriage decisions. In societies where
these decisions were made by parents and might well pair up couples
in their early teen years, the social environment made the emotional
swings of adolescence an irrelevant factor in couple's staying together.
Re. .0 etc.: There's a book I've seen on the shelves called "Nice Girls DO"
by a Dr. Ruth clone. The substance of the book is that nice girls *do*
enjoy sex and sexual variety, contrary to the teachings of some previous
generations. There's been so much crap taught about sex in various
societies (most especially western society in the past couple centuries)
it's a wonder the human race didn't cease to reproduce and/or relate
altogether. Books like the aforementioned are part of the process that
we've been going through over the past few decades to rid ourselves of some
of the hangups that resulted from these earlier misguided views.
In sum, it's not easy to rid ourselves of internal pressures to conform
to stereotypes that we learned as children, even if we have rationally
concluded that they are invalid. However, we can support each other
in this process.
|
210.21 | Never ending guilt and sexual hangups... | ZEPPO::MAHLER | I can relate! | Tue Feb 17 1987 13:22 | 9 |
|
[Hi Debbi, ER Sunshine? Ugh. 8-}]
Cultural unbringing has alot to do with this,
in particular is Judeao-Christian guilt.
If Nietzche is right then we are all in trouble
in this situation.
|
210.22 | Wondering | STUBBI::B_REINKE | Down with bench Biology | Tue Feb 17 1987 15:33 | 6 |
| re .20 and .21
Could you clarify what you are saying a little. Do you mean
that women are freeing themsevles of hangups that kept them
from enjoying sex, or are you encouraging them to be free of
hangups against casual sex and multiple partners?
|
210.23 | ... | YODA::BARANSKI | Searching for Lowell Apartmentmates... | Tue Feb 17 1987 15:47 | 6 |
| RE: .18
Well, yes, but I don't think you read all of my note... it said that the
problem was the economic system, not marrying young...
Jim.
|
210.24 | Re: .20 | GLORY::HULL | VTX is your best VALU | Tue Feb 17 1987 17:51 | 7 |
| >>>There's been so much crap taught about sex in various
societies (most especially western society in the past couple centuries)
it's a wonder the human race didn't cease to reproduce and/or relate
altogether.
On the contrary - so many people are illiterate nowadays, all they
DO know how to do is horizontal exercise!
|
210.25 | trying to climb out of the sewer, you get a little messy:-) | CGHUB::CONNELLY | Eye Dr3 - Regnad Kcin | Tue Feb 17 1987 23:02 | 30 |
| re: .20
Well said!
re: .21
>> Do you mean
>> that women are freeing themsevles of hangups that kept them
>> from enjoying sex, or are you encouraging them to be free of
>> hangups against casual sex and multiple partners?
One way to look at is that some women AND men are trying
to free themselves of hangups that prevent them from
enjoying sex. In some cases those hangups may relate
to prohibitions against multiple partners or "casual"
sex. (Of course "casual" is a loaded term--some folks
may consider any sex outside of marriage or with someone
other than an almost tied-down future spouse as being
"casual"; other folks might consider any sex where you
don't bother to learn the other person's last name as
"casual".)
If you were born in one of the latter generations, the
prohibition might be against being a virgin though! It
doesn't matter--the general principle is that people
should be able to grow into a comfortable or natural
sexuality for themselves without having a lot of societal
bulls**t imposed on them. That's the goal. The reality
right now is that they can't because of the particularly
poisonous aforementioned bulls**t that's been floating
around for quite a few generations. So it becomes a real
struggle for each individual, unfortunately.
|
210.26 | let's flip that coin | SPMFG1::CHARBONND | Shakin' the bush, boss | Tue Feb 24 1987 06:47 | 7 |
| RE .0 I assume your mother was a nice girl. :-)
Seriously, I think that sex is ONE component of a good
relationship. Companionship, the ability to disagree
politely, and most importantly- RESPECT.
Lately, most girls I meet are only after one thing - coke.
|
210.27 | cola | VINO::RASPUZZI | Michael Raspuzzi | Tue Feb 24 1987 10:05 | 5 |
| re .26:
Maybe you should carry a can with you :-) :-) :-).
Mike
|
210.28 | ? | VORTEX::JOVAN | diamonds on the souls of her shoes | Tue Feb 24 1987 12:12 | 7 |
|
� Lately, most girls I meet are only after one thing - coke.
^^^^^
Why don't you try going out with some *women*? ;-)
Angeline
|
210.29 | Nawwwwwwwwwwww! | ZEPPO::MAHLER | Inhuman Decorum in Human Relations | Tue Feb 24 1987 12:22 | 6 |
|
Now there's an honest opinion. I can be found most often
at Ralph's with some GIRL asking "Do you have any Coke?"
Who me?
|
210.30 | No, but I have pepsi... | NEXUS::GORTMAKER | | Tue Feb 24 1987 23:44 | 1 |
|
|
210.31 | Sting... | NRLABS::TATISTCHEFF | | Wed Feb 25 1987 23:31 | 4 |
| re .28: Good one Angeline!
Lee
|
210.32 | Ouch! | NOVA::BNELSON | California Dreamin'... | Thu Feb 26 1987 12:19 | 11 |
|
Re: .31, .28 --
I don't like to speak for others, but I think it's safe to say that most guys
_would_ go out with "women" rather than "girls" -- it's telling the difference
by their appearance that's tough! ( Let's face it, the differentiating factors
are not visible! ) ;-) ;-)
Brian
|
210.33 | differentiating factors:-) | MANTIS::PARE | | Thu Feb 26 1987 12:56 | 2 |
| The difference is that girls ask for what they want and women bring
their own.:-)
|
210.34 | Why didn't someone tell me this _before_?! | QUILL::BNELSON | California Dreamin'... | Thu Feb 26 1987 17:53 | 11 |
|
Re: .33 --
[ image of palm striking forehead ]
_Now_ I understand! ;-)
Brian
|
210.35 | Huh? | 3D::AUSTIN | Who me??? Shy??? | Sat Feb 28 1987 17:44 | 8 |
| re: .32 & .33
[image of *woman* scratching head]
Is that coke or pepsi...or have I lost track of the topic?
|