Tomasito's Diary
Sex and the City - A Column

| 01 | Dating Emancipation |

It's about emancipation, the emancipation of emancipation. It's about daring and letting dare somebody. The equalisation of women and men has gotten far. But one point is still as ancient as the discussion about it. The basic and profound question is: Who makes the first step? Centuries over centuries it was officially set by the society that men had to start to show interest for a woman. The woman had to wind herself like a fish - to appear not too "gettable", and the man had to beguile the desired woman with possibly tacky compliments. It was a game of the woman of saying no and meaning yes.

Where does this game lead to nowadays? Does a "no" mean a "no", or is it still a "yes" - or maybe it's even a "maybe". It is not clear anymore. Things have changed a lot in that respect. But that the man has to make the first step is still the usual case, though, to be statistically honest, in very single cases the women starts the mating process. Anyway, this can be kindly ignored. The man has to stare what woman is willing to exchange glances that may lead to further connectioning. If that case is the case the man can go there and, on the way, he thinks with what kind of witty, sophisticated way he could also get the auditive attention of the woman. Men think they have to be like that - at least the non-smokers; the smokers have it much easier, the just can ask for a cigarette or fire and start a conversation with that (About smoking? Risks of smoking? Lung cancer? That lighting a cigarette with a match is worse because of the match's sulphur head?). Non-smokers have to think twice, thrice or even ten times to come up with a good chat-up line, depending on their originality. Women assure that this is just not necessary, a normal conversation start would do it sufficiently. First: Who will believe that? Second: How to start a normal conversation if there's more involved than just a conversation for the sake of a conversation? A topic is being needed.

But once in a conversation, what kind of attitude shall be seen on the man's surface? Again, the 15th century complimenting, or 20th century complimenting like "I've never seen such beautiful eyes like yours" (well, I'm sure they used it already in the middle ages). But if somebody has beautiful eyes, how many times has she already heard this kind of sentence? So again the problem of trying not to be too normal but original. So it has to be something metaphorical, but again, not too tacky ("Your eyes are so deep that if they were a lake I could see through them until the centre of the earth"), but neither stolen from any Shakespeare drama or popular pop songs, which she could know. It's a walk between edges, the exaggerated compliment on the one side, the not recognizable compliment on the other side.

To add it once again - in once in a while: Who has to think about that? It's still the men. Compliments made by women are rare (please correct me if I'm wrong). Also in bed this behaviour can be seen. The sophisticated, cultivated and educated man sees when a woman is ready and willing for certain actions and respects it if not. Vice versa it's merely thinkable.

Still some ancient patterns of actions and attitudes can be observed in the men's and women's behavioural role. Emancipation there and back, apparently it has not really reached the dating sector.


Site by Tomasito - 18.07.2003