Impossible is Impossible

This blog is my way of reflecting upon life. Life is about living and learning. As I live and learn I’m going to reflect upon this life I lead. Hopefully I'll offer something insightful with my postings. If you learn nothing else from me, know this that “impossible is impossible”.

Wednesday, January 17, 2007

Christopher's Theory or "The Dating" ?

So let me just say that Lauren Ashleigh is one of the best writers I've come across. She keeps me enthralled, entertained, and most importantly engaged. Homegirl needs to be a screenwriter, because some T.V. and film scenes aren't written as well as she writes her scenarios. Homie's on point, big ups to the girl.

So LaLa's most recent entry addressed the subject of dating. When I say "we" it's because La suggests its moreso Generation Y, she wonders "Y" Generation "Y" doesn't date. It seems to be a phenomenon specifically affecting a segment of that generation, being even more specifically the Boomerangers (those born between 77-86). It would seem that we don't go out on dates, we don't "go steady." (Forgive me because for years I could have swore I heard "go study". I always thought "going study" was symbolized by the guy carrying the girls books, and going off to study. We all know even amongst our parents studying isn't what happened. Sidetrack Bob but it made me laugh and I needed one. Now back to the important stuff.)

Guys my age and yes some ladies too are doomed by The "LAW OF AVERAGES"

Law of Averages-

Think back to "The Phantom Zone" applied equally or unequally by men and women:

From www.brothersmanlaw.blogspot.com (10-17-06)

"When a woman meets a man they have three categories to place a man into:

A. Guys they want to immediately have sex with;
B. Guys they might be interested in having sex with;
C. Guys who will forever be emasculated into "friends" (translation: no sex -- ever -- no matter what you do or how hard you try.)"

This theory can have sex removed and be applied more broadly. One can easily decide who are, "Guys or girls he or she is interested in, could be inerested in, or won't ever be interested in."

Once you categorize people and break them into groups, ones you're not interested in or not interested in, the law of averages should kick in. There should be atleast one dateable person. Sometimes the "Law of Averages" kicks you in the ass, and you're left with none.

Other times dating just isn't a part of some people, particularly some guy's "investment strategies".

Investmet Strategy-

There's a strategy which guys employ when we need, want, or desire something. We're willing to do a lot more to get the most on our investment. We want the most "bang for our buck", and sometimes just bang without spending bucks. Thus acknowledging as true La's theory that its the era of "random hookups" and "one night stands."

At the end of the day everyone wants a return on their investment.

Reciprocals-

There's a need for reciprocity, a reciprocal, no not the inverse of a fraction, a reciprocal meaning something which is shared by both sides. We sometimes lose hope when there isn't the promise of reciprocity not in terms of resources (time, money, or effort) expended, but in terms of receiving some sort of benefit in that we can't be sure we'll have stable friendships, nevermind stable relationships as the result of a date.

So therefore we don't even try.

Then there is the existence of the "problematic equation".

Problematic Equation-

This exists because we don't have simple equations
romantic ideas + romance in practice = romantic experiences (i.e. dates).

*Romantic Ideas- We don't remember those good old days when people had "real" dates, cause many of us just haven't had them.

*Romance in Practice- We're too caught up in everything else, that we can't focus on fulfilling experiences "for two".

*Romantic Experiences- Are no longer as special, cause people are too focused on being butt buddies (I would have used that less friendly F word, but this is a family affair).

And for an even simpler answer we want the buddy or the booty, and not both. Therefore dating is seen as too costly.

** Forgive me if this was a bit academic in nature haha, I just had my first classes for the semester. I was also inspired to blog because one of my classes I am taking solely because I wanted to improve my writing on this blog, I'm not even kidding. Also, I'm not taking any sociology classes, so I got to keep them skills fresh! :-)

6 Comments:

At 9:50 AM , Blogger Kai said...

thats a nice blog u have there
:-]

 
At 2:26 PM , Blogger Jameil said...

the academic nature was nice. you have a good idea on your hands. c is a fallacy. guys in the friend zone usually have more of a chance than they think they do by virtue of being a good friend. it becomes a very attractive quality when it really matters, when its time to think about getting married and starting a family.

people don't date b/c women have let men get lazy. people accept and at times even encourage and embrace the idea of casual sex w/multiple partners so men don't feel the need to work. why? b/c women don't make them. i met a man w/a good theory once (don't remember who he was). he said, if women would join together and all stop having sex for a month, chivalry would return. here, here.

 
At 6:08 PM , Blogger Chris said...

dating is costly if you don't fit certain categories that women want, so why spend your money if you're going to end up alone anyway?

 
At 11:08 PM , Blogger So...Wise...Sista said...

VERY impressive CNelly!

Well damn. You present some very good points. At the core, i believe theres no getting to know you period. What happened to getting a number for the sake of calling and talking into the wee hours? Now getting a number means sending a text to see "whats good for the night." Then you fcuk and THEN realize you're not compatible in the least. And yup, it's partly women's fault, but really it's just the fact that men have so many options. What one wont do, another will do twice...and with whipped cream. lol

 
At 2:21 PM , Blogger The Very Reverend Ace Clemmons, Jr. said...

i guess im starting to see that maybe a filter has been placed between some generations here. Some level of social gender interaction clearly has not made it from mine to yours, and perhaps *partly* to Wise's. I'm an X'er. (i think)

I posted a comment on Wise's about how i was 21 and knocking boots with a 32 yr old chik. she tried to leash me and it didnt work out. Now in the age window of 29-34 i was hitting grand slams all the time with women in the 21-25 range. it was like taking candy from a baby- no not just sex, but every last one of them wanted to be eventually exclusive. And they were always the ones who starting things by *just wanting to have a good time and get laid* they were convinced they became the mythical "One". Nope.

this led to some stalking incidents that were a little scary.

 
At 11:00 PM , Blogger La said...

1st of all, if you continue to praise me that way I'll never be able to fit my big ass head thru the door. Thanks C! Aww, shucks! :-)

This is the best written thing ever. It makes so much sense it's damn near scary. I think the whole not dating thing is equally parts to blame on both genders. Yeah, maybe men don't date anymore, but some woman has allowed it. I miss courting. Maybe that's what I shoulda said in my blog. I miss being courted.

One thing though; those 3 catagories we women seperate men into, they're not always hard and fast rules. My significant other was someone I wanted to sleep with immediately, maybe even before immediately before I actually met him, lol. However, that was 2 years ago. And we're still "honeymooning". So I guess it depends on the situation.

 

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home