Originally Published 2005-01-29 16:53:33
So I've been reading "Mathematics and Sex" by Clio Creswell. It turns out that the magic number is 12. Yes, that's right, 12. Chew up 12 pretty girls (or boys, if that's your thing), and marry the next one you go out with that's as good or better than the original 12. The probability of marrying your soul mate is at it's peak with this plan. It did mention that over 33 is too much testing. It never gets any better.
The book does not give any guidelines for quantifying who is applicable to your 12, however. Apparently it's unique for everyone.
Humph. Regardless, I feel kinda done with the chew-em-up 'n spit-em-out game.
Weird. I was just thinking earlier today about that whole "vibe" thing when you first go out with someone. How fine the line between "sweet" and "clingy" seems to be. How something as simple as calling the next day can seemingly make or break.
I remember one time a few years back a girl didn't call me back -- we traded email a couple of weeks later, though -- I asked her why, and she said, "it kinda sounded like you wanted to jump into something right away."
I get that, of course... that silly game that I play so well when I don't give a shit about the girl and forget altogether when I actually like her a lot (argggh). "Posturing" might be a good term for it.
The thing is... isn't everyone either looking to fuck or looking to "jump into something"? And heck, trying to get laid could definitely be construed as jumping into something (lol). So what's this "right away" business? Yeah, if I go out with you and really like you, I want to talk to you the next day? Um, ok. Let's see... I may be comfortable with exploring some emotional intimacy? How about... if I'm really attracted to you, I'm gonna want to have sex with you? Funny how that one is so excusable these days, but the emo side is seen as such a negative.
Hmmm. I guess there's a third one for chicks, though, isn't there? The gold-digger option. Ok, that's a really negative way to put it. The companion-lotsa flirting- "friend" that just happens to have a boat and likes to take single girls water skiing because maybe one of them will cozy up and have sex with him after awhile.
I think I've fallen into that one occasionally (No, I don't have a boat, it was just an example). I can think of at least one "movie buddy" in my past who liked to keep me around and never engaged on any level. I don't think a kiss or two can be counted towards "engaging" when you've hung out a dozen times.
Humph. So where am I going with this? Pssssssh.
So, yeah... I guess I'm deciding that I am a "jump into things" kinda guy. I'm ok with playing around... I'm ok with getting to know one another over time... That's the whole point, after all, but if I'm into a girl, I want to be able to call her when I'm thinking about her pretty quickly (as in, say, after you've memorized each other's favorite drink and covered a couple of skeletons), and not throttle back just because of some mind-fuck routine for convincing one another that you're sane.
And... am I? Yes, I am. I am ok with that. If a girl thinks that is lame, then we obviously didn't connect from her perspective in a similar way.
So what about the girls that -- although most will never admit it and would indicate that they "just want to meet knew people", or "just want to spread my wings" -- are just looking to hook up or water ski?
I like water skiing and hooking up as much as the next guy... am I really going to say no to either of those just because I'm fed up with the game?
Wait. Am I really ready to "settle down"?
Um, no. Definitely not. But I'm ready to go out with women who are settle-down potentials. Settling down takes at least a year, and I'd be ok with it taking three. What was it Andrew and Laura told me that one time? "We knew right away. Three, maybe four months? You don't say so, because, well, it's scary, but you know." Ok, maybe it doesn't take a year.
No. But it'll take ME a year, 'cause I'm a bitch like that.
Now here's the conundrum... god, I sound like such a CHICK right now! Do you go out with stand-ins because they're (a) good enough for now and it's awfully nice to have decent sex with someone you trust/pseudo-love, and (b) maybe you'll fall in love with each other after all and live happily ever after, i.e., one or the both of you will change?
Ack. The absolutist in me says, "No fucking way! Demand what you want and don't take less!" It doesn't hurt that I can effectively say, "Been there, done that," either. But I'm not much of an absolutist anymore. Everything has shades of grey.
But on the flip-side, do I have the balls to sit on the bench waiting to play in the fourth quarter? You want to save your best for last, and I work hard to be the best.
I go it alone a lot. But I don't particularly like it. I LIKE having a girl around, even if I can see that it's temporary from day 1 (or 2, I suppose).
Well. Harumph. Maybe I don't. It is kinduv a waste of time.
Yeah, but then I start throwing off the "desperate" vibe to the girls I DO like, right? I mean... I already get all nervous, forget to be myself, and forget to the play the game by the book... how much worse would it be if I got out of practice on top of it? (Get your mind out of the gutter... I don't mean THAT. Although I guess it would apply there too.)
Ugh. Maybe I should just try that universal vending machine thing again. It worked out last week pretty well. Something about actually defining what you want makes it more real, doesn't it?
Ok. This is already too much for the public blog though...
Hmmm. How about if I only "hooked up or water skiied" with "settle-down potentials"?
Oh wait. I almost always do that anyway. I think?
Originally Published 2005-01-29 16:53:33