Page 4 of 4
Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2001 7:00 pm
by Crassus
Did anyone mention shoes? I've always had the impression that women like to be complimented on their shoes.
Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2001 7:15 pm
by dragon wench
Originally posted by C Elegans:
<STRONG>I think fish cologne is contraproductive from a pedagogic point of view
So is skimpy skirts, I belive. On of my female colleagues held a series of lectures to a class I happened to have a couple of friends in. Some of the guys in the class didn't even remember what the lectures was about, since they had been constantly daydreaming about the more physiological aspects of my very well endowed colleague...
Same thing goes for handsome male lecturers, of course. I once had a very handsome male teacher in physiology...all the girls in the class immediately went totally deaf as soon as he flexed his muscles to demonstrate the motoric aspects of the peripheral nervous system
[ 10-05-2001: Message edited by: C Elegans ]</STRONG>
ah yes, eye candy. *sighs in nostalgic memory at the rigours of coursework*
Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2001 10:25 pm
by Maharlika
Originally posted by fable:
<STRONG>It all depends on your audience. I knew one music director at a public radio station in North Carolina who had earlier been a regional manager for a chemical company. He was brought to their national offices periodically to give lectures to other regional managers on various aspects of organization. Once, this man in-his-fifties was congratulated after a particularly focused speech-and-question session by an extremely attractive younger woman who was another regional manager. She enthusiastically told him, "Wow, if you can make love the way you organize your speeches, you must be something in bed." He turned her down out of marital fidelity, but never got over it.
See: sometimes, good presentation really does count.
</STRONG>
I'll KEEP that in mind, Fable.
Oh, sorry for the hindsight
, should have mentioned about your point too.
Nah, it's not the cologne, and definitely not loner's skimpier skirt...
...just ran out of cappuccino after reading one of Mr.S's posts and had my coffee spilled all over.
Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2001 10:29 pm
by Maharlika
Originally posted by Crassus:
<STRONG>Did anyone mention shoes? I've always had the impression that women like to be complimented on their shoes.</STRONG>
Likely.
Specially if you are Imelda Marcos!
Posted: Fri Oct 05, 2001 10:41 pm
by Sailor Saturn
Originally posted by Crassus:
<STRONG>Did anyone mention shoes? I've always had the impression that women like to be complimented on their shoes.</STRONG>
I don't care much about my shoes getting complimented.
I do, however, like to be complimented on my outfit.
If you give me the wrong compliment or wrong type of compliment, I'll be upset. If you don't give me a compliment, I'll be partially upset. If you give me the correct compliment, I....well, we'll see if you can discover this one on your own.
Posted: Sat Oct 06, 2001 6:56 am
by fable
Apropos of nothing, I think a lot of the mystique, both good and bad, that surrounds the sexual divide, the racial divide, nationalities, class distinctions, etc, has to do with generalization.
As an example, check out the various BG2 threads where various teenage guys give their heavily considered opinions about what The Opposite Sex is all about, interested in, and turned off by. With due respect to my chromosomal peers, unless you're studying Jung or working with some non-causal archtype system, an individual woman does not think, feel or believe like some dimly perceived Uber-Fraulein. In any given situation in everyday life, any dozen women will internally react in a dozen different, distinctive ways, no matter how similar the external results. (Throw Skinner out the window: people aren't pigeons, and similar physical consequences can derive from infinitely diverse internal criteria.)
This particular generalizing is fairly benign, even if it does lead to major angst eventually for anybody who believes it. (For sooner or later, it goes without saying that some woman is going to set a guy straight who attempts to pigeonhole her, and whether she uses wits or fists, he probably won't like it.) Others are obviously worse. We're seeing now the results working out of generalizing the US and its commercial interests on the one hand, and all MidEastern citizens on the other.
Worth keeping in mind the next time you hear somebody casually discuss an enormous group of people as though they were an amorphous blob or the Borg.
[ 10-06-2001: Message edited by: fable ]
Posted: Sat Oct 06, 2001 8:03 am
by scully1
@Fable: Good points, but do you think the teenage guys in question will understand all that?
Posted: Sat Oct 06, 2001 8:30 am
by Darkpoet
Originally posted by fable:
<STRONG>Apropos of nothing, I think a lot of the mystique, both good and bad, that surrounds the sexual divide, the racial divide, nationalities, class distinctions, etc, has to do with generalization.
As an example, check out the various BG2 threads where various teenage guys give their heavily considered opinions about what The Opposite Sex is all about, interested in, and turned off by. With due respect to my chromosomal peers, unless you're studying Jung or working with some non-causal archtype system, an individual woman does not think, feel or believe like some dimly perceived Uber-Fraulein. In any given situation in everyday life, any dozen women will internally react in a dozen different, distinctive ways, no matter how similar the external results. (Throw Skinner out the window: people aren't pigeons, and similar physical consequences can derive from infinitely diverse internal criteria.)
This particular generalizing is fairly benign, even if it does lead to major angst eventually for anybody who believes it. (For sooner or later, it goes without saying that some woman is going to set a guy straight who attempts to pigeonhole her, and whether she uses wits or fists, he probably won't like it.) Others are obviously worse. We're seeing now the results working out of generalizing the US and its commercial interests on the one hand, and all MidEastern citizens on the other.
Worth keeping in mind the next time you hear somebody casually discuss an enormous group of people as though they were an amorphous blob or the Borg.
[ 10-06-2001: Message edited by: fable ]</STRONG>
So if I comment on how nice a woman looks. I should expect to get slapped or kicked in cookies???? Or have her yell at me???
Posted: Sat Oct 06, 2001 8:41 am
by Yshania
@DP - not by this woman
As long as the compliment is sincere
Posted: Sat Oct 06, 2001 8:47 am
by Darkpoet
Originally posted by Yshania:
<STRONG>@DP - not by this woman
As long as the compliment is sincere
</STRONG>
When I talk to a woman it is with the utmost respect. So all my compliments are sincere, I even look them in the eye when I talk to a woman.
Posted: Sat Oct 06, 2001 8:49 am
by Yshania
@DP - that is what I imagined you would be like
*hugs*
Posted: Sat Oct 06, 2001 8:52 am
by Darkpoet
I never cared for being rude to women. Though a few times, I thought about it.
[ 10-06-2001: Message edited by: Darkpoet ]
Posted: Sat Oct 06, 2001 10:13 am
by fable
Originally posted by Darkpoet:
<STRONG>
So if I comment on how nice a woman looks. I should expect to get slapped or kicked in cookies???? Or have her yell at me???
</STRONG>
Her reaction will depend upon you, her, and your relationship up to that point. I've known at least one extreme feminist who *would* be inclined to kick any man that said she looked nice, simply because she's accustomed to hating and distrusting men. But most of the women I've known would evaluate the origin of the compliment, and proceed accordingly.
Posted: Sat Oct 06, 2001 10:44 am
by Darkpoet
Originally posted by fable:
<STRONG>Her reaction will depend upon you, her, and your relationship up to that point. I've known at least one extreme feminist who *would* be inclined to kick any man that said she looked nice, simply because she's accustomed to hating and distrusting men. But most of the women I've known would evaluate the origin of the compliment, and proceed accordingly.
</STRONG>
*rubbing his jaw* I think, I ran into her last night. Well, it was her fist, that I ran into.
Posted: Sat Oct 06, 2001 11:43 pm
by Maharlika
Originally posted by Yshania:
<STRONG>@DP - not by this woman
As long as the compliment is sincere
</STRONG>
That's it!
Ysh, you have just said the magic word.
SINCERE(/ITY).
And yes, Fable, you put those words perfectly well.
To compartmentalize people into certain boxes would not just work.
But to answer the "problem" of "differing personalities," I think Ysh's magic word would wrap things up.
Posted: Sun Oct 07, 2001 12:29 am
by C Elegans
Originally posted by Darkpoet:
<STRONG>
So if I comment on how nice a woman looks. I should expect to get slapped or kicked in cookies???? Or have her yell at me???
</STRONG>
Alas DP, you try to be nice the wrong women.
Since I'm a woman myself I will most likely not be accused for being "chauvinist" by posting this, but from my personal experience, a lot of women (and men of course, but now we're talking about women) are sort of stuck in a conflict between traditional and more modern values of gender roles. You'd be suprised how many women I've met who claim to be equality feminists, but still take for granted that the man should pay for a dinner (even if they have well paid jobs). Or when it comes to bed activities, they just lie there and expect to "be served", and don't lift a finger to please the man. He's expected to "perform" whereas they are passive receivers who judge the performace. I cound rant about this forever, the examples are countless.
The situation DP describes here, is IMO very often about women who use rejection of men as a mean to feel powerful. They want men to respect them as equals, they don't want to viewed as mere sex objects, but at the same time they know no other ways to find respect than using the age-old female trick sexual rejection.
I have something you want. IMO a woman who is rude towards a man who is only giving a polite verbal compliment, is a woman who has problems with her self confidence in other areas.
That's my POV.
Posted: Sun Oct 07, 2001 12:41 am
by C Elegans
Originally posted by fable:
<STRONG>Apropos of nothing, I think a lot of the mystique, both good and bad, that surrounds the sexual divide, the racial divide, nationalities, class distinctions, etc, has to do with generalization.
</STRONG>
A modern social psychologist would agree with you (I do, too). Generalization, cathegorization, selective intake of information etc are all parts of this, I think. In the end, it becomes a self fulfilling prophecy. May I recommend you a nice book?
Aronsson: The social animal
It's a book about how people think and act, results from scientific studies and field studies are mixed with anecdotes and theoretical concepts. It's a must read for anyone who's interested in people in general
Posted: Sun Oct 07, 2001 12:57 am
by C Elegans
Originally posted by Crassus:
<STRONG>Did anyone mention shoes? I've always had the impression that women like to be complimented on their shoes.</STRONG>
Shoes? Why would one like to be complimented on ones shoes?
I'm only 1 woman out of 2.5 billion, but this is how I think:
My shoes are something I have bought in a shop, anyone could buy the same shoes as I have. They are not part of me. I think the shoes are nice, otherwise I wouldn't have bought them. If you think they are nice too, that would not be a compliment to me, that would be more like we have the same taste in shoes, just like liking the same song or the same food. Ie we have something in common (albeit something very trivial)