Where are the women???
Connie
On Mon, 25 Aug 1997 21:50:52 -0700, jar...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
>Christopher Abt wrote:
>>
>> are there any females who read this?
>
>Judging by the number of posts I don't think much of anyone reads this
>newsgroup.
>
>John
Yes.....there are women here! Unfortunately too many men are looking
for the unusual rather than the normal relationship. Yes...in
addition, there are not too many people who check this site
out....there for a while there was a lot of information that was
coming from all over the country rather than from the Phila area.
meh...@earthling.net
Tom Farley wrote:
>
> Christopher Abt wrote:
> >
> > are there any females who read this?
>
> I think there are a few, but this newsgroup hasn't really gotten off the
> ground yet. I can't say what goes on off-list, when someone responds to
> a post privately, but what little conversation that happens in the
> newsgroup has the same cold, put-offish character as you hear in popular
> meat-market bars. Some of the previous responses to your question
> illustrate my point. Nevertheless, I check it out about once a day, in
> the hope that the spammeisters and the whackos will wander off and let
> the group evolve into something worthwhile. Until that happens, you
> won't see many posts from women worth meeting.
>
> Tom
Gosh, Tom, that's such a cynical response about women worth meeting.
Maybe, for now, like you say, it has to do with the Whackos. I've been
reading this NG for a few months, and, yes, have been hesitant in
responding or posting for that matter. Hope your experiences improve
for you!
J...
RJ
Tom Farley wrote:
> My opinion is that
> phl.singles doesn't have to become an unmoderated dating service or a
> grim,
> get-laid-quick bulletin board. There's more than enough of those in
> cyberspace
> already. It ought to be a place for single men and women from the Big
> Scrapple
> to share ideas and insights, get thoughtful feedback and challenging
> debate,
> and basically have some fun with e-mail conversation about the
> relationship
> between the sexes and single life in and around the big city.
Sounds like a great idea. The secret is to keep posting -- even if you
think nobody is reading. The trouble's been, I think, that each message
has been treated like a note in a bottle washed up on the shore of an
empty beach. Someone will say something and everyone else kind of
ignores it. I've seen this happen in other "dead" newsgroups which are
little more than spam graveyards. For my part, I'm willing to go along
with this for a while and to keep posting . Sure, it would be great to
have more women involved, and I think that could happen if we just keep
the place alive.
Of course a lot of this apathy could be due to the very character of our
fair city. Sometimes I wonder why Philly is such a quiet town in so many
ways (there used to be an old joke about the sidewalks being pulled up
at nine o'clock at night). Is everyone just waiting for someone else to
take the lead, is it in the water, or has living in the shadow of NYC
taken away some of our spirit? Who knows? I'm not ready to give up yet.
> If people
> ultimately meet in person, more power to 'em. That's never going to
> happen
> until folks like you and I take the group in a direction away from the
> few who
> are trolling for an XXX experience, and the others who are looking to
> steal our
> money. To do that we all, men and women, have to post messages.
> Having dumped
> all of that on you, all that's left to say is...thanks for posting
> your
> thoughts.
>
So.... let's keep posting!
Roger
meh...@earthling.net
Tom:
> You may be right about my cynicism, J, but I think I'm just calling 'em the way
> I see 'em, and I haven't seen much beyond terse, deprecating one-liners from
> "real" women (discounting the sex-oriented spam). In fact, your recent post --
I agree with you on this. I've been reading several NG for several
months and have not found much to get involved with. And yes, most have
been one liner posts without much substance to them. I would rather not
say anything than to have people perceive me as a fool.
> a total of four lines starting, as an illustration of my original point, with a
> critical observation about me -- is one of the longest and most thoughtful I've
> seen on this Newsgroup for as long as I can remember. On the other hand,
I guess I could fall into that category of no substance with the
response to your post. When I read your statement, you could say I got
a little annoyed. Not all women who read or post are not worthy of
meeting. And your generalization got me to thinking. I would have said
more, but wasn't sure of the type of response I would've illicited from
you. So, instead, I sounded like an ignorant fool who needed to spout
off. For that, I apologize.
> perhaps I've been too passive, not putting sufficient effort to get this group
> moving to where it should be. (I see a glimmer of potential in the comments
> from Commander Mark this morning. I think he's got a clue.) My opinion is that
> phl.singles doesn't have to become an unmoderated dating service or a grim,
> get-laid-quick bulletin board. There's more than enough of those in cyberspace
Again, I agree with you. Since I don't frequent the bar scenes or
clubs, and really don't get to meet to many people at work to have
worthwile conversations with, I do tend to look at the NG for that.
Several months ago, I met someone through such a group and have been
having a great deal of fun in conversing with him through email. We
tend to get into major phylisophical discussions and it's nice to be
able to use the mind that way. I too would like to see this NG head
into that direction and maybe, just maybe, we can get rid of the
whackos.
> already. It ought to be a place for single men and women from the Big Scrapple
> to share ideas and insights, get thoughtful feedback and challenging debate,
> and basically have some fun with e-mail conversation about the relationship
> between the sexes and single life in and around the big city. If people
As stated above, you are not alone in your quest. With any luck, this
can happen.
> ultimately meet in person, more power to 'em. That's never going to happen
> until folks like you and I take the group in a direction away from the few who
> are trolling for an XXX experience, and the others who are looking to steal our
> money. To do that we all, men and women, have to post messages. Having dumped
> all of that on you, all that's left to say is...thanks for posting your
> thoughts.
Well, now that we both dumped on one another, let's begin a discussion
that can go some place. Although I have read your post regarding Diana,
I think that situation should be put to rest. (No pun intended.)
Joanne
Connie
On Wed, 03 Sep 1997 21:21:03 -0400, Eric Lucas
<ealucas@*antispam*ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>Thanks for sticking your neck out and expressing an opinion! Maybe this
>can be the source of some honest discussion!
You're welcome....I have a tendency to stick my neck out....luckily I
still have it attached to my head! <Smile>
>
>I'm curious about what you say. Do you mean the men you've met in general,
>or just the ones on the ng's that would be considered weirdos/losers in
>polite society, like the I-just-wanna-get-laid ads, and the ones that post
>the same desolate, lonely personal ad day after day after day?
Both! I have met guys in general, and especially if you happen to be
a divorced woman, the guys think after a date (or even on the first
'get to know you' meeting) that you should jump into bed. Now, I am
not a prude, and I do enjoy my intimate time with a guy, but not
necessarily on the first or second meeting. Maybe it is because I am
older...I have been told that you people follow it through almost as a
given...dating means going to bed. Well, while having all those
emotions and hormones flooding through me doesn't make it easy to say
no, but if my children are around, I am not going to jump into bed
with you. Okay....I am not a femme fatale either....being older and
overweight may cloud my thoughts, but it isn't easy to date someone
and just hop in bed. (Am I the only one who thinks like this????)
Just
>curious, as I'm someone who finds it a bit difficult to meet new people,
>especially women, since I've had a "real job" (sure is different now than
>it was in college, when meeting people in general was so much easier!), and
>I'm always curious what women think men are looking for (after all, as the
>stigma goes, what are you looking for that you still haven't found?)--and
>what those same women are looking for. For example, how do you define the
>normal relationship?
A normal relationship would be two people meeting...going out,
dinner, dancing, movies, walking...whatever, and talking...to each
other and about each other. Building a relationship. After some
time...(no limit), but mutual consent, you can then go to bed (or
wherever) and enjoy the physical aspects of your relationship.
>
>Like I said, I'm not flaming your opinion. I just thought it might serve
>as a good jumping-off point for a discussion.
>
> Eric Lucas
>
>
>
>
RJ
Connie wrote:
> I have met guys in general, and especially if you happen to be
> a divorced woman, the guys think after a date (or even on the first
> 'get to know you' meeting) that you should jump into bed. Now, I am
> not a prude, and I do enjoy my intimate time with a guy, but not
> necessarily on the first or second meeting. Maybe it is because I am
> older...I have been told that you people follow it through almost as a
>
> given...dating means going to bed. Well, while having all those
> emotions and hormones flooding through me doesn't make it easy to say
> no, but if my children are around, I am not going to jump into bed
> with you. Okay....I am not a femme fatale either....being older and
> overweight may cloud my thoughts, but it isn't easy to date someone
> and just hop in bed. (Am I the only one who thinks like this????)
>
I suspect more people think like this than the media and "common wisdom"
would have us believe (I know I do!). So often each person is working so
hard at trying to figure out what the other wants -- and is so hesitant
to express what she/he wants -- that things get very confusing and
complicated. We want to please each other and also satisfy our own
needs. We also want to get past that awkward stage and arrive at a
moment of intimacy which will relieve us of the anxiety of waiting to
find out if a relationship is really going anywhere. But rushing a
relationship along doesn't make it work any better -- far from it!
I think we all have a need for intimacy-- though there is a fear of
intimacy in many people at the same time -- and sex is only one way (and
not always the best way) to express it. In fact, some people can use sex
as a way to avoid *real* intimacy. It becomes a game -- a means of
getting what they want and using others to convince themselves that they
are in control of the situation. If people see sex as a way to satisfy
their own needs and ignore the true feelings of others, it becomes a way
of taking and not giving. (Sorry if this is coming across like a Sunday
morning sermon...)
> A normal relationship would be two people meeting...going out,
> dinner, dancing, movies, walking...whatever, and talking...to each
> other and about each other. Building a relationship. After some
> time...(no limit), but mutual consent, you can then go to bed (or
> wherever) and enjoy the physical aspects of your relationship.
>
I agree. A normal relationship is well-rounded and rooted in shared
interests and emotional support. The reason why so many relationships
fail or hobble painfully along is because these other aspects are never
cultivated. Again, there is a tendency in our present-day culture to
emphasize sexuality at the expense of the other elements of our lives
together. As I stated above, sex can be seen as a power-play which makes
it the main venue of intimacy in a power-based society. On the other
hand, sex can be a wonderful component of intimacy which can enhance an
already grounded and supportive relationship -- a rare thing these days,
it seems.
Roger
Eric Lucas
I'm sorry to hear you've had such difficulty. I wholeheartedly agree with what
you consider normal. Much more emotionally fulfilling than the one-night
"wham-bam..." routine, I should imagine. If I just wanted sex without intimacy,
I've got a right hand.... (Sorry to be crass--just being honest.)
I guess not all men do feel this way, because you're not the first woman I've
heard complain about this attitude. I find that getting intimate (even
non-sexual affection--kissing, etc.) takes a fair bit of trust and understanding
of what a person is like. I have never understood how some people do this--the
so-called "one-night stand." Yes, I have been in relationships that became
sexual very quickly (on the second date, once), but that was a very unusual
situation. Normally it takes much longer for me to reach that level of trust
and intimacy. In fact, I can't remember a first date when I even kissed a
girl--a hug's all a gal'll get from me on the first night. (Hugs are more fun
anyway.)
I disagree that it has anything to do with age or physical stature. Even when I
was young and thin, I felt this way. It made me a bit of an dating outcast in
high school, but in college and grad school, the women I dated appeared to
appreciate it. Now, a few year and a few pounds later, I can't imagine being
any other way.
If this is what some women have been exposed to, no wonder the ones I've met
since college have tended to be hostile until I could convince them they had no
reason to be hostile. Let's see... the stereotypical man needs to be more
respectful, and the stereotypical woman needs to be less hostile and more
forgiving of the stereotypical man's minor idiocy.
Why don't people just act human and give each other respect and honest emotion?
Eric Lucas
Connie wrote:
> On Wed, 03 Sep 1997 21:21:03 -0400, Eric Lucas
> <ealucas@*antispam*ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
> >Thanks for sticking your neck out and expressing an opinion! Maybe this
> >can be the source of some honest discussion!
> You're welcome....I have a tendency to stick my neck out....luckily I
> still have it attached to my head! <Smile>
>
> >
> >I'm curious about what you say. Do you mean the men you've met in general,
> >or just the ones on the ng's that would be considered weirdos/losers in
> >polite society, like the I-just-wanna-get-laid ads, and the ones that post
> >the same desolate, lonely personal ad day after day after day?
> Both! I have met guys in general, and especially if you happen to be
> a divorced woman, the guys think after a date (or even on the first
> 'get to know you' meeting) that you should jump into bed. Now, I am
> not a prude, and I do enjoy my intimate time with a guy, but not
> necessarily on the first or second meeting. Maybe it is because I am
> older...I have been told that you people follow it through almost as a
> given...dating means going to bed. Well, while having all those
> emotions and hormones flooding through me doesn't make it easy to say
> no, but if my children are around, I am not going to jump into bed
> with you. Okay....I am not a femme fatale either....being older and
> overweight may cloud my thoughts, but it isn't easy to date someone
> and just hop in bed. (Am I the only one who thinks like this????)
>
> Just
> >curious, as I'm someone who finds it a bit difficult to meet new people,
> >especially women, since I've had a "real job" (sure is different now than
> >it was in college, when meeting people in general was so much easier!), and
> >I'm always curious what women think men are looking for (after all, as the
> >stigma goes, what are you looking for that you still haven't found?)--and
> >what those same women are looking for. For example, how do you define the
> >normal relationship?
>
> A normal relationship would be two people meeting...going out,
> dinner, dancing, movies, walking...whatever, and talking...to each
> other and about each other. Building a relationship. After some
> time...(no limit), but mutual consent, you can then go to bed (or
> wherever) and enjoy the physical aspects of your relationship.
>
> >