Flirt... I don't even like that word. In fact, I have called it the five-letter f-word. Why do we need it and why do we do it? That's a question I have tried to answer for some time and don't think I'll be able to understand it as much as I would like. I have wondered about how this all got started and when. When did our ancestors decide that it was acceptable to act like a complete idiot in order to win someone's affections?
Here's what I think. Dating is difficult. When emotions are involved, confusion easily takes over. What did she mean when she said that? What was the message behind that body movement? Let's face it, we try to read too much into things and tend to get confused. Flirting is a form of communication. It's a method of behavior and speech that hints that you are interested. It makes it easier for the other party to know where you stand and what your intentions are.
Why flirting works on guys? Guys like to be the ones in charge or at least feel like they are. Since a lot about flirting has to deal with vulnerability, guys get hooked by it because that way they feel like they are the ones in control of the relationship. That isn't to say that guys don't flirt because they do. I would imagine it works similarly on girls but I'm not a girl so I can't go there.
Now, there are a few kinds of people that gets labeled as "flirts".
Of course there is the easily recognizable flirt that acts ridiculous because he or she lacks the self-confidence. These are the kinds of people that don't really know who they are and how they fit in socially. They care about what others think about them and therefore do what they can to get people to like them. Conveniently, flirting is a pretty sure-fire, easy way to get people to like you (as long as you don't go overboard).
So are there flirts that do have self-confidence? Of course. One of those is the person who acts like a flirt because he or she really wants to get married. Since flirting is an effective way to get dates, these people use it to go on as many dates as possible. This person doesn't necessarily need the attention and isn't looking for friends. This person views it as a tool.
The final flirt that I can think of is that person who can't help but be seen as a flirt by others. It is in his or her very nature. I'm talking about someone who lacks a personal bubble and doesn't see the bubbles around others. Physical touch is often seen as a flirt. I'm talking about the individual who is really friendly to everyone and personable with everyone. Even someone who gives out compliments every third sentence can be seen as a flirt. I feel bad for these poor people who get all kinds of attention by those they really don't want attention from. Often they can't help that their personality makes them seem flirtatious. These people know who they are and aren't necessarily looking for a relationship.
There you have it, my thoughts on that five-letter word. Silly yet effective. Necessary? I'm still trying to figure that one out.
Saturday, November 12, 2011
Monday, October 3, 2011
Creeper vs. Adorable
Guy sees girl. Guy says to self, "Self, there's something special about her." Guy follows girl out the door and asks for girl's number.
The girl can have one of maybe three reactions. Either she thinks (in a voice that steadily rises in pitch), "Awwwww..." or she says to herself, "OOOOOOOkayyyyyyy...this guy is creepin' me out." The third possibility I'm going to consider irrelevant because it is reserved for those who have chosen the Amazon attitude spoken of in a previous post. It goes something like this: "I don't care who you are, I'm not interested even if you supposedly were mister perfect."
Think about it in these terms. Aragorn - yes, of the Viggo Mortensen variety - plays the part of the guy and, after following the girl, says something like this, "I saw you from across the room and I knew I wanted to talk to you." Cheesy on paper, but I know a good number of girls who would swoon if this were to happen to them. Then imagine the exact same scenario only this time the guy's part is played by your local nerd (you can think of at least one poor soul). Let's say they both use the exact same line saying it in pretty much the exact same way, so the only possible difference in delivery is a difference in pitch. You can see that the nerdy guy will be viewed as a creeper while Aragorn is adorable.
What causes the different reactions? It's a tough one to nail down, but one thing I've noticed that it's not really based on the guy's approach. It matters almost solely on whether the girl could be interested or not. In the case of the Aragorn scenario, the girl would kill to have him approach her, so of course she will think it flattering and adorable. Then there is the nerd who has no greater desire than to find an awesome girl to date but gets rejected and viewed as a creeper just because he doesn't have the looks accompanied with the delivery.
I think we should have more pity for that poor "creeper". Granted there are some real creepers out there and girls need to be wary. The thing is that often some of those real creepers are the guys that get the "Oh, he's so adorable reaction." Why? Because they have the face while their intentions and motives are not pure or good.
Here's what I think girls need to consider. Instead of labeling everyone you're not attracted to who approaches you boldly as a creeper, think of them instead as courageous. It takes a lot of guts to do what that guy did and girls need to find prospects who have real guts. All too often I see wimps at the hospital who get upset at everyone around them, including their wives, when they are in pain. Though these wives are happy, I can't but help thinking that they deserve better. If you aren't attracted to the man who shows courage, that's okay. Just don't automatically label him a creeper.
The thing brave guys need to consider is that "courage alone will not save you". Guys get labeled as creepers because they don't know when to give up. When you make a solid effort and the girl is nice enough to give you the time of day, the battle is not won yet. There are plenty of guys who need to learn when it is time to quit. Surrendering can be very honorable if done timely and in the right way.
I think we should have more pity for that poor "creeper". Granted there are some real creepers out there and girls need to be wary. The thing is that often some of those real creepers are the guys that get the "Oh, he's so adorable reaction." Why? Because they have the face while their intentions and motives are not pure or good.
Here's what I think girls need to consider. Instead of labeling everyone you're not attracted to who approaches you boldly as a creeper, think of them instead as courageous. It takes a lot of guts to do what that guy did and girls need to find prospects who have real guts. All too often I see wimps at the hospital who get upset at everyone around them, including their wives, when they are in pain. Though these wives are happy, I can't but help thinking that they deserve better. If you aren't attracted to the man who shows courage, that's okay. Just don't automatically label him a creeper.
The thing brave guys need to consider is that "courage alone will not save you". Guys get labeled as creepers because they don't know when to give up. When you make a solid effort and the girl is nice enough to give you the time of day, the battle is not won yet. There are plenty of guys who need to learn when it is time to quit. Surrendering can be very honorable if done timely and in the right way.
Tuesday, September 13, 2011
The Quest
Men need direction. There must be something tangible lurking in the future that they can work towards, otherwise they wander and end up accomplishing little. I suppose that's why God said in the Old Testament "It is not good that man should be alone; I will make an help meet for him." (Genesis 2:18). They need someone or something to give them purpose and one could look at the "help meet" as a goal or quest as well as a person.
Mythology and legends are full of stories of men who are driven by some quest. Most of the time, that quest is thrust upon them, created and given by some outside source. That source can either be a person (a prophet or oracle) or fate itself. The hero hardly ever chooses his quest probably because the man wouldn't know what to choose if it were left up to him.
Women in mythology tend to not need a quest. Sometimes they are goddesses who decide their own goals and destiny. Sometimes they are women like Odysseus's wife who are left with a choice - do I find another husband or do I wait? In her case, she planned out a test that would offer her the best solution. Sometimes they are like the Amazons who choose to be independent warriors, bound by nothing and no one.
Heroes of legend have a task or a number of tasks given them that they must accomplish in order to achieve some kind of status. Often that status is that of being a husband and father as they often must save the maiden in distress. They cannot achieve this without first undergoing the preparatory process that is their quest. For one reason or another, women did not typically have rights of passage as the men did.
Just as the hero needed to fulfill a quest to save the princess, men today tend to stay aloof of relational commitment because they have not become "men" yet. Women get upset at men for this. They get frustrated because they for the most part are prepared for that kind of relationship. I believe women are typically blessed with the ability to form lasting relationships without having to undergo a process of refining similar to the men. Though I know many women who undergo trials and have careers and other pursuits, I believe they don't necessarily need these in order to be ready for marriage. They are like the Amazons who want to live an independent life or they are simply waiting for their knight to find his own golden fleece.
So, the men need to buck up and get going on their quest and women need to wait for their properly prepared heroes to find them.
What makes this difficult is that sometimes the quest is put on hold for one reason or another, or there remains a heretofore undiscovered quest. This could be why relationships are such a game.
Mythology and legends are full of stories of men who are driven by some quest. Most of the time, that quest is thrust upon them, created and given by some outside source. That source can either be a person (a prophet or oracle) or fate itself. The hero hardly ever chooses his quest probably because the man wouldn't know what to choose if it were left up to him.
Women in mythology tend to not need a quest. Sometimes they are goddesses who decide their own goals and destiny. Sometimes they are women like Odysseus's wife who are left with a choice - do I find another husband or do I wait? In her case, she planned out a test that would offer her the best solution. Sometimes they are like the Amazons who choose to be independent warriors, bound by nothing and no one.
Heroes of legend have a task or a number of tasks given them that they must accomplish in order to achieve some kind of status. Often that status is that of being a husband and father as they often must save the maiden in distress. They cannot achieve this without first undergoing the preparatory process that is their quest. For one reason or another, women did not typically have rights of passage as the men did.
Just as the hero needed to fulfill a quest to save the princess, men today tend to stay aloof of relational commitment because they have not become "men" yet. Women get upset at men for this. They get frustrated because they for the most part are prepared for that kind of relationship. I believe women are typically blessed with the ability to form lasting relationships without having to undergo a process of refining similar to the men. Though I know many women who undergo trials and have careers and other pursuits, I believe they don't necessarily need these in order to be ready for marriage. They are like the Amazons who want to live an independent life or they are simply waiting for their knight to find his own golden fleece.
So, the men need to buck up and get going on their quest and women need to wait for their properly prepared heroes to find them.
What makes this difficult is that sometimes the quest is put on hold for one reason or another, or there remains a heretofore undiscovered quest. This could be why relationships are such a game.
Tuesday, August 30, 2011
It feels good to be validated
Walking on BYU campus today I counted 3 people sporting Superman shirts. Batman shirts? None. Chalk one more up for the Man of Steel.
Monday, August 29, 2011
Zelda and James Bond
If you've ever taken a look at the bottom of my blog, you will have noticed a couple pictures of things I'm obsessed about. You may have been wondering "If you're so obsessed, why have you never mentioned it anywhere else?" Good question, and I guess now is the time to share my thoughts and interpretations on one of them.
First of all, Zelda is not the name of the boy hero in the series (a common misconception). It is the name of the princess that said hero is called upon to rescue. His name is Link, fyi. Why is Zelda so important? Well, it actually all comes down to the most important element in the story - the triforce.
The triforce is what you might consider a relic left by the goddesses Din, Nayru and Farore. The legend goes that after they created the world, they returned to the sacred realm and left the triforce as a symbol of their power and as a gateway to the sacred realm. It was said that if a person accessed the triforce and touched it, the triforce would bestow great power and grant the wishes of that person. If someone with good intentions accessed it, the land of Hyrule would be blessed with peace and prosperity. You could guess what would happen if an evil person touched it.
And so it went that an evil man named Ganondorf snuck his way into the sacred realm, and when he touched it the triforce split into three pieces - power, wisdom and courage. He was given power, but wisdom and courage were granted to two other worthy individuals. Zelda was given wisdom and Link was given courage. Outraged, Ganondorf captured Zelda and sought after Link so that he could have all three pieces and cover the land in darkness. Link's task was to restore peace where Ganondorf had placed monsters and curses throughout the land. He was to grow in strength so that he could eventually confront and destroy Ganondorf and save the princess.
There you have it, the Legend of Zelda in the smallest nutshell I could manage. Now for a glimpse into why this isn't just some cheesy story for kids.
I bet you didn't think there were any similarities between Link and Bond, but there are. First, Link is somewhat of a lady killer. Of course there's Zelda, but in every game I have played there are a number of girls vying for Link's attention. It is important to note that Link is a virtuous hero and would never go sleeping around. All the same, it seems that wherever he turns, he has some girl impressed by his swagger. It makes sense, because after all he has the triforce of courage. Women want someone who isn't afraid and who they can count on for protection. He is trustworthy, selfless, dependable and kind, all things that make women fall in love with him.
With Link, it's all about getting the right gadgets. The difference is that instead of having someone like Q make them and offer them before his mission begins, Link has to find them as he goes along his quest. The gadgets/weapons are always significant and Link could never defeat Ganondorf without them just as Bond always ends up having to use all of his gadgets by the end of the movie in order to get to the bad guy.
Bond is easily recognizable in his suits/tuxedos holding a gun of some kind and Link is instantly recognizable in his green tunic holding the Master Sword. Sure there have been times when Link is seen without his signature getup, just as Bond isn't always wearing a tux, but it always makes an appearance.
Many people are confused by the chronology of the Zelda series and indeed it doesn't make a whole lot of sense. There are like 5 different Links with different backgrounds depending on which game you are playing. Similarly, Bond movies jump all over the place and there are a bunch of different Bonds.
Oh, and Link can take on an innumerable number of baddies all at once because he's just that cool.
Of course, this merely scratches the surface of why I find the Legend of Zelda so fascinating, but that will have to be discussed in future posts.
First of all, Zelda is not the name of the boy hero in the series (a common misconception). It is the name of the princess that said hero is called upon to rescue. His name is Link, fyi. Why is Zelda so important? Well, it actually all comes down to the most important element in the story - the triforce.
The triforce is what you might consider a relic left by the goddesses Din, Nayru and Farore. The legend goes that after they created the world, they returned to the sacred realm and left the triforce as a symbol of their power and as a gateway to the sacred realm. It was said that if a person accessed the triforce and touched it, the triforce would bestow great power and grant the wishes of that person. If someone with good intentions accessed it, the land of Hyrule would be blessed with peace and prosperity. You could guess what would happen if an evil person touched it.
And so it went that an evil man named Ganondorf snuck his way into the sacred realm, and when he touched it the triforce split into three pieces - power, wisdom and courage. He was given power, but wisdom and courage were granted to two other worthy individuals. Zelda was given wisdom and Link was given courage. Outraged, Ganondorf captured Zelda and sought after Link so that he could have all three pieces and cover the land in darkness. Link's task was to restore peace where Ganondorf had placed monsters and curses throughout the land. He was to grow in strength so that he could eventually confront and destroy Ganondorf and save the princess.
There you have it, the Legend of Zelda in the smallest nutshell I could manage. Now for a glimpse into why this isn't just some cheesy story for kids.
I bet you didn't think there were any similarities between Link and Bond, but there are. First, Link is somewhat of a lady killer. Of course there's Zelda, but in every game I have played there are a number of girls vying for Link's attention. It is important to note that Link is a virtuous hero and would never go sleeping around. All the same, it seems that wherever he turns, he has some girl impressed by his swagger. It makes sense, because after all he has the triforce of courage. Women want someone who isn't afraid and who they can count on for protection. He is trustworthy, selfless, dependable and kind, all things that make women fall in love with him.
With Link, it's all about getting the right gadgets. The difference is that instead of having someone like Q make them and offer them before his mission begins, Link has to find them as he goes along his quest. The gadgets/weapons are always significant and Link could never defeat Ganondorf without them just as Bond always ends up having to use all of his gadgets by the end of the movie in order to get to the bad guy.
Bond is easily recognizable in his suits/tuxedos holding a gun of some kind and Link is instantly recognizable in his green tunic holding the Master Sword. Sure there have been times when Link is seen without his signature getup, just as Bond isn't always wearing a tux, but it always makes an appearance.
Many people are confused by the chronology of the Zelda series and indeed it doesn't make a whole lot of sense. There are like 5 different Links with different backgrounds depending on which game you are playing. Similarly, Bond movies jump all over the place and there are a bunch of different Bonds.
Oh, and Link can take on an innumerable number of baddies all at once because he's just that cool.
Of course, this merely scratches the surface of why I find the Legend of Zelda so fascinating, but that will have to be discussed in future posts.
Tuesday, August 16, 2011
Maybe
Maybe... What a wonderfully easy word. Utilizing that word provides no obligation thereby avoid giving offense, right? I guess that depends on who you talk to, but I submit that maybe = "I'm too scared to say no".
You may have noticed that a number of people don't use this word correctly. Merriam-Webster's Learner Dictionary has this to say about the word maybe: "It is used when you are talking about an action that has a chance of happening in the future." Imagine that. How often do you hear someone use this word who actually thought there was a chance of something happening in the future? Not very often.
Take facebook for instance. Why is there a "maybe" option when you are invited to an event or party when it usually means those people won't be there. I don't want it to sound like I think this party looks lame or that I don't like the person inviting me, so I click maybe. The fact is I think the party doesn't appeal to me or I feel like I don't know the person well enough to want to come. Personally, I think they should create a thumbs up-thumbs down system similar to Pandora. If you give an invite a thumbs down, there would appear a bubble that says "Thank you. We will no longer bother you with parties/events of this kind in the future. Would you like to block all invites from this friend?" Wouldn't that be nice.
Here's one of my favorite things people say:
"Are you coming tomorrow night?"
"Maybe. Who will be there?"
Am I not good enough for you? I guess that means we're not really friends. Why do people ask this all the time? Frankly, it fascinates me. The best is when people say this even when they have nothing else/better planned. Either they don't think hanging out with me is all that alluring or they are looking for someone special they want to hang out with. Face it. In a group of friends there is usually at least one who has more than platonic interest in another friend. If that special someone is not there, the interested party tries to figure out a way to hang out with him/her instead of hanging out with you. Hence, why "maybe" is such a good word. I would hang out with you if so-and-so were there too.
I'm definitely guilty of playing the maybe game. So if ever you ask me to do something and I say "maybe", don't count on me at all, and I expect about the same from you. There might be a chance, but it's a 0.83% chance. Maybe if my future wife was going to be there...
You may have noticed that a number of people don't use this word correctly. Merriam-Webster's Learner Dictionary has this to say about the word maybe: "It is used when you are talking about an action that has a chance of happening in the future." Imagine that. How often do you hear someone use this word who actually thought there was a chance of something happening in the future? Not very often.
Take facebook for instance. Why is there a "maybe" option when you are invited to an event or party when it usually means those people won't be there. I don't want it to sound like I think this party looks lame or that I don't like the person inviting me, so I click maybe. The fact is I think the party doesn't appeal to me or I feel like I don't know the person well enough to want to come. Personally, I think they should create a thumbs up-thumbs down system similar to Pandora. If you give an invite a thumbs down, there would appear a bubble that says "Thank you. We will no longer bother you with parties/events of this kind in the future. Would you like to block all invites from this friend?" Wouldn't that be nice.
Here's one of my favorite things people say:
"Are you coming tomorrow night?"
"Maybe. Who will be there?"
Am I not good enough for you? I guess that means we're not really friends. Why do people ask this all the time? Frankly, it fascinates me. The best is when people say this even when they have nothing else/better planned. Either they don't think hanging out with me is all that alluring or they are looking for someone special they want to hang out with. Face it. In a group of friends there is usually at least one who has more than platonic interest in another friend. If that special someone is not there, the interested party tries to figure out a way to hang out with him/her instead of hanging out with you. Hence, why "maybe" is such a good word. I would hang out with you if so-and-so were there too.
I'm definitely guilty of playing the maybe game. So if ever you ask me to do something and I say "maybe", don't count on me at all, and I expect about the same from you. There might be a chance, but it's a 0.83% chance. Maybe if my future wife was going to be there...
Wednesday, August 3, 2011
Concluding thoughts on Persuasion
I just finished the book Persuasion by Jane Austen. Yes, it took me forever to finish it, and no it wasn't because I didn't like it. I got a little distracted by a series of epic books that I will probably write about in the future. I wanted to give my opinions on this book's conclusion.
I have enjoyed this story since I watched one of the movie versions some time ago. It fascinates me that the only reason why there is a story is because two people couldn't talk to each other. It's full of awkward moments that could have been avoided had a conversation taken place. The ironic thing is that the book often comments on the value of meaningful conversation. The hard part was that such a conversation required a lot of humility and courage. The reader continues with anticipation wondering how and when the two heartbroken love birds would talk about their feelings.
Eventually, Captain Wentworth writes his heartfelt letter.
Though I think the story has a lot to offer, I must honestly admit that I am somewhat disappointed by the ending. As I said, I waited with anticipation for them to have a difficult conversation. I wondered who would be the one to initiate it and how the awkwardness would play out. Unfortunately, instead of Wentworth taking Anne aside to confess his unchanged feelings for her, he writes a letter. True, many a woman say the letter is beautiful and so romantic, but I don't think it was enough.
For all those ladies out there, put yourself in Anne's shoes. Imagine being in a wonderful relationship that is on the cusp of marriage, but you eventually end it because someone you hold in high regard persuades you to do so. Eight years later, you regret your decision and when you see him again, you find that your feelings for him have not changed. But, you broke his heart and now he avoids you when he can. Picture him eventually letting go of his pride and wanting to confess he still longs to marry you. What would you think if you got an email from him in which he writes that he has been a fool and wants to be with you. Lovely and romantic though the message may be, I can't help but think that most ladies would be a little disappointed that he couldn't muster the courage to talk face to face. The man is practically asking you to marry him, and he does it through an email? Come on, that's kind of lame.
Also, it wasn't like the ball was in Wentworth's court. She had just as much responsibility to fix their relationship. She broke it off for crying out loud, so if anything, the ball was in her court. After she got the letter, she naturally kind of freaked out and didn't know what to do with herself. Still, she didn't try to find him or anything, and instead was escorted home. What was she planning on doing, think about it for a while?
Now I'm not saying that the book is all that bad because it eventually describes how Wentworth met up with her and they talked about everything. He explained why he acted the way he had and she told him that she was sorry that she was so prideful. It all worked out in the end, which I guess is all that matters. Maybe this book teaches that, in real life, relationships aren't perfect because people aren't perfect. In a perfect world, there wouldn't have been a story because they would have talked the moment they met up again. Maybe that's why I like the story.
I have enjoyed this story since I watched one of the movie versions some time ago. It fascinates me that the only reason why there is a story is because two people couldn't talk to each other. It's full of awkward moments that could have been avoided had a conversation taken place. The ironic thing is that the book often comments on the value of meaningful conversation. The hard part was that such a conversation required a lot of humility and courage. The reader continues with anticipation wondering how and when the two heartbroken love birds would talk about their feelings.
Eventually, Captain Wentworth writes his heartfelt letter.
Though I think the story has a lot to offer, I must honestly admit that I am somewhat disappointed by the ending. As I said, I waited with anticipation for them to have a difficult conversation. I wondered who would be the one to initiate it and how the awkwardness would play out. Unfortunately, instead of Wentworth taking Anne aside to confess his unchanged feelings for her, he writes a letter. True, many a woman say the letter is beautiful and so romantic, but I don't think it was enough.
For all those ladies out there, put yourself in Anne's shoes. Imagine being in a wonderful relationship that is on the cusp of marriage, but you eventually end it because someone you hold in high regard persuades you to do so. Eight years later, you regret your decision and when you see him again, you find that your feelings for him have not changed. But, you broke his heart and now he avoids you when he can. Picture him eventually letting go of his pride and wanting to confess he still longs to marry you. What would you think if you got an email from him in which he writes that he has been a fool and wants to be with you. Lovely and romantic though the message may be, I can't help but think that most ladies would be a little disappointed that he couldn't muster the courage to talk face to face. The man is practically asking you to marry him, and he does it through an email? Come on, that's kind of lame.
Also, it wasn't like the ball was in Wentworth's court. She had just as much responsibility to fix their relationship. She broke it off for crying out loud, so if anything, the ball was in her court. After she got the letter, she naturally kind of freaked out and didn't know what to do with herself. Still, she didn't try to find him or anything, and instead was escorted home. What was she planning on doing, think about it for a while?
Now I'm not saying that the book is all that bad because it eventually describes how Wentworth met up with her and they talked about everything. He explained why he acted the way he had and she told him that she was sorry that she was so prideful. It all worked out in the end, which I guess is all that matters. Maybe this book teaches that, in real life, relationships aren't perfect because people aren't perfect. In a perfect world, there wouldn't have been a story because they would have talked the moment they met up again. Maybe that's why I like the story.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)