Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site unc.unc.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!harvard!talcott!panda!genrad!decvax!mcnc!unc!fsks From: fsks@unc.UUCP (Frank Silbermann) Newsgroups: net.singles Subject: Re: The Value of Chutzpa Message-ID: <107@unc.unc.UUCP> Date: Wed, 7-Aug-85 21:05:40 EDT Article-I.D.: unc.107 Posted: Wed Aug 7 21:05:40 1985 Date-Received: Sun, 11-Aug-85 06:39:53 EDT References: <317@azure.UUCP> <800@vax2.fluke.UUCP> Reply-To: fsks@unc.UUCP (Frank Silbermann) Distribution: net Organization: CS Dept, U. of N. Carolina, Chapel Hill Lines: 97 Chris Andersen: >>> First of all, you violated rule #1 of net.singles >>> "Never assume that you know what turns MOTAS on". Jane Caputo: > Thank you Chris. If you want to know what turns women on, ask them. Even if the woman is a stranger? How would you feel if some man came up to you asking what turns you on? Practically speaking, a man must make assumptions. Jane Caputo: > What Gregg Mackenzie called "the proper attitude" would certainly > turn me off. When I was very young and sadly lacking in empathy, >I considered it sort of a social responsibility to put down men who considered >themselves god's gift to women. My daughter does the same thing now. At least these guys got your attention. They can always come back to you later saying how they're really not like that. Stories of the woman who falls in love with the man she first found obnoxious are common. It's the guys you don't even notice who have no chance. Frank Silbermann: >> Furthermore, if a woman has a fetish for bold, swashbuckling men, >> and you refuse to strut for her, well, you're not being very considerate >> of her needs, are you? Jane Caputo: > And what if she doesn't have a fetish for bold, swashbuckling men? > Your strutting will turn her off immediately. Depends on how seriously the man takes himself. Burt Reynolds' great appeal comes from combining machismo with a self-mocking sense of humor. Jane Caputo: > Today when I go to a party the men I'm interested in are conveniently > in a corner, engrossed in some technical discussion. They seldom > recognize me, but luckily I can recognize them. Unless, of course, > they go underground for the evening, circulating and making smalltalk > to meet women. . . > Forgive me for belaboring this one (admittedly deviant) case, > but the world is full of women with unique histories. And each > is looking for "somebody special" -- a man whose ways coincide > with her half-conscious images of masculinity. When the fit is right, > the most unexpected, insignificant things will turn her on > (and the only techniques you'll need will be for self-defense :-) This is very nice when it happens, but the odds of it happening are small. At a party I can sit around in a technical discussion with a few other men, and hope that someone like you will show up. And IF that happens, I would hope she'd be MY type, so that I'd be interested in _her_. And IF she were my type, I then could hope that she'd choose me over the half dozen other nerds in the group. That's too many IF's. I know a woman with a similar dilemma. She is about 75 pounds overweight. She doesn't have to try to gain weight -- it comes naturally. Theoretically, this shouldn't cause much problem, since there do exist men who are turned on to fat women; some men are ONLY interested in fat women. But in this country, these men are uncommon. There are just not enough of them to go around. But if this woman loses weight and develops a movie-star figure, then the ratios will be in HER favor. If a _SUPERFICIAL_ feature is scaring away potential SO's, then the best thing to do is to change that feature. Notice the emphasis on "superficial". No one is advocating a change of character or values. Chris Andersen: >>> Frankly, if a women dismisses a guy JUST because he can't say "hello" >>> without stuttering a little (a condition resulting from several years >>> of being a "wimp"), then perhaps the women isn't even worth the try. Jane Caputo: > I think it's a little strong to say she "isn't worth the try." > But it's very realistic for someone like Chris, whose appeal is > likely to be his sensitivity and warmth, to eliminate this woman. > There's not likely to be much interest on either side. But this woman is NOT rejecting Chris' sensitivity and warmth. She's rejecting his stuttering, his passivity and his inhibition. This woman might well LOVE to meet a man with sensitivity and warmth, provided it came wrapped differently. Does Chris consider his stuttering to be an integral part of his personality? Did he choose to stutter on philosophical or aesthetic grounds, or is it merely an accident of his upbringing? Jane Caputo: > If you want "somebody special", then the best thing you can do is learn > to telegraph what you really are. Make sure your public image matches > your private one as closely as possible, and give the right woman > a chance to find you while you're looking for her. I agree. That's why Chris would do well to strengthen his public image. Somehow I don't believe that stuttering awkwardness accurately reflects Chris's true, inner self. Or does it? Frank Silbermann