| RE: .1
Since I'm male, I'll try to clarify in this note (although I already
broke my own "female-only" response request in 637.2, but what the
hell, life's too short to worry about such trivial details.)
The key phrase I was trying to address in my original 637.0 note
contained the words:
We put on our heels and went out for a walk
More for a drink and to have a few eyes on us
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Stated succinctly, are there some women who enjoy being "women-
watched", particularly in a casual atmosphere (in the song's setting,
a lounge/nightclub)? And, originally unasked, but implied never-the-less,
are there some women who will openly acknowledge this enjoyment?
That's it. No hidden meanings, no secret agendas. I wasn't looking
for guidance/direction in (mis)reading signals. I'm usually pretty
good at determining what's being non-verbally said to me, although
once every 10 or 15 years or so, I must admit I have been known to
be wrong. :-)
Alan
|
| RE: 637.4
Liz, I understood your point that some women do not like to be
ogled. I acknowledged that fact in my 637.0 when I wrote:
> From what's been written in this and other Conferences, as well
> as statements made in the "outside" world, there are some women
> who are not happy with men noticing them only *as women*. (I may
> be saying that badly, but at this moment, I can't think of a
> better way to put it.)
However, my question remains: Are there some women who are pleased
with, poetically put, "Having A Few Eyes On Them" (aka ogling)?
Alan
|
| I am rescinding my request that only women respond to Note 637.
The only reason I made that request initially, was that I didn't want
women to feel they couldn't write freely there, without getting into
an endless series of arguments from some of the men.
Also, because the subject itself was directed toward women, I thought men
would have no real reason for responding to questions that only women
could answer.
Yet, I now see that having two separate notes may accomplish nothing
more than create additional confusion. It does seem to be getting
unwieldy.
Moderators, please write-lock Note 639, and if it's possible, could
you move whatever entries are here to Note 637?
Thanks.
Alan
|