Men See You As: Not a Challenge |
 When you're in love, you lay it all out on the line And while men do appreciate your honesty... Do you ever wonder if you're being a little too available? Pull back a little! He'll be wanting you even more. |
--------
Thursday I plowed my way through a book Christina got me called "The Girl's Guide to Hunting and Fishing." It was basically a novel that gave snapshots of this girl's life as she grew up and had various types of experiences with various men, always landing with a guy who fulfilled some of her needs but wasn't exactly for her in the end. In the final couple of chapters, she buys one of those "Rules of Dating" books ("Never accept a date less than three days in advance", "Never dance with a guy more than once at a party", etc.) because she's so desperate to meet "the one" and have him actually be interested in her. Of course, the author chooses for the self-righteous ending and has the main character nearly destroy the one man who is perfect for her, and who does love her "the right way" because she's busy playing by the rules of "the game"* in a desperate attempt to "keep him interested." Point being, supposedly, that when the right one comes along the "rules" aren't supposed to matter or apply, or even help in the end.
How true is that, though? Is the book (written by a female) simply looking to placate the zillions of women (myself included) who just aren't in the least bit comfortable trying to manipulate someone just for his affections? Does it maybe actually truly hurt things to be too open, too frank, "too available"? Maybe people are just messy equations of chemicals and physiology. If so, that would support the argument that manipulation is actually necessary, or at least helps quite a bit in keeping a man interested. Another book I'm reading has some psychological undertones, and it talks about the psychology of seduction.
One of the most important aspects of seduction is the aura of mystery. This experience with the unknown is intended to create an excitement that causes the release of phenylethylamine. Phenylethylamine apparently is the culprit for causing that wonderful "emotional" rush of feeling "euphoric, energetic, and optimistic" during sexual interactions. One can argue a good point about monogamy and waiting for marriage to have sex simply from the perspective of wanting this rush to be as good as it can be with the person that you're going to live with forever (a nice thing to want, given that it's going to be forever), and so accomplishing this by simply leaving everything as a big mystery until marriage. I get sidetracked though; that's not the point.
The point is that if so much of human experience can be boiled down to "feelings" that really come from hormones, and that those hormones need certain stimuli for release - isn't that a really good argument for engaging in the sort of coquettish, manipulative, behavior that I tend to abohor (not to mention, completely fail at?) I've shifted away from the seduction and back into the more "emotional" realm, but really - isn't that how most people characterize falling in love - that heady, dizzy, feeling that comes from finally getting close to someone you've wanted for awhile and haven't ever known that you could have?
And - girls, let's be honest. How many times have we turned down dates from guys that seem just too open, too "there?" How many times has a previously "boring, available" guy seemed much more attractive after he's suddenly not single anymore?
Before I give the impression that I've given up on "real love" - let me say two things. First, while the experience of "falling in love" (the chemicals, maybe) maybe does rely on those hormones getting released, that's still not to say that maniuplation is necessary. (Note that it DOES say, however, that manipulation technically is sufficient.) I would contend that it's probably much more satisfactory to let things happen naturally, and given the wide variety of personalities out there, there probably is someone who is capable of having their happy hormones stimulated by someone who tends to be less distant and mysterious than others. It just takes some looking.
Second...it's important to realize that the behaviors which might be conducive to "falling in love" (especially taking the manipulative road) aren't really conducive to a long term relationship, especially having a family. I mean, in some ways, sure - in terms of sex, mostly, though. In the long run, though, I would think that most people would want an open, honest, reliable, trustworthy mate - especially if they have children. I think where most people get hung up is the "spark" - that hormonal rush. And that's where most girls will completely discount an otherwise fabulous (haha, okay maybe not fabulous ;-) ) guy - how many times have we all heard the phrase "He's perfect, but my stomach just doesn't do flip flops when I see him?"
For what it's worth, I've had a couple relationships that bypassed the "dizzy, falling in love" feeling. In the long run, it didn't actually seem to make any sort of negative difference - I always still ended up with a guy that I was close to, could trust, was comfortable around, and could have fun with. (Not to say that there wasn't any physical enjoyment. I think that the "falling in love" feeling is completely separate from the way it feels to kiss, hold, and caress someone you really care about. It's different for me, at least, although I think that some people who haven't experienced a healthy relationship might not agree.) Regardless of the fact that those relationships obviously still ended - at least they ended for pretty substantive reasons - personality conflicts, values conflicts, etc. - and not just because we "fell out of love." I was able to feel like I really learned from all of the relationships, and walked away from them with a better sense of who I am and what I need in a long term partner.
Uh, where was I going...oh yeah! The only real conundrum here is - what to do if you're the "perfect guy" or "perfect girl" who's getting rejected _solely_ on the grounds of being "too available?" I know a lot of people in this position. It's dangerous territory. On one hand, probably anyone worth your time is going to appreciate you how you are. On the other hand, millions of years of evolution and a deeply engraved physiological blueprint are likely going to tip the scales slightly in favor of the more mysterious types. It's a compelling argument for perhaps tweaking a couple behaviors - at least until they're head over heels for you, at which point you're somewhat free to at least be your loving, caring, and hopefully open, self. I guess it's a matter of deciding if the other person is really worth the effort it takes to make their happy hormones come out and play, just to win you the chance to show them how great you really are.
Be careful when playing with fire, though.
* I just lost The Game, speaking of such things. Damnit.
No comments:
Post a Comment