Well, guys. I was right to go into tonite's event with low expectations about the guy(s) my crazy aunt might introduce me to. (But I felt like I had to go, since this is now the third or fourth time she's invited me to an event to "introduce me to so-and-so," and I didn't want her to think I was ungrateful for her attempts.)
Upon meeting the two guys she had in mind for me (who were friends, BTW, which was sort of creepy), I immediately knew I was not interested. In either one of them. Because no matter how funny, smart, family-oriented, successful, etc. a guy is, if I'm not attracted to him, it just ain't gonna work.
Are you with me, ladies? (And gents?)
I'm sure these guys were plenty nice. (Though they were a bit above my age demo too. And by "a bit," I mean a lot.) But, physically, one reminded me of David Letterman (but with nicer teeth... which is good, considering he's an oral surgeon) and the other reminded me of a grown-up version of Ralphie from A Christmas Story, but with brunette hair (and about a tube of hair gel).
Are you with me, ladies? (And gents?)
I'm sure these guys were plenty nice. (Though they were a bit above my age demo too. And by "a bit," I mean a lot.) But, physically, one reminded me of David Letterman (but with nicer teeth... which is good, considering he's an oral surgeon) and the other reminded me of a grown-up version of Ralphie from A Christmas Story, but with brunette hair (and about a tube of hair gel).
Damnit. Is it so much to ask to meet someone who is both great on paper and ALSO someone I could imagine making out with?
(Sorry, blogdad. Should have warned you that one was coming.)
And as I was reflecting on that while driving home, I realized that I feel like maybe I did meet someone like that: Mr. X.
(You may remember that I started talking to Mr. X while I was on blogcation back in July, but I haven't written about him much here because he knows about the blog. Let's hope he's not reading it today!)
I mean, I think Mr. X is hilariously funny. (Big plus.) I know he’s very close with his family. (Awesome.) He’s got a career that he likes. (Important.) I still get giddy like a school girl when I see a message from him. (A little too sappy for my taste, really.) AND, I think he's adorably cute. (And could totes imagine smooching him.)
But here's the problem: Mr. X lives in another city. (Bummer.) And while we talk every day (or, at the very least, text and email), we've got no plans to see each other anytime soon. (And, really, I can't tell if he even wants to.)
So now I'm trying to figure out what's worse: finding a local guy whose only thing in common with me is that we are both single, or finding a guy who could be a great match, but who's geographically undesirable?
Eff. SeptMENber is off to a rocky start...
*** UPDATE ***
I just got an email from my aunt: "They both want your number." FML.
Posts
19 comments:
Anon -- thanks! I've been on that site before and it's effing hysterical. And if you're on twitter, be sure you follow @shitmydadsays. Hilar! :)
"Are you with me, ladies? (And gents?)"
Yeah, I'm totally with you. i find I have to be like nearly absurdly attracted to someone to really be in there. Plus as a guy you know that for whatever stupid counter-intuitive reason as soon as you're with someone, or at least even seen with someone your options will increase exponentially and all sorts of girls you probably wouldnt have the chance with alone come out of the wood-work and flirt, so you need to be into someone enough to just be flattered by the new attention, but not actually tempted by it.
As far as dating someone local vs. the person you may really want, after a few disapointing experiences with LD situations I've refused to even go there but I probably would eat my words if the right girl came along. Better is always better. "settling for local" if that's what it'd end up being (even without your recognizing it) will inevtiably betray you anyway. Finally, I've always thought that you don't really have a choice in who you want, just in who you'll be involved with. The decision to want is it ouf your (conscious) hands, which is why love is a battelfield (according to Pat Benetar).
Cheers,
MG
Mr. X sounds like he's got some potential. Do you know if he read this? I'd have to imagine he'd want to see you right away after you said all those great things about him! Good luck!
MG -- "Better is always better." I like it.
Anon -- I can, indeed, confirm that he read this blog post. Whether he wants to see me? Still not sure.
Count me in the camp that says you have to be at least mildly attracted to the person physically. However, there are those instances where someone can "grow" on you (here's a sentence that ought to get a "rise" out of people...sheesh, I'll stop).
Can I also point out that I've read MG's first paragraph now three times and can't make heads or tails of it? MG - could you boil that down into one, potentially shorter, sentence?
Just sayin...
I've done the LD thing, and it's tough. Unfortunately, it didn't work out. But I know of a several friends that it did work for.
It really comes down to the basics. If you feel good being involved with him (LD or locally) then do that. Invest in webcams, txt all the time, and there's a whole section devoted to LD relationships at Barnes and Noble.
But if he doesn't call or txt or give you the idea he wants you around (Mr. X you SHOULD be with this girl, as you both sound amazing!) then it'll never work.
Two things: If you can't be with the one you love, love the one you're with. AND "He's Just Not That Into You" Reading the book results differently than watching the movie.
Hahahahahha, of course they both want your number.
I have a former co-worker that is bothering the hell out of me, while other guys I am actually attracted to are completely non-existent. WTF.
Chuck -- I think MG was saying that if you're with someone and don't feel the attraction, you're going to be lured away much more easily (especially since it seems like all the singles suddenly show up when they know you're taken). But it took me a couple of readings to get there too.
A Neske -- thanks for the suggestions! And, he lives in another city, but it's really only a couple of hours away. So, it's SLD, I guess (semi-long distance). :)
d - WTF? FOLs. (That "o" is for "our," for anyone wondering.)
Also,
I think for an LD relationship to be a legit relationship and not just be spinning your wheels, there needs to be a plan (like any relationship really) and that plan involves someone moving. And I'd say moving within a year to make it a normal relationship.
Anything else is just killing the boredom/lonliness and that fuzzy endorphin feeling of knowing someone on the planet likes you (which is illusory, but powerful).
@ Chuck, my comment/paragraph that you couldn't understand was very male-specific-basically just backing up my superficial comment- so dont worry about it.
@AAB - thanks for the explanation.
@MG - ah, yes, thanks for pointing that out. I'm clearly an utter moron and not a guy. Thanks for clearing that up. Can't all be you, evidently.
ok lover, let me drop this little bomb on you.
if Mr X didn't want to see you why the hell would he bother with having contact with you everyday. a guy that wasn't interested wouldn't do that. no way no how.
i say you hint at getting together with him. you aren't shy. duh.
as for the other? let them buy you a steak. maybe something will come of it. if not, you om nom nomed a good meal.
dude-Guiliana and Bill are MARRIED and live in different cities, for god sakes. It's possible :)
(PS "I don't watch a lot of TV") lol
@Chuck-
My apologies. I absolutely didn't mean it that way. I meant it wasn't worth repeating/summarizing as it wasn't "on topic," and as you know I've already received a bit of criticism for this. I'm trying to not piss anyone off.
But AAB did summarize it well and do go into deeper explanation, let's look at it like a theorem:
A. Women like stability.
B. Single Men can seem un-stable, while men who are "taken" seem stable, emotionally healthy, have that "family man" type quality about them, etc. by virtue of having a woman in their lives regularly (i.e. not being a total jackass like myself)*. All of this is increasingly attractive to women .
A+B= When you're taken, you're more attractive to women. I said "counter-intuitive" because you'd think women wouldn't want a taken guy, or to "steal" him because you'd think that means he's always likely to be susceptible to that kind of temptation, but that's simply not the case in my experience and in the experiences of the many guy friends I've had throughout the years.
There is also the saying that when a guy sees another guy with a pretty or "good" girl he'll say "i want one like her" whereas a woman will see another woman with a guy and say "I want THAT (specific) guy" because he has the emotional quality of being the kind of guy who's into relationships. It's also possible that a man is better off getting a girl "like her" because to get the girl away from the guy she's already with, it may get violent, and it thus may be easier to just go find another like her. There ARE more of them statistically speaking, and stereo-tpyical as it may be, it does seem like there are also more that are dateable by percentage.
That being said, if you're going to start a relationship as a guy, you know that suddenly a bunch of other women are going to start showing interest and you need to be classy and mature about it, if you were doing it for the right reasons to begin with; it's not very gentlemanly and downright immature/insecure/weak to go getting a girl into you and having her cut off her other options to just be with you to just to drop her when a few others inevitably starting saying things like "what is is about Chuck lately? he looks great!" and then sudenly realize, "Wait! Chuck has always been 'The (proverbial) Man' right here under my nose and I didn't even notice til now...but now that I do..."
Enjoy the fantasy from there.
* This can also lead to that "well there must be SOMETHING interesting about him," reaction from women when seen with his significant other that over-comes the flaws he'd noticeably have when cruising solo with his dip-shit friends "trying to pick up some chicks, bro."
Sorry to everyone about the length y'all.
Okay, a couple of thoughts - I totally agree with Chuck - on MG's first para and his comment about being mildly attracted to someone. But, here's my question, how do you know if you are mildly attracted to someone after spending only a few hours with them? I mean, think of your really good friends. Did you ever not like any of them when you first met them...and then they turned out to be some of your best, long-term friends ever and you now laugh about how much you didn't like each other at the start. So, it probably doesn't need to be said that I married a guy that I was determined to never date...not my type at all and was convinced that it would never work. So, in the words of Chuck, "just saying"...keep your mind open.
Alexa -- I just LOLed at the om nom nom. Ha ha ha.
Julesercise -- good point! I actually think it may be better that way. This way, I don't have to change my life that much. ;)
MG -- whoa. Perhaps I should give you Chuck's email address and you guys can go out for a beer and talk about women?!?
Late Bride -- I really WANT to believe that theory, but any time I have tried to force it with someone I wasn't attracted to, it didn't work out. Plus, your hubs is not ugly. He just wasn't necessarily your type. These guys? Well... they're no LBH (Late Bride Hubs).
@MG -
I've made it through your entire comment, though I did give serious consideration to stopping after the word "theorem." Welcome back to high school geometry my friends!
Seriously, though, what you did say made some sense to me. As an aside, my dating life has rivaled AAB's of late so I appreciate ALMOST ANY thinking these days.
@AAB + @Late Bride -
Thank God someone agrees with me. I'm not saying you can go from repulsed to "lets bang" over the course of time, but I think you could go from "hmmm, he's kind of cute" to "lets bang."
Anyway, this comment is now rivaling MG's in terms of length so i'll stop.
Chuck -- "let's bang"?!?!? LOL.
Let's bang...ahahaha.
I CAN totally see how if you're being pursued by someone you have initial doubts about that in time you'd possibly fall for them...persistence can pay off and a person can either shine under scrutiny or fall even further out of range. But you cant in due diligence pursue someone you're not crazy about and I think if you're going to be the pursuer, you find that feeling quickly...butterflies in the stomach, etc.
@ AAB. I'd hang with Chuck, that could work.
@ Chuck, thanks for getting me. But geeze, I was just trying to have fun with the theorem- it also made it shorter and more direct for you.
if you're dating life's been null the first step as a guy is to take advantage of photo ops with pretty co-workers/friends at parties and events and such and then post to facebook or other highly-visible places. Watch your stock value slowly increase from there. Women will check you out when you're out with them as it will add to your "je ne sais quois" - that's a good time to make a move.
I creeped your blog...you work in marketing? That's like pretty-girl profession number 1 or 2...take advantage of your resources.
So did this guy get the hint and ask you out yet or what?
Post a Comment