One of the problems that lots of women have with dating is that they refuse to understand/believe/accept that men and women are playing two different games. Men understand this and women don’t, which leads to lots of women falling for the okey-doke when they really don’t have to.
For instance, one of my most intelligent and reality-understanding female friends asks me why guys keep kickin’ it to (read: trying to get sex from) women that obviously aren’t giving them any rhythm (aren’t showing signs of sexual interest in him).
The obvious answer to that is that nobody cares what you think. A guy either wants to have sex with you or he doesn’t. What you think about that is irrelevant. He’s still going to try to tag up.
That’s obvious to men because… We’re men.
That isn’t obvious to women because it doesn’t jibe with their fairytale notion that they were brainwashed with as little girls that men are inspired to have sex with women solely for some supernatural reason that’s mutually beneficial and has nothing to do with physicality.
In fact, sex is a biological imperative. If nobody has sex, there are no more kids, and the species eventually becomes extinct.
Therefore, guys are inclined to desire sexual interaction with women that turn us on, *NOT* necessarily with women that “give them rhythm” = indicate that they want to have sex with us.
This is why there are no fat strippers.
The point being that if women understood dating clearly, they would have a better time of it.
Unfortunately, that would require women to believe that men and women are different, which we are.
Again.. Men understand this. Women rebel against this.
One of the downsides of women attempting to be men, or, to put it another way, believing in a “We’re all the same” society is that they think they can apply female thought patterns to males and jack themselves up in the process.
Women think “What would *I* do if…” instead of “What would a male do if…”, which isn’t useful, and sets women up for dating failure.
Who Started This?
This brings us to the question of the day, which is “Who said we were friends? o_O”
This is very, very, very, very, VERY important.
It’s not important who says we’re friends *NOW*. It’s important who said we were friends *FIRST*.
People tend to accept and then propagate to the public an unified description of their relationship to each other. This is why it isn’t important if a guy and gal agree at this point in time that they are “friends”. Whomever started it, the other one is going to start using the same word, even though it doesn’t mean the same thing.
Males use the term “friend” to mean “I like her as a person, have things in common with her, and would spend platonic time with her, however, if she’s attractive to me, she could get it.”
Females use the term “friend” (often preceded by the word “just”, indicating a lower-level status than some other type of relationship) to mean “I am not having sex with this male.”
This is why women tend to bug out and overthink situations where “friends” end up hooking up. They are now wondering how to compartmentalize the guy, since they don’t have a description for a guy they like as a person and may or may not have sex with if they feel like doing that.
Meanwhile, the guy is chillin’. He’s like “She looked good. I felt like hittin’ it. That’s what I did. Let’s watch the game together now.”
This is because the male description of female friends has nothing to do with whether he’d hook up with her or not. It has to do with whether he considers her a FRIEND or not.
So, It’s very important to think back and consider who started this? :D .. Who called the other one a friend first?
It was probably the female, because males tend to hang out WITH our friends, therefore, friendship with her was implied by the fact that we agreed to spend time with her in the first place, and there’s no reason to say “You are my friend, _____. :)”.
There’s also no reason for guys to mention that because it doesn’t have any bearing on whether she could get it or not.
So, If the gal started it and called the guy her friend, he’s going to agree, because a) he considers her a friend, in the male description, and b) if he disagrees, she’s going to bounce, and he won’t get the chance to hit it.
In other words, there’s no downside for a guy who decides to agree with a gal’s description of their relationship as a friendship.
Now.. If the guy started this “friend” stuff, that “might could” mean that she *CAN’T* get it, which is an entirely different situation. :)
SIDE NOTE: For y’all ladies that might be wondering what “it” is, I’m referring to the general response when one male points out a female to another male… If he would hook up with her, the response is “She could get it”… You can tell how interested he is in her by how much emphasis he puts on that statement.. It might sound like “meh.. (shrug) she could get it. :/”, or it might sound like “SHE COULD GET IT!!!!! >:D”… Another sign of emphasis would be how much his face scrunches up as if he’s in some sort of pain when he says that.
Most guys aren’t going to tell women they want to have sex with that they’re their friends, because we know and acknowledge the difference in how men and women think.
Labels & Appearances
For instance.. A chick might be cute, right? :) haha But that doesn’t mean she can’t get it.
Some guys like having sex with cute women.
Meanwhile, you can’t TELL HER that she’s cute, because her analysis of that is “He thinks I’m CUTE… instead of SEXY!!! :O” and then your chances to get on go directly downhill from there.
OTOH, if a chick says a dude is cute, that means she doesn’t find you visually repulsive, and she’s willing to stick around long enough for you to throw your hat in the ring and try to get some. >:D
So, if a guy starts the “friends” thing, he’s saying it in the FEMALE understanding of “friends”, not the male one.
Unfortunately, the female definition of “friends” doesn’t make a distinction between ACTUAL FRIENDS and guys she’s claiming not to have sex with.
Actually, that’s another important point. There’s no societal pressure on guys to be seen as *NOT* having sex with some chick, unless she looks busted, in which case it’s embarrassing, and you might have to suffer jokes for a few months about how desperate you are and blah blah, but there’s no such thing as a male “slut”.
Meaning, you can call guys “sluts” all you like, but all you’re saying is “You can get laid”, which is a positive thing for males, not negative.
So, When a female is interrogated about a male, she’s under pressure to deny having sex with him, whether she did or not in the past, and whether she will continue to do so in the future.
This is another thing that erodes the credibility of women calling men “friends”. Women have reasons to lie about that, for their own self-esteem, and men don’t.
Or.. Let me put that another way.. Men’s reasons for playing it off are external, and women’s are internal. Guys might not bring it up because there’s no social benefit to us in saying who we hooked up with. What difference does it make? :D Guys can get girls or we can’t. “Which ones” doesn’t matter.
Meanwhile.. Women always have to take a defensive posture, and act like they’re either having sex with one guy, who has claimed that she’s his girlfriend/fiancee/wife/whatever, or that she’s not having sex with any guys at all. So, Every guy that hasn’t publicly claimed her as at least a girlfriend will be labeled “a friend” when she mentions him to anyone that asks.
So, the male definition of a female friend is “A chick that I like as a person, and would spend time with, and, depending on how she looks that day, I may or may not tap that ass”, and the female definition of “friend” is a guy that she’d rather not have anyone think she’s having sex with.
Follow Bill via Facebook | Twitter | YouTube | Google+ | Email Subscription | RSS Feed