Wednesday, July 21, 2010

He's Just Not That Into Verbal Communication: Why Traditional Heterosexual Dating Turns Women into "The Communicators"

I wrote this post last year, but seeing as how our readership has expanded since then, I thought it would be fun to start reposting some of the older material.





We're all familiar with the stereotypes about how men and women approach communication: women always want to talk about the relationship, and men have the emotional maturity of a toddler. This supposed disconnect is an essential theme to family sit coms; the woman puts her hands on her hips and says "we need to talk," and the man whines and groans and does everything he can to distract her. (Has anyone seen "Everyone Loves Raymond"?). I don't know how accurate these stereotypes are, and I have no intention of making an argument about their accuracy or lack thereof. What I would like to discuss today is how traditional gender roles in heterosexual dating patterns contribute to this stereotype.

Not everyone follows traditional dating roles, and I say thank goodness for that! But even some very liberal and socially progressive individuals adhere strictly to the idea that a man should pursue a woman, and not the other way around. She can reciprocate the interest, the argument goes, but she shouldn't take over the chase because she deserves a man who's willing to chase her. My thoughts on mixing hunting metaphors with dating descriptions aside, this view is surprisingly prevalent in mainstream television, film, etc. (Just look at He's Just Not That Into You). But how do these prescriptive roles influence the way men and women communicate about their feelings, motivations, and intentions?

Here's how I see it: These roles make dating a more straightforward experience for men than for women. Under these rules, if a man is interested in a woman, he asks her out on a date. He instantly knows whether that first date will happen, because she tells him "yes" or "no" right away. If he is still interested after a first date, he asks her out again. And so on. There's always a chance the woman is accepting the dates without interest, or a chance that she'll accept a date only to cancel later, but in general a man can tell whether there will be another date because he's initiating the dates. In a storybook world this behavior would never be a problem. A man would ask a woman out, she would accept or not accept, and couples would figure out how they felt one date at a time, until that crucial moment when they would both reveal their love.

But what happens when a man doesn't initiate another date right away, and the woman isn't sure why? Whatever gender stereotypes tell us about female intuition, most people can't read minds, so this is a plausible scenario. It could be the man is busy, or that he feels broke at the moment (traditional dating dictates the man pay). It could be that he isn't sure whether he's interested and needs some time to sort things out. But then again maybe he's lost interest, and he simply won't call. This scenario could happen whether he said "I'll call you" or not.

To a man in this predicament, the situation is clear. If he's interested he'll ask her out again, even if it takes a week or two before he calls. But the woman must wait before she learns his intentions. I attend school in a conservative environment, and I frequently hear men complain about women who make up excuses to avoid dates instead of admitting they've lost interest. Yet how many of those same men let women know that they will not be calling for another date? I would guess almost none. It would probably feel rude and presumptuous. Besides, the man knows that he's lost interest and will not initiate another date, so he doesn't need that information communicated the way that the woman will if she's interested in him.

So, if a woman is confused about a man's intentions, or if she wants to change the pace at which they're dating, or if she isn't interested but a man keeps asking her out despite all the hints she drops, what are her options? She could try to initiate a date with him, but that would be straying from traditional dating patterns. Some women will do this, but many who adhere to traditional gender roles will not. So, short of exiting traditional roles, she has only a few options:

1. Drop hints/ play games and hope she can subtly get (or share) the information she needs

2. Accept her confusion / annoyance, and just grin and bear it

3. Initiate a serious discussion

When subtlety falls flat, and waiting in ignorance is too much to bear, we are left with the third option: verbal communication. Many people avoid direct communication simply because they want dating to feel casual and natural, and it can't feel that way if everything is vocalized in explicit detail. In traditional heterosexual dating, a man would have more reason to avoid it, though, because he already has the information he needs: If he likes the woman he'll ask her out again, and if not he won't. If he wants to go out more, he'll ask her out more, and if he wants to go out less often, he'll ask her out less often. But if a woman is placed in the position of only saying ,"yes," "no," or "how about later," she may in fact need to discuss the relationship in a way her traditional male counterpart doesn't understand, and that need would make her much more likely to risk the awkward elements a discussion may bring.

Personally, I think the behavior patterns you start when you're dating carry over into longterm relationships and marriages. If a man and woman do develop serious difficulties communicating while they're dating, then a couple rings, a cake, and some vows probably won't make that go away. So maybe we can all be a little more open, honest, and direct, regardless of what dating patterns we prefer.


An additional note a year-older Emily would like to add:

Sometimes men complain that when they ask women out on dates, the women say "I'm busy this weekend," instead of saying "I'm not interested." Carl the Open Minded Chauvinist often complains about this behavior, and I usually listen with sympathy. But awhile ago I stopped feeling sympathetic, and here's why:

I asked Carl the OMC how he thought a man should respond if he's not interested, but a woman says, "Let's do this again sometime," at the end of a date. Carl said that the man has no obligation to say "I am not interested," since doing so would be rude. I argued that when a woman says "I'm busy this weekend," rather than "I'm busy this weekend but let's do it next weekend," she is communicating disinterest at least as clearly as a man who simply stops asking a woman out, if not more clearly. And that to the woman it may feel just as rude to say "I'm not interested in you," as it would feel to the man at the end of the date. Both are invited to continue pursuing the other person romantically, and both find indirect ways of communicating their disinterest. 

29 comments:

  1. Can we send this to all men? Just a tidbit of information: I am a chaser, weather or not I would like to formally admit it or not. I always tend to ask out guys first or confess my love and guess what?! I am almost always dumped right there on the spot. I think men like the chase, just from my own personal excruciating experiences. Also from the science perspective it's literally ingrained in our subconscious and DNA to be chased and play games, it's only with vigorous meditation and being dumped over and over that we mature into bright adults and pick our mates a little more carefully and intelligently. I believe :)

    ReplyDelete
  2. Carl, the OMC asked me to post my thoughts, so here you go:

    Your ideas about why a man would not initiate another date are interesting. To quote:

    A. It could be the man is busy.

    Possible, but I don't think so. I can only speak for myself here, but a woman that I am actively interested in pretty much absorbs my waking thoughts. Work, School, Games, Pastimes all take a back seat. Getting that second date would be first on my priority list. I would have reservations about a guy who won't immediately go for the second date.

    B. Feels broke at the moment

    This one is also possible... but if that's the case, it really means he lacks imagination. My best date ever was a drive around town, a walk in the park, visiting a nursery and a book-store and reading Dr. Seuss books together, laughing all the while. Total cost: $0. If a guy won't ask you out because he feels he has to spend money... I would move on.

    C. He isn't sure whether he's interested and needs some time to sort things out.

    This has happened to me a grand total of one time, but I told her I needed time in that case. I am not sure, but this may be more applicable to women. For myself and the few others I've spoken to on the topic, this usually isn't an issue. A guy knows if he's interested.

    Basically, I am trying to move on to my point about a guy not calling. If he doesn't call pretty quickly after the first date (my personal opinion would be about 3 days), then that means he's not interested.

    It took me some thought to sort out my opinion about you feeling justified about being ambiguous. Basically, I disagree. When a man asks you for that date, he is asking, "Are you interested? Is it something you would like to do?" If you are ambiguous, or say you are busy, I wouldn't go so far as to say you are being dishonest, but you aren't being forthright. I think responsible well-meaning people should be forthright. This seems to be supported by 3 Ne 12:37. (Not sure if churchy stuff is welcome on here or not, but there ya go.)

    As for men not giving a girl a call after the first date, that's just the way dating works. A man might as well complain, "Why do I have to be the one that asks her out? Why do I have to pay? Why do I have to be the initiator?" Because that's the way it works. Is it the best way? Maybe not, but I don't think a guy is trying to be ambiguous when he doesn't call, he's just trying to save both parties a little awkwardness. Being nebulous when a guy calls doesn't save you from awkwardness, it just perpetuates it.

    If you are feeling ambiguous about the situation and are wondering why that guy hasn't called you, then ask. He should man up and say he's not interested, or get excited and say, "Yeah! Let's totally get together again! Sorry for being a kwan and not calling you sooner!"

    ReplyDelete
  3. Chris, I can buy your argument that a man is asking whether a woman is interested when he asks her on another date. But I have to go back to my original point about this issue, which is that when you are going on dates with a woman, you and she may communicate in entirely different but equally valid ways. Whether you intend to do this or not, your explanation of how women should communicate harks back to androcentric thinking. You're still focusing on the man's need for instant information, and ignoring how quickly a woman would like to receive information.

    I could just as easily argue that if a woman says "I'm busy," it means she's not interested. Because, trust me, if I like a guy, I will not just say, "Sorry, I'm busy that day," and leave it at that. I will first try really hard to fit him into my schedule, and if I can't, I am going to tell him "I can't this weekend, what about next weekend?" And so, using your logic about how a response does or doesn't imply interest, I could argue that a woman is being extremely when she doesn't suggest an alternative day.

    However, it's not fair of you or me to generalize our motivations so much, or to demand that others communicate the way we do. All we can really do is understand that not everyone communicates the way we do, and learn how to *check our assumptions* instead of assuming we know what the other person means.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Oops, that should say "extremely clear," not just "extremely."

    PS - thanks for you comment! You've raised interesting and valid points.

    ReplyDelete
  5. If you don't mind a male weighing in:

    I have to say I agreed with this post as a whole. If this is what feminism entails, than I am all for it. I'll try my best to put such knowledge into effect :D

    ReplyDelete
  6. Especially the part about how it will define the relationship later on. Openness, communication, is key.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Please do weigh in! We love to hear male voices here. Also, our theme for the month of August will be masculinity. I like the comments you've been making on the blog, so just let me know if you'd like to do a guest post. It could be on anything relating to masculinity, from how other men have shaped your idea of masculinity to what masculinity means in your faith to how race plays into masculinity.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I don't know who has it easier in traditional dating. The woman has to wade through a lot of ambiguity and wait for desirable guys to notice her and ask her out. The guy has to make himself vulnerable, setting himself up for possible rejection multiple times by being the initiator.

    I think dating is hard for both parties and it's an outright miracle anytime it works.

    I cannot speak for all men, but I do appreciate as much openness and honesty as possible. Sometimes it hurts, but I always come away from an obvious, but kind rejection with gratitude. In fact, one of the things I was attracted to about my current girlfriend was how open she was with me during our first few dates. I never felt like I was receiving mixed signals and she always let me know she was interested, and not through flirting, which she admits she is terrible at.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Adam, I agree - traditional dating can make things tough for anyone, and openness and honesty go a long way. While it's important to me to validate the less direct way that many women communicate in dating (after all, they do it for a reason) I've always been a pretty frank person, and it's taken me a long time to understand why so many people aren't direct. I know someone who would always tell men "I'm just not ready for a relationship right now," when she knew for a fact she wasn't interested. Then, to her great surprise, the men would assume "She likes me, so she'll come around in awhile."

    No matter how much I encouraged her to just tell them the truth, she maintained that it was kinder that way.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Carl the OMC here. (Yay! I have an acronym!)

    Emily, I believe in your reply to Chris and Adam you veer very much closer to the territory you're accusing us of. You want us to validate your way of communicating, while I think Chris absolutely nailed it on the head when he said "Being nebulous when a guy calls doesn't save you from awkwardness, it just perpetuates it."

    In that instance you are deliberately confusing the issue by not being clear. The other party is asking "are you further interested" and you should say "no thank you, I'm not." A guy not calling isn't initiating, isn't communicating anything. He's not deliberately injecting more awkwardness and bad communication. I completely disagree that she is "communicating disinterest at least as clearly as a man who simply stops asking a woman out, if not more clearly," as you say.

    In short, you want us to validate your ambiguous way of communicating, but don't validate our desire to have an unambiguous way of communicating. As a woman, you need to realize that you're dating men, and should try to communicate how men will understand. (Yes, I'm being androcentric, but we're talking about communicating to MEN, so you have to simply deal with that.) You should not expect us to come over into your world and try to use your methods of communication if you're not willing to reciprocate.

    That being said, I do know that you, personally, Emily, are more direct than most of the female population out there. So don't take any of this as a direct attack on you personally. You're already far better than most women at communicating in a way that men understand.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Emily, I would definitely LOVE to make a post or two on masculinity. I will try to get something in the works and let you know.

    And I'm not sure how Emily is putting forth an ambigous way of communinicating, Carl. Forgive me for the ignorance on my part, but could you elaborate? How is openly discussing whether you want a relationship to keep going or not 'ambiguous'?

    ReplyDelete
  12. My dear Carl the OMC,

    If I had actually said what you're saying I said, I would be guilty and sexist indeed. I have many, many thoughts that I will need to tease apart from each other in order to explain the places where I agree or disagree with you, so this may get a little long. It will also probably become numbered in some way.

    Let me take apart your comment, one paragraph (perhaps one sentence) at a time:

    "Emily, I believe in your reply to Chris and Adam you veer very much closer to the territory you're accusing us of."

    - My rhetoric is frequently unclear and imprecise, and I may be coming across as a hypocrite as a result. That being the case, please allow the rest of this comment to clarify my thoughts, irrespective of my previous imprecise language. (In other words, please take what I'm saying now at face value, even if it contradicts what I seemed (to you, at least) to say earlier).

    But let's continue:

    "You want us to validate your way of communicating,"

    Ahem. Ahem. Did I ever explicitly state that *I* communicate this way? Have I ever said that I tell men "No, I'm busy that day" and hope they'll guess that I'm not interested? The only times I say "I'm too busy" and don't suggest another day are when a man calls me the day of. I figure it's too late to reschedule, but that's an entirely different discussion. So let's not make assumptions, my friend.

    "I think Chris absolutely nailed it on the head when he said "Being nebulous when a guy calls doesn't save you from awkwardness, it just perpetuates it."

    I take issue with Chris's overall argument, because he essentially says that male communication can stay as it is, but that female communication needs to change. That attitude is androcentric, plain and clear. I take issue with this particular statement of his (and your endorsement of it) because it ignores the witnesses of many individuals who have found that they experience a whole lot less awkwardness by not having to tell a man, "I'm not interested." Perhaps Chris is revealing that this response causes the *man* to feel awkward, but he has provided no evidence that it doesn't help the *woman* feel less awkward.

    Am I arguing that women should communicate this way, or that it doesn't hurt men when they do? No, not by any means! In fact, I'm trying really hard not to pass judgment on either form of communication. My main goal with this post was to explain to people of either gender why someone would respond in ways that might initially seem strange. When I have been on the asking side of the dating equation, I have had men who were not interested avoid telling me so by saying "I'm busy that day." When they did that, I hated it. A lot. But seeing a man do it helped me understand how the *role* of the askee increased his or her likelihood to communicate indirectly. I don't communicate the way these women do, but then again.... I'm not asked out on dates nearly as frequently as most single women at BYU are. Maybe I'd respond similarly if I were in that role more frequently.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Moving on:

    "In short, you want us to validate your ambiguous way of communicating, but don't validate our desire to have an unambiguous way of communicating."

    Wow, Carl. Way to turn me into a strawperson. Was it fun to shoot those arrows at the false and easily-shot image of me? ;-)

    1. I am arguing that male communication is much more ambiguous from the female perspective than men realize. And that female communication is clearer from the female perspective than men realize. So, I don't see this as an argument in favor of ambiguity. I'm arguing for a re-envisioning of what communicative ambiguity is in the first place.

    2. You complain that I don't validate the male desire for the communication that feels unambiguous to them. Validating or not validating what men want in communication is not my intention, and here's why: this post was a response to the stereotype that women are unclear. The perspective you're championing has been so well represented that I saw no need to validate it further. However, I personally think each viewpoint is just as valid as the other. If they were on equal footings to begin with, I'd argue equally for each. If the male perspective on this was at a disadvantage I'd argue more in favor of it. But neither of those scenarios is accurate, as far as I can tell.

    I will say in my defense that I at least attempted to explain why a man would not feel a need to communicate in a DTR. Alot of women get mad at men for not telling them "here's how I feel," and I certainly tried to explain why men would have a logical reason to think DTRs are unnecessary.

    ReplyDelete
  14. "As a woman, you need to realize that you're dating men, and should try to communicate how men will understand. (Yes, I'm being androcentric, but we're talking about communicating to MEN, so you have to simply deal with that.) You should not expect us to come over into your world and try to use your methods of communication if you're not willing to reciprocate."

    1. Carl, the last part of this statement is something I wholeheartedly agree with. It would be unfair for any person to expect others to come over to their way of thinking without reciprocating that effort. (So what are some ways that you think men should reciprocate? You never mentioned any.)

    2. I'm still very irked by you assuming that as a woman I must automatically communicate the way that a high proportion of women communicate. I never said I communicate that way. You need to stop taking broad statistics and trying to apply them to individuals. That is not how statistics work, and for you to use them that way is entirely unfair and fallacious.

    3. I am not saying that men need to communicate the way most women do while women should continue communicating as they do. That, my friend, is what you and Chris are arguing by saying that men don't need to change since they're already clear and that women do need to change since they're unclear. I have pointed out the flaws in your argument, but I have not made an argument that mirrors it. I dare you to find a place where I do that.

    4. Why can't everyone just try to understand one another better?

    5. Ultimately, what I am asking is that men not complain about female communication in dating if they are not willing to change their own communication to accomodate the needs of women. I'm not saying you have to change your communication. Just that the women who are unclear are unclear for a reason, and that you can't simply dismiss the way they communicate and ask for everyone to communicate the way you do.

    Personally, I wish everyone were a whole lot more frank and direct. I wish women would say "I'm not interested." But I also wish men would admit to not being interested too. My idea isn't the solution for everyone, but at least it's consistent in that I ask EACH group to make a concession, not just the gender I date. Did I state in the post that this is what I'd like? Not explicitly, but I said that I thought everyone could stand to be more honest and direct.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Wow - blogger wouldn't let me post that comment in less than three separate comments! I guess OMCs are just really fun to debate with. I stand by the main argument I've at least been intending to make this whole time:

    People have reasons for communicating the way they do. It's not fair for anyone to simply expect the other person to change that communication style without at least trying to understand the logic behind the communication.

    And when you get down to it, even trying isn't enough if it isn't a truly sincere effort that involves questioning your own assumptions about communication. "Women just DTR because they like drama" isn't accurate or fair. And neither is "Men say they'll call and then don't just because they don't care about your feelings."

    So let's just all try to meet half way. Okay? Does that work?

    ReplyDelete
  16. Hi, David the SGF here. What is an SGF you ask? Well that is a Sassy Gay Friend. Don't believe me? just watch YouTube.; Ask any single woman in NYC or just look to Will and Grace and you will see that the number one accessory of a woman is a Gay Man. Why? Because the gay man is uniquely placed to understand the emotions of a woman while being non-threatening, but above that, the Gay Man is indeed a man and as such can give the woman insights into the actions of guys she is interested in.

    So now that my credentials are in order I would like to say a few things to the ladies but guys you listen up too. Every straight guy, be it a Cro Magnum male or a Metrosexual hottie, a Chauvinist or a Chivalrous Gentleman has the same base instincts, heck I have them too, just slightly angled.

    1. Men have fears of rejection: Even the biggest pick-up artists have some level of fear in going up to a girl, making yourself vulnerable, and giving her the option to reject you. That is how 95% of guys see it. It isn't asking her out but asking to be rejected. It is completely retarded and baseless because most girls want to be asked out as well, but it is there, get used to it ladies.

    2. Men have to weigh the positive outcomes against the potential downfalls: On a subconscious level we calculate. Risk mostly but money as well, ever see your dad watching the thermostat and turning off all the lights? He was calculating the bill. All men do this, and with dating it happens on a lower level, but it happens. So when asking a girl out he has to balance rejection and reward. often the mind blows both out of proportion but fear is a strong motivator. After a first date that fear decreases a little but it is reinforced by another phenomena, the pity date

    ReplyDelete
  17. 3. Men know that (mostly LDS) women have been trained to always say yes to a first date. But the second date, the one where you start to strip away the layers of BS and "what are you studying/ where do you work" questions, is a completely new beast. It has added fear attached to it with only a minimal increase in perceived reward. This guy is then likely to waffle for a while while he tries to overcome his imbalance of reward and risk. Certainly though when a guy knows what he wants he should tell you right Emily? Wrong because of baggage.
    4. Boys who are new to dating are filled with excess with fear and very little bravery to overcome it, but as they have grown up there has been a repeated pattern. Boy likes girl, boy musters up courage to ask girl out, At some point, be it right then or some time later, they break-up and a piece of this guy's heart is torn out ending up on his back as baggage to carry around. In a Man this baggage greatly affects how much of his time and heart he wants to invest in something that, by his state as a single man, has the same pattern of pain. So yet again he is inclined to not fully infest and instead waffle. But because most men actually do care about the women who said yes to a date, they don't want to be jerks. they don't want to be rude, and most importantly they recognize that this single woman also has her own baggage and they don't want to add to it further by saying "I'm not interested in you, even though I asked you out."
    So these guys who you think are insensitive and ambiguous are actually, trying to protect you. It might be (IS) a royally retarded point of view, but it is the mindset of the male and there really is no getting around it ladies. All you can do is turn to your helpful SGF who understands it and gets the retarded nature of guys and ask him for help. He will comfort you and plot to bring an end to it all, but the only way is through open, honest, equal communication. If you like a guy then talk to him and feel free to ask him out. It cuts the fear cycle for him (granted it gives it to you instead) and it empowers you to tell him clearly, with open communication that you are interested in him. It doesn't take much else to break the cycle on your end.

    ReplyDelete
  18. I really think it depends on where you're dating. I've been asked directly if I was interested before, and that was great, I just responded, sorry, I' not. Whereas if you ask a woman the same question, you get a variety of answers. My favorite: I'm just not interested in dating ANYone right now. Invariably 3 weeks later the girl begins dating someone, and the man feels like a complete chump.

    I really think the direct route would be better in most cases, from the men or the women's standpoint, scary as it may be. When I've been asked, I've responded truthfully. The truth is that while we guys can choose who we go out with, we still don't have that much control, since we often pick women that don't like us, and that truthfully would not want to be with us, but give a polite pity 'yes'.

    Yeah, the males are stupid too, but in a different way, usually it's in the manner of "Oh that girl is the hottest girl in the area, I should go after her no matter how beautiful/intelligent the other girls are."

    And truth be told, I completely hate going on dates. I'm completely stressed out and worried from about 7 hours before I ask her out, til at least 2 days after the date ends.

    K, more later, maybe, exhuasted I am.

    ReplyDelete
  19. ///Men know that (mostly LDS) women have been trained to always say yes to a first date.///
    I would take a bit of issue with this. Perhaps, if you mean the culture puts emphasis on this, I'll give you that, but the idea that they are somehow taught this in a class setting or something of the sort would be unfounded. Though something tells me you didn't mean it like this.

    That aside, I think the Gay Man has made good points. Perhaps by both sides simply having more of a push to be open about it, eventually the fear will subside (it will need to if we are going to be more direct), and we can both get over the bridge that is fear.

    Gosh, my brain hurts. I too am exhausted. Somewhere, there is an answer.

    ReplyDelete
  20. By the way, SGF, always fun to know a gay Mormon. I've met a couple in my lifetime. That, and some non-Mormon homosexuals. GSA's, Boston Pride Parade, Laramie Project, it's all quite familiar to me, though I'm no longer associated with any of it.

    ReplyDelete
  21. I may be repeating what others have already written in the comments, but it's late afternoon on a Friday and I don't have the attention span to do more than skim through the comments :)

    If a guy doesn't call me after a first date, I assume that he's not interested. And that's fine. I don't feel the need to have any sort of discussion, the message has been communicated clearly.

    As has been mentioned, I will usually say yes to a first date, even if I'm not interested. If he asks again, I'll thank him but say that I'm busy and leave it at that - no more excuses. Usually that's enough to get the message across. If he continues to call or press for a date, I'll tell him that I'm not interested.

    In my opinion, situations in which both people know how they feel are pretty straight forward. When more or both parties involved aren't sure how they feel about the other or when two people are in a relationship but their level of commit/interest starts to diverge is when it really gets tricky.

    ReplyDelete
  22. I haven't read all the comments yet, but I thought I'd share my thoughts on the Original Post (or OP if you will).

    In this day and age, I wonder how many women actually feel bound by this method of dating. I would like to echo the sentiment "men are dumb and women are complicated." I know this isn't offensive because my husband (a male) told me that the former is true. Instead of blaming the dumb men for not calling when they're broke, maybe we should instead encourage women to step up and take a proactive role in the mate-selection process, rather than a passive/ aggressive or manipulative one. Any man who is put off by a woman asking him out is probably not worth having, anyway. I mean, come on men; would you REALLY feel emasculated if a girl called you up and said, "Hey, last Friday was fun, do you want to catch a movie later?"

    I must be a lot more "radical" than I thought I was. *I* asked my husband out for our first date. I bought the tickets to the activity, and he paid for the ice cream afterwards. In the early days of our relationship, we both made an equal effort to ask each other out. It wasn't that hard.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Tony,

    While not explicit, it certainly was expressed by Oaks here in 2006.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Beth, I think it would be fantastic if more women took a more proactive role in dating (Though, incidentally, Oaks actually attributes men not asking women out to women increasingly pursuing men in the article David linked).

    But I'm not sure where you got the impression that the original post was *blaming* dumb men for not calling when they're broke. I don't think I even called men "dumb." And I really don't think it's fair to generalize women as more complicated and men as more dumb. Those stereotypes just don't hold up, in my experience.

    I'd be curious to know what, precisely, in my language gave the impression that I was blaming men.

    ReplyDelete
  25. For those who have short attention spans, the direct quote from Oaks is:

    "2. The leveling effect of the women’s movement has contributed to discourage dating. As women’s options have increased and some women have become more aggressive, some men have become reluctant to take traditional male initiatives, such as asking for dates, lest they be thought to qualify for the dreaded label “male chauvinist."

    ReplyDelete
  26. Emily -

    I read Carl's original blog post that linked to yours, and he said "Men are Dumb" and I guess I had that thought in my head as I was reading.

    But I do kind of think that your language does in fact blame men for perpetuating this model. "Men complain," "Yet how many of those same men let women know that they will not be calling for another date?"

    When I re-read Elder Oak's talk, I got the impression that he was trying to encourage men to grow a pair, rather than telling the women to sit back and wait for stuff to happen to them. But I can see how others would read it differently.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Beth, I see what you mean about my language - it definitely doesn't sound overly friendly toward men in the parts you reference. But I really only blame the men who inconsistently expect women to guess what they're thinking and feeling but then want women to openly express everything *they* are feeling and thinking. It's the inconsistency that bothers me.

    ReplyDelete
  28. "So, if a woman is confused about a man's intentions, or if she wants to change the pace at which they're dating, or if she isn't interested but a man keeps asking her out despite all the hints she drops, what are her options? She could try to initiate a date with him, but that would be straying from traditional dating patterns. "

    Ahh but see that is only one reason. If *most* men express interest in women that they like (as society pressures them to), then we can assume that men who are NOT interested in a woman, will not express such interest. Therefore according to modern social reality, women are effectively rejected by men's lack of communication with them..it is not simply a matter of a childish unwillingness to bend social etiquette.

    ReplyDelete
  29. "So, if a woman is confused about a man's intentions, or if she wants to change the pace at which they're dating, or if she isn't interested but a man keeps asking her out despite all the hints she drops, what are her options? She could try to initiate a date with him, but that would be straying from traditional dating patterns. "

    Ahh but see that is only one reason. If *most* men express interest in women that they like (as society pressures them to), then we can assume that men who are NOT interested in a woman, will not express such interest. Therefore according to modern social reality, women are effectively rejected by men's lack of communication with them..it is not simply a matter of a childish unwillingness to bend social etiquette.

    ReplyDelete