Through the process of reading various "About Me" pages, and trying to encapsulate my own self into the sectioned off headings with character limits, and having other self descriptions sent me, I have come to the sad conclusion that there is little that a person can put there that will be an adequate description of anything, though they can be wonderful conversation starters.
One can not effectively define oneself absent some already understood definition. If someone describes him or herself as "inetligent," it probably says more about the person than if he/she had described him/herself as "intelligent," but what exactly? Is the person being ironic? stupid? careless? With the wealth of spell checking out there, including in web browsers, you almost have to go out of your way to misspell common words.
More, to take the above example, intelligence is a difficult thing to self-ascribe. I'm a pretty damn thoughtful and knowledgeable individual, but I do hesitate when it comes to saying anything about my intelligence. We use that word as a measure of one's mental prowess against another, and how can I claim that my own mechanism of thought combined with my particular knowledge is greater than others? Still, in the end I would describe myself as intelligent, but the inner conflict regarding that is invisible. Are other more confident in their statement of their own intelligence and does that make them more or less intelligent, and should I care?
The category that seems most frustrating to me is about passions. To me it seems, passion is what gets us out of bed in the morning, it is the source of drive behind many if not most of our waking actions. While many different things can qualify, being passionate about "life in general" is not really possible.
*this is being posted incomplete a week after the date...future edits possible but unlikely.
Showing posts with label dating. Show all posts
Showing posts with label dating. Show all posts
Thursday, July 30, 2009
Sunday, July 19, 2009
Stating the Obvious but...
Of course geeks make the best boyfriends/spouses! My favorite is #7, and I certainly agree with reason #1, though I'm a bit surprised it's there. There are, of course, other reasons that are not listed, and most geeks also have the good-companion beta male personality (for full discussion read "A Dirty Job").
Geek is a word that tends to refer to specific things like computers, sci fi, anime, and science/math. It is really more general than that, though. Geeks are people who, for reasons passing the understanding of others, love to discover things, and challenge and complexity in that pursuit are enticing things. Male geeks, as such, treasure women (who will have them) above all else. We will never figure you out, but we love to try.
There is, to be fair, a bit of objectivity to that. Of course, geeks tend to objectify all people along similar lines, so it is not inherently sexist. And experimentation--from the kitchen to the bedroom--is not something that everyone is going to enjoy, after all, they don't all produce good results, they just all teach us a little more.
Geek is a word that tends to refer to specific things like computers, sci fi, anime, and science/math. It is really more general than that, though. Geeks are people who, for reasons passing the understanding of others, love to discover things, and challenge and complexity in that pursuit are enticing things. Male geeks, as such, treasure women (who will have them) above all else. We will never figure you out, but we love to try.
There is, to be fair, a bit of objectivity to that. Of course, geeks tend to objectify all people along similar lines, so it is not inherently sexist. And experimentation--from the kitchen to the bedroom--is not something that everyone is going to enjoy, after all, they don't all produce good results, they just all teach us a little more.
Sunday, May 24, 2009
Wherefore are the Engagement Ring
This is an interesting read.
Wedding bands make sense to me, and stylistically I like the elegant simplicity of matched, plain (gold, silver, platinum) bands. Engagement rings have always seemed odd to me. I am amused that it used to be a means of essentially buying a woman's virginity, and the diamond cartel history is fascinating, though it makes me have less desire to purchase those stones, never minding the whole conflict diamonds issue.
Ok, I'll admit, I'm a guy with respect to jewelry and I don't get much any of it, but the idea of wearing two months' salary (it used to be one) on one's finger seems overly silly. It's a means to brag about the wealth of a future husband, not of his love, or devotion. There is little sincerity to it either: figure out whether the monthly salary thing is before or after taxes and should factor in any bonuses, multiply by 2, go to jewelery store and look at rings that are in that price range, possibly with girlfriend (or one of her friends), identify appropriate ring at the correct price, and purchase (often on credit card to be paid off over next few years).
The real reason is the number of other things that one can do for the cost of two months' salary, and it doesn't even matter what one's salary is. For someone earning $24k/year that's $4000 that could be spent on a nice vacation, or new furnishings/appliances/renovation for their house. No matter how much one earns 2 months' salary is a lot.
It really may not be much different than a guy showing off his 52" LCD that is up in a smallish living room that could be fully and well served by a 32" model, or a $15k, 950cc motorcycle that is used for slow touring on nice weekends. Except that the tv can be used by many people and provides plenty of entertainment and the bike does still get one around (and in relatively fuel efficient fashion, though at 950cc, only ~45 mpg).
Rings can be beautiful works of art. They can have meaning and history (passed down, found second hand, designed by one of the couple). Most engagement rings, however, are the equivalent of gold plated spinners: too much money spent on an accessory meant for showing off that money, not love.
Wedding bands make sense to me, and stylistically I like the elegant simplicity of matched, plain (gold, silver, platinum) bands. Engagement rings have always seemed odd to me. I am amused that it used to be a means of essentially buying a woman's virginity, and the diamond cartel history is fascinating, though it makes me have less desire to purchase those stones, never minding the whole conflict diamonds issue.
Ok, I'll admit, I'm a guy with respect to jewelry and I don't get much any of it, but the idea of wearing two months' salary (it used to be one) on one's finger seems overly silly. It's a means to brag about the wealth of a future husband, not of his love, or devotion. There is little sincerity to it either: figure out whether the monthly salary thing is before or after taxes and should factor in any bonuses, multiply by 2, go to jewelery store and look at rings that are in that price range, possibly with girlfriend (or one of her friends), identify appropriate ring at the correct price, and purchase (often on credit card to be paid off over next few years).
The real reason is the number of other things that one can do for the cost of two months' salary, and it doesn't even matter what one's salary is. For someone earning $24k/year that's $4000 that could be spent on a nice vacation, or new furnishings/appliances/renovation for their house. No matter how much one earns 2 months' salary is a lot.
It really may not be much different than a guy showing off his 52" LCD that is up in a smallish living room that could be fully and well served by a 32" model, or a $15k, 950cc motorcycle that is used for slow touring on nice weekends. Except that the tv can be used by many people and provides plenty of entertainment and the bike does still get one around (and in relatively fuel efficient fashion, though at 950cc, only ~45 mpg).
Rings can be beautiful works of art. They can have meaning and history (passed down, found second hand, designed by one of the couple). Most engagement rings, however, are the equivalent of gold plated spinners: too much money spent on an accessory meant for showing off that money, not love.
Saturday, May 16, 2009
Online Dating
I'll admit some hesitancy in posting this. Not because anyone reads this blog, but because of the specific people who may encounter it (I am googled quite easily).
Online dating is great. Especially for people (like myself) who can't really get into the bar scene. I enjoy going to bars, but meeting someone there just doesn't seem fit my personality much. (It works great for some.) Online, however, is an excellent environment to encounter a large number and variety of people. As an added benefit, it is easy to fit into even very busy or chaotic lives.
Of course it is also troublesome: it makes people feel compelled to rush and so tends to favor those who can manage to be aggressive without seeming too intense/creepy/forward--a tricky balancing act I will never figure out--it encourages us to disregard people for often superficial reasons or to make snap judgments based on too little info, and the timing and nature of whether and when people respond mean that good opportunities could easily be missed and worse ones pursued. In the grand scheme it should most often work out in the end: missing out one or even several very good potential matches doesn't mean that another will not show.
Beyond the early rush intro, is the pressure to find meaning in with someone as quickly as possible. But everyone is different, and while those differences can make for good relationships, they may also make for one that would not be able to get off the ground in this environment.
In the end, I suppose that I (and others) can only be ourselves and hope that the other person knows what she/he wants and asks. Of course if the need is for another to meet expectations without having to make those known...
P.S. I am not referring to any one person in this, but everyone, myself included.
Online dating is great. Especially for people (like myself) who can't really get into the bar scene. I enjoy going to bars, but meeting someone there just doesn't seem fit my personality much. (It works great for some.) Online, however, is an excellent environment to encounter a large number and variety of people. As an added benefit, it is easy to fit into even very busy or chaotic lives.
Of course it is also troublesome: it makes people feel compelled to rush and so tends to favor those who can manage to be aggressive without seeming too intense/creepy/forward--a tricky balancing act I will never figure out--it encourages us to disregard people for often superficial reasons or to make snap judgments based on too little info, and the timing and nature of whether and when people respond mean that good opportunities could easily be missed and worse ones pursued. In the grand scheme it should most often work out in the end: missing out one or even several very good potential matches doesn't mean that another will not show.
Beyond the early rush intro, is the pressure to find meaning in with someone as quickly as possible. But everyone is different, and while those differences can make for good relationships, they may also make for one that would not be able to get off the ground in this environment.
In the end, I suppose that I (and others) can only be ourselves and hope that the other person knows what she/he wants and asks. Of course if the need is for another to meet expectations without having to make those known...
P.S. I am not referring to any one person in this, but everyone, myself included.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)