Why, if wanting to be in honest relationships do women prefer being lied-to?

Browsing the Internet, doing research about what women perceive are shortcomings of men, I came upon a surprising revelation. Apparently, and besides the fact that women hate being lied-to, what they hate the most is being poorly lied-to. And as much as I can relate to the fact that dishonesty is something worth hating, I can’t wrap my mind around the difference between being lied-to and poorly being lied-to.

I mean a lie is a lie, right? No, apparently not. If women make a difference between being lied and being poorly lied-to, one can only conclude that they too feel that if a lie is well delivered and believable and passes as a truth, then it’s fine. On the other hand if a lie that is in fact delivered as unbelievable and passes as a lie, it’s not.

All of which got me thinking about the subject. And I realized that there are two kinds of lies that men tell women; those said as to seduce and those said as to not be abandoned for another liar. Also, that women like to be lied-to just as long as it’s done to feed their own fantasies.

And so when it comes to seducing a woman, men set out themselves to be the men they are not. And the logic behind this is simple; most men are by any standard, regular guys. And women don’t like regular guys. Seriously, few men are up to the high standards that women set for themselves when it comes to picking a partner.

In the absence of extraordinary men, what women really want is for men to be the men they are not. What to do then? Nothing else that to blatantly lie; it’s so effective that a friend instead of asking me if I’m dating someone, he’ll always say “who are you lying to now?” Not that I’m a liar, nor that I’ve never lied as to seduce a woman, its just that it is more effective; he knows it.

Which takes me to the second kind of lies men tell women; or those said as not to be abandoned for another liar. And the logic behind these is too simple; most men are by any standard, regular guys. And women don’t like regular guys. Seriously, few men are up to the high standards that women set for themselves when it comes to sticking with a partner.

When women want to get into a relationship they want to keep on believing that they are with that someone who they’ve already made-up to be. Unfortunately though, most are neither the men they make themselves to be when seducing a woman; less so the men that women want them to be. What to do then? Nothing else that to blatantly lie; it’s so effective that most women are with men who have lied to them. Not that I’m a liar, nor that I’ve never lied as to keep a woman I’ve already seduced, it’s just that it is more effective; everybody knows it.

Thing is that lying seems not only about the intent of the liar but about that of who is lied-to as well. Or at least that’s what I recon from the fact that women draw distinctions between being lied-to and being poorly lied-to. I mean really, what’s up with women (and liars)?

____________________________________________________________________

Next post: Women and hormones (Monday June 4, 2012)

Where’s the fun in dishing-it-out when talking about men (their “own” men even)?

Women like to dish-it-out when talking about men.

Yup, women like to talk about defects that are common to all men. They like to share men’s flaws with friends, draw conclusions and laugh about how men are in fact defect-ridden creatures; which they are. And the list is not only quite extensive, it’s enormous.

Adjective plenty, women talk about how men are jealous, unfaithful, liars, cheaters, players and dogs; about how men are emotional automats and unromantic; about how men follow sports, buy useless toys, are disorderly, throw their clothes and used towels on the floor; about how men splash the toilet seat when going to the restroom; about how men are in love with their remote controls and scratch their balls while watching TV and so on and so forth.

But most of all, it seems like if women like to compete to see who is with the man with the most defects.

As if dishing-it-out about men in general weren’t enough, women too like to share on the specific flaws of the men they are with. Yup, share on what makes “their” men criticism-worthy and they will tell on these with mothers, sisters and friends. But it gets worse. They will too tell on these in front of “their” men, “their” men’s families and friends. Some will even speak-out about these at social events and to total strangers.

And it all seems harmless, but its not.

Women would say that most of the defects of “their” men, in this context is nonsense spoken in confidence, but nonsense its not. There are disclosures that are less offensive than others, but at the end of the day, they are all uncomfortable.

For even if nobody likes to come upon a man scratching his balls with one hand and a TV remote on the other, a splashed toilet seat, a floor riddled with clothes and used towels, and unromantic partner, a dog a liar or a cheat, having everybody know that this the case reflects poorly not on he who does it but on she who dishes-out about it.

It’s a violation of the trust deposited in the intimacy of relationship.

Really, even if some women may dismiss this by saying that with defects and all they can’t live without men, living revealing men’s flaws pays no good service to the relationships they pursue.

And it’s not cool.

Because in addition to the betrayal, or the possibility of being seen while walking down the street and being singled out as the guy who scratches his balls, litters the bathroom or what have you, there too is the possibility that they single out the woman who has revealed his flaws.

Thing is that as much as people will bask when those reprehensible habits of men have been revealed, they will too look down at the women they are with. So much so that they will be spoken as the poor gals whose boyfriends/husbands are lousy lovers, dogs, players, cheaters, liars etc; so much so that will not be allowed to deny it either.

And puts women in a corner they cannot get away from.

As if weren’t enough with the loss of trust and the absence of deniability, dishing-it-out about men in general and “their” men in particular losses women the possibility of unbiased advice whenever it may be needed.

I mean, why would anybody want to remain with such a flaw ridden creature some women make men out to be? Best if they just never acquaint themselves or if acquainted leave these specimens once and for all.

Because even if dishing-it-out about men can be a lot of fun, feel harmless or dismissible on account of the fact that most women can’t live without them, but mostly because doing so is not cool at all, is that one is left to wonder what’s up with women (and men’s defects)?

____________________________________________________________________

Next post: Women and liars (Monday May 21, 2012)

What’s the deal with women and being saved (by unattainable objects of affection)?

Continuing the theme of fairy tale characters, the turn is for princesses and princes.

Maidens there are many; she who is put to sleep for a hundred years by a malevolent spell; she who left behind a shoe that only fits her foot; she who is victim of her father’s jealous ways; she who… well, you get the drill. In any case, and as many maidens as there are they are all the same. Gracious, poised and charming they are too both admired and hated.

And while a maiden’s virtue makes her well known and desirable, yet the object of deep jealousness and envy from powerful and unforgiving characters, she and all the good hearted souls around wish her for a handsome, valiant man of means; a prince. Of whom there are many, yet are all the same. Wealthy, gracious, poised and charming, princes are aimless meanderers who carry themselves atop of white stallions while loosely using shiny swords.

The kind of characters who are in need of saving and yet can only be saved by the other.

For as much as there are maidens in need of saving from the heavy burden of virtue, there are princes with a nag for saving them. And word gets-out about the existence of both. How else can the personification of virtue be saved from the vortex of a deep conjure spelled and casted in envy and jealousness of her traits?

And saving is exactly what the prince is made-out for. Brave and defiant he navigates the steep set of odds that are stacked-up against his determination. Emboldened by the ideal of a woman who’s virtue he’s never crossed-paths-with before, he rides for insurmountable lengths, conquers empires, faces and defeats evil-spirits, slays dragons, climbs towers; all to reach and rescue she who will become his princess.

With a kiss,

And just like that women have been taught for centuries that if they are beautiful, chaste and demure, people (mostly women) will be profoundly envious and jealous of them. So much so that they will be involved in a thick conspiracy against them; conspiracy that will render them helpless and from which they will be rescued by a man emboldened by the virtue she personifies; a prince.

And just like that women have been condemned for centuries into believing that the world makes them helpless, that they can only be saved from their helplessness by a man; that in order to be saved the man must conquer not them, but a set of imagined odds; that if he conquers these odds he deserves a kiss, they’ve also been convinced that with a simple kiss she is made into a princess and into a life of bliss.

That seals the destiny to a “happily-ever-after-ness.”

I mean, form a kiss to happily-ever-after… really? Without a date, some wining and dining, a movie? Without some fooling-around and frolicking while in the tower, woods or castle? Without a heart-to-heart, an exploration of each others wants and needs, a simple conversation? Without having met their friends? Without having met the parents? Poor prince… really!

In any case, and as much as from helplessness, to being saved, to a kiss, to happily-ever-after seems more like punishment than reward for the prince’s valiant efforts, what about the generalized notion that a woman needs not to have constructed her own happiness but that she will be provided for it if she is found by the “right” man? What about if the “right” man never comes along?

Because almost no one is ever all-so-helpless as to not try to save themselves; because happily-ever-after is not something that falls on your lap but rather something you build out of mutual empathy and care for one’s self and the other; but mostly because no one can make a princess out of maiden as much as no one can make you as happy as only you can, is that one is left to wonder what’s up with women (and Prince Charming)?

____________________________________________________________________

Next post: Women and men’s defects (Monday May 7, 2012)

Why would women keep kissing a frog that after being kissed, didn’t become prince charming?

The Frog Prince tale by Brothers Grimm has for centuries served as encouragement for millions of women on their pursuit for love-worthy objects of affection.

Yup, on account of this story women have accepted that before finding prince charming they will have to kiss a lot of frogs; and it’s all good. Really, nothing’s wrong with pursuing love, nor in kissing a lot of frogs as to try and uncover a prince.

Still, and as much as some women would like to believe that they can change the men in their lives from frog to prince…

Be it by a simple kiss or a full-out effort into changing men from what they are into what women want them to be, no one ever said that a frog becomes a prince; no one. But mostly no one really believes it. For as much as a prince that was first turned into a frog might go back to prince by a kiss, a frog is a frog and stays a frog no matter how much kissing he gets from a “princess.”

Men don’t change.

Really, men don’t change. Even if men can change and/or evolve (from toad to frog), and as much as relationships do provide opportunities for growth (and demand these be taken for relationships to work), men like frogs, remain the men they essentially-are no matter how much kissing they get from a “princess.”

Thing is that men believe that if they get kissed it is because she-who-did likes them not for what she wants them to become but for the frogs they really are. Seriously, if the man in question is a drunk, a cheap, a mamma’s boy (or what have you) and in spite of his drunkenness, cheapness, mamma’s-boy-ness (or what have you-ness) gets kissed, he’ll believe he is being so because, not in spite, of his frog-ness.

Worst of all, the more a “princess” attempts to make a frog a prince, the more the frog believes it is being-so because of the frog he really is (not the prince she wants to make out of it).

Because a frog is a frog and stays a frog no matter how hard a “princess” may try and make him out to be a prince; because it’s better to change frog (and swamp) before trying to make a prince out of the frog he really is, is that one is left to wonder what’s up with women (and frogs)?

____________________________________________________________________

Next post: Women and Prince Charming (Monday April 23, 2012)

It appears as if the “fairer” sex is on pace to outrun men…

As much as I wonder about what’s up with women; why they love men who don’t love them in return (be it by abuse or emotional unavailability); pursue “sugar-daddies,” don’t believe that men too are innocent until proven guilty; and the likes, I must accept that women are outperforming men in almost every aspect of social and human development, and its becoming more and more evident.

Or is it because women are in fact outperforming men that I ponder on all those issues?

In any case, the other night while at a bar with friends having a few drinks I set myself to carefully watch all who passed-by. Having arrived a little early I got to see a lot of what transpired that evening and something both struck me and reminded me of a feeling I had a few years back.

All or almost all women who passed while I was sitting at the bar looked as if taken from the pages of a high-gloss fashion magazine. Thing was that not only did the women who I saw that night where all dressed New York, Paris or Milan -fashion-week worthy; which they where, but that they all carried themselves with unbelievable poise, grace and confidence. Even if none where over thirty all could have with how they carried themselves that night, conquered the world right then and there.

Meanwhile, the guys at the bar looked as they had been drawn from an Archie and Friends comic book; seriously, next to some of the most worldly young women that I’ve seen in my life where Archibald, Reggie, Jughead, Moose, Dilton and Chuck. And most, if not all, looked as out of place as Archibald, Reggie, Jughead, Moose, Dilton and Chuck did when compared against Betty and Veronica (even if their same age or a bit older).

Out to “conquer” as these guys at the bar felt, they looked like babies in need of arm-carrying while the women they where with could have crossed the velvet rope at any five-star club in Los Angeles, London or Dubai.

All of which reminded me of how I felt when my sister “summoned” my brothers and me and first told us she is gay. Thing was that even if none of us were caught off-guard by her revelation and all felt authentically happy for her and the decision she’d made to reveal herself just as she is, one of my brothers came out with a phrase I’ll never forget.

He, my brother when prompted about how he felt with news, said: “No man could possibly follow on her footsteps.” And as much as my sister did not “come-out,” or rather, did not accept that she is gay for a lack of suitable men (for she is extremely beautiful, intelligent, creative, and had a wide set of “suitors” from where to choose from), one fact remains and it is that no man can possibly follow on her footsteps.

Even if with a serious bias when it comes to my sister and although that night was a revelation for neither before nor after have I found myself in a situation in which the contrast was so obvious, there is much of what I found in those two occasions that is absolutely true. Women are taking charge in leaps and bounds and in the meantime are too outrunning men socially and human development wise.

And it’s not only me who thinks this is the case. In the US for example, 34% of women between the ages of 25 and 34 have an undergraduate degree (or more) while only has 27%¹ of men do. The unemployment rate also favors women; in 2010 the U.S. unemployment rate among women over 20 was nearly 7% while for men it was about 12%². Also, and it’s being widely reported by mainstream media (and though women in the US still earn only 80% of what men do), in some cities women are making 1.2 times what men make. No wonder so many women today ponder about where have all the good men gone.

Because women are outrunning men; because more women are taking leaps and bounds towards their personal and social mobility; because men are being left behind, is that one is left to wonder what’s up with women?

¹ Source: U.S. Census Bureau – Bachelor Degrees
² Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics – Unemployment rates

____________________________________________________________________

Next post: Women and frogs (Monday April 9, 2012)

Why are women the single most important issue framing the US political debate?

As the primaries for the election of the GOP candidate towards the 2012 US presidential race draw to an incredibly protracted and elusive end, it appears as if three key framers for the national debate have arisen; Capitalism, Energy Independence and Environmental Sustainability, and Women’s Rights.

Even if for most having the economy and sustainability as framers for a presidential race shouldn’t come as a surprise, the way the debate is being framed is in fact, surprising. At the mist of an ongoing financial crisis and a global oil-price-spike these issues need be addressed by any reasonable society and form of government. Still, what has been defined by the GOP as the retrenching towards Conservative and American values and interests on these issues is in fact an opprobrious undermining of the values and interests they have hoisted.

Or is it, kidnapped? I mean, how else can one define the cooked-up conjure of free-for-all, tax-cutting, deficit spending, no-welfare-statism that the GOP candidates have been preaching and passing as Capitalism? How else can one define the denial of the fragility of the environment and depravation of responsible and sustainable energy practices with free-for-all-drilling for natural resources that is being passed-up as Energy Independence?

But as much as the GOP seems willing to kidnap and bankrupt what’s left of the US’s fragile economy and environment, it is too waging an even more perverse battle under the flag of Conservative and American values; the War On Women.

And women’s rights are now, more than ever, at the center of the political debate of the most powerful nation in history.

Since the last of the four most important victories in women’s rights in history where won; the separation of church and state, the right to participate in the political process, the advent of birth-control and Roe v. Wade, never has a modern nation through its political process so purposefully tried to undermine women’s individual freedoms.

From the repeal by the church and Christian organizations of the mandate to include contraception in their employee health-care plans; to proposed legislation in many states mandating intra-uterine probes before abortion; to the proposed restrictions in funding of women’s health-care and affordable child-care, the GOP has waged a war on women’s rights.

And as much as the financial crisis has placed an insurmountable burden on middle and poorer classes thus effectively stifling their social mobility, and as much as the sustained (but unsustainable) growth of the world economies is depleting the planet’s natural resources, the “moral” crusade being advanced by the GOP against women is too, impoverishing.

It impoverishes women because it leaves them without options. It impoverishes women because striping them from the option to decide how to live their sexuality without the burden of reproduction strips them not only from the freedom of their bodies; because striping them from the option to op-out of motherhood if unequipped or unwilling for the responsibility of a child strips them not only from the freedom to live their lives without that responsibility; because stripping them from affordable health and child –care strips them not only from the communitarian support system that breeds both individual and parenting success, but mostly because stripping women from the options above also strips women of self-determination, education and moral and financial –independence.

And as much as we would all like to believe that women’s rights are strictly about women, they concern us all.

For not only does leaving women without the option of self-determination, education and moral and financial –independence impoverishes women, it also impoverishes men in very much in the same way. And it does so, for not only women own their bodies, are at many times in their life unequipped or unwilling for the responsibility of a child, and/or are in as much need of the communitarian support system that breeds both individual and parenting success; so are men and the offspring for whom they jointly responsible for.

But no matter if one is female or male, our own construct about democracy and how it at its core is about individual rights and freedoms, makes us all responsible for not making in-principle differences between one or the other; also, for an uncompromised allegiance to individual self-determination and moral independence. Yet, and being that the ethos of democracy demand that these principles be observed at all times, with the GOP’s war on women it is too waging war against what is essential about democracy.

Thing is that at the core of the GOP’s push against women’s rights it is too inviting religion as a determiner of matters of state; and with it state imposed restrictions on individual freedoms.

But there’s hope, for without regard to how any-one person frames its own individual political and moral choices, the US can through the single and most essential of political freedoms (the vote) uphold its status as beacon of freedom and opportunity. And it will be up to women and men in the US to retain a political model that enforces their individual rights, offers opportunities for personal advancement, and allows for the choices that rather than impoverish exalt their economy, environment and self.

Because at the core of the crossroads in the US political debate lie women as the single most important issue; because women’s rights to self-determination, education and moral and financial –independence are at stake; because not only women but men have a stake in upholding the true values of democracy; but mostly because never before have women played such a pivotal role in determining their futures, is that one is left to wonder what’s up with women (and the US presidential race)?

____________________________________________________________________

Next post: Women v. men (Monday April 2, 2012)

Why would women, if wanting to be complimented take offense when being so?

Women like to feel pretty,

Women like to shop for clothes and feel pretty in what they buy and wear, buy and wear makeup, go to the hairdresser, have their “manis” and “pedis,” wax their facial and pubic areas and what have you. And it’s all good; even if some women feel better “au naturelle,” most women would have that part of being a woman and feminine, involves all the “up-keep” that takes place.

And being complimented on how pretty they feel and look.

Women also like people to notice. Notice how that dress they just bought favors their bodies; notice how that new eye shadow brings their eyes out; notice how that new hairstyle makes them look ten years younger; notice how… well you get the drill. And noticing is not enough, they too want to be told; and there is nothing wrong with that either.

All of which makes you wonder why women take offense when being complimented.

Don’t get me wrong, even I know that there are “compliments” that are NOT compliments… at all! A guy coming up to a woman and acting like (or being) a douche and/or a creep and salaciously looking a woman over and or yapping about how he loves big asses (such as yours), or about how he gets off on “thunder thighs” (such as yours), or being overly explicit and rude… well those are not compliments (unless you get-off from hearing stuff like that in which case is all good).

There are those too that even if offered with “good” intentions may rub a woman the wrong way. Things like: “Saw you from across the room but thought that it couldn’t be you, you look fantastic!”, or “You look so much better now” or, “You look just like your mother” don’t pass as compliments either.

But for as much as there are “compliments” that are NOT compliments, there are those that in fact are,

Thing is that as sincere as something like: “Looking good babe, you’re hot!”, “You have such a beautiful face (eyes, smile etc…)!”, “Love your hair” or “That looks great on you” may be, women will always find a way of taking it the wrong way; really. If you tell a woman she’s “hot”, she would rather be “understated”; If you tell her she has beautiful face (eyes, smile etc…), she will in the back of her mind think: “Hey, is all the rest so bad that that is the only thing you could come up with?”; If you compliment her on her hair she will immediately run for a mirror to see if something is wrong with it; or, If you compliment her on what she is wearing, she will immediately think about what she’d rather be wearing.

And yet others that are heartfelt too.

For even if most women can’t compete with the high-standard of beauty that fashion and media have created, that doesn’t mean they are not beautiful; nor that they can’t be complimented on how beautiful they are. Yes, as much as the constructed ideals of beauty cast long shadows under which other forms of beauty lie concealed, there are too those who within the shadows are in fact beautiful; also those who recognize their beauty. Even if the “beauty police” can’t find beauty in the shapely, in the round tummies, in the pear or inverted-pear figures, in the boyish looks, in the grey hair or in aging, it doesn’t mean that others don’t find that attractive and worth being complimented on.

Still, most women will find a compliment offensive if offered for the beauty of their “imperfections.”

And they shouldn’t; because when dismissing a real and heartfelt compliment women are in fact dismissing themselves as compliment worthy. I mean really, what’s up with women (and compliments)?

____________________________________________________________________

Next post: Women and the US presidential race (Monday March 26, 2012)

Why do women feel queasy about guys taking time to be with their friends; sans-them?

Women like to have and take time for themselves and to be with their friends.

Women like shopping, going to the hairdresser, having massages “manis” and “pedis,” taking the afternoon off and having coffee or drinks with friends, doing “girls stuff.” And it’s all good, really; liking what you like and having fun doing it is all good. More-than-good really; taking time for ones self, even while in a relationship, is something well worth pursuing, something that anyone would approve-of, something that if done frequently might even prevent most of those uncomfortable silences that keep men on their toes.

But as much as women like to take time doing “girls’ stuff,” they hate it when guys take time for “boys stuff.”

Most women won’t admit to it, but when men meet-up with friends, take a night out to go to a bar, a party or to play poker, they flip-out. And as much as most women won’t admit to flipping-out when men spend time amongst men, they will find reasons for doing so (flipping-out). They will say that men when amongst men behave badly, go chasing after other women, are not taking proper care of the relationship, are not spending enough time as a couple or being attentive to their couple’s feelings etc. Truth of the matter is that women hate for men to have a good time while they are not with them.

Seriously, women hate for men to have fun in their absence.

Yup, as much as women relish the time spent on themselves and with other women, most feel betrayed by the fact that men have fun while on their own or while with people other than themselves. It’s almost as if men having fun on their own, or anybody else for that matter, would mean that they will realize that there are greener pastures elsewhere; insecurities that become projections of heartbreaking outcomes.

And they will do everything in their power not to allow men to enjoy themselves.

Why else would women demand being asked for permission when going out (when letting them know should be enough)? Why else would more information than usual be warranted? Why else, regardless of how much time is spent together, would a woman say: “why do you get to spend so much time with your friends?” Why else… well you get the picture.

In any case, a “reasonable” woman always concedes with a “have fun” spoken under her breath.

And a “have fun” spoken under a woman’s breath, plus a greater number of calls than usual to check up on exactly how much fun one is having (and with excuses such as: “going to sleep now, have fun…” or “at what time are you arriving exactly?, I was thinking about catching a movie and waiting up for you to get home,” or a “I’m wearing the lingerie you gave me for my birthday, just thought you should know”) is always enough to ruin all the fun that there is to be had on a “boys-night-out”.

Because nothing in a relationship means that one is supposed to have fun only with her but mostly because a ruined “boys-night-out” builds unnecessary resentment in a relationship, is that one is left to wonder what’s up with women (and “boys-night-out”)?

____________________________________________________________________

Next post: Women and compliments (Monday March 19, 2012)

Why, when wanting to be heard, do women keep to themselves?

Women don’t believe in economy of words.

Seriously, that which praises that more-is-less when it comes to communicating is something that never crosses a woman’s mind. If you ask a woman how was her workday for example, she will spare no detail. She, and before getting to what’s important, will tell you what the doorman had to say about her haircut (hint included), what the receptionist at the office was wearing (hint and adjectives included), what she heard at the coffee-stand during morning break (hints, adjectives and intersects – for which there is no context – included), and before she gets to what’s really important, she’s for sure lost the attention of her audience.

Thing is that after all the detail, hints, adjectives and intersects, and before a woman gets to what really happened with clients, bosses’ or colleagues (good or bad), before her achievements or woes, before that which really made or broke her day, she will have lost all chance to share in the attention offered when she first started; and all is but white-noise in her audience’s minds.

As if that weren’t enough, when women speak, one does not need to interact with their dialogues, one is but a passive recipient for their stories.

Yes, when women talk about the trials and tribulations of their lives, whatever they might be – feelings, ambitions, desires, where to travel etc…– one is never to get involved but informed. But one doesn’t get informed either, and nor for lack of interest, but because one is lost in the detail, hints, adjectives and intersects; and all is but white noise in one’s mind.

I mean, how is one to ever become aware of what women want if it all intersects with what the mom, the cousin, the friend, the doorman, the receptionist, the colleague, the boss, the client etc… had to say or did? And women complain that men never listen, when in reality we might be interested but all is but white noise in one’s mind.

But it gets worse, for as much as women don’t believe in the economy of words and when they “communicate” don’t share but inform, when they really want to be heard they keep to themselves.

Far worse, for when women have something to say that really matters, something like: “what you did really hurt me,” something like: “I’m not comfortable with you,” something like: “I got tired of not being listened to,” they keep to themselves. I mean really, what’s up with having a lot to say but when asked, say: “nothing, I don’t want to talk”?

And when nothing or little comes out of a woman’s mouth all alarms go-off.

Yes, when women say nothing, even the most innocent of man asks, “did I do something wrong?” But one never truly finds out. Thing is that as much as women say they are in touch with their emotions, they really are the worst when it comes to communicating them.  

Because while the more that women say the less we listen, and the less they do the more we try (to listen), is that one is left to wonder what’s what’s up with women (and the “silent treatment)?

____________________________________________________________________

Next post: Women and “boys-night-out” (Monday March 12, 2012)

Why, if everybody is entitled to a fair trial, do women charge, trial, judge and sentence men as if they were all guilty?

Women lawyers, judges and justices there are many; yet no woman believes in the presumption of innocence of a man.

Seriously, that which prays that “everyone is innocent until proven guilty,” is all but “dead-letter” in the minds of women when it comes to men. Sadly, and as if not believing in the presumption of innocence of men where not enough, women don’t believe in shifting the burden of proof either (which in this case would be “everyone is guilty until proven otherwise“). No, for women “men are all the same.”

And even if most men are essentially the same,

Harmless generalizations that fit the gender are nothing to get upset about. Things like men being terribly basic, or how they think about sex all the time, get sleepy after doing that about what we think all the time, don’t understand women, don’t listen to women etc…, are true to most men, really.

There is huge difference between these harmless generalizations and trying to fit men into a basket where they are all abusers, cheaters, liars, etc…

If a woman pursued a relationship with an abuser, an emotionally unavailable man, a petty criminal, a player, a cheat, a liar or a down right “dog,” that alone doesn’t make the gender one of exclusively abusers, emotionally unavailable, petty criminals, players, cheaters, liars or “dogs”.

Huge difference, seriously.

Thing is that if a woman decides (even unknowingly) to plunge head-first into a relationship with one of any of the types of men that fit-the-bill above, and is left justifiably disenchanted (for it turned out to be one where she was abused and left to ponder about her missed opportunities, one where her love for the guy was unrequited, one where she was cheated and/or lied to), she will always come away condemning men when in reality it is not men whom have hurt her but a man. And as much as that man deserves to be charged, trialed, judged and sentenced (some even to serve jail-time), passing-on that same judgment and sentencing to all men, and under the premise that “men are all the same” is terribly unfair with men (no doubt), but mostly with women.

For when women work under the suspicion that “all men are the same,” they too abandon the idea that they can find love in-the-heart of a good man.

As unfair as it is with men, for women to think that for the actions of one man all men have to prove themselves worthy of the kind of affection offered to those that abused-it or didn’t give it return, it’s even worse when it comes for women to find options for their futures. By doing so, she who is won over by her suspicions that “all men are the same,” precludes the possibility of being liked by he who finds them interesting and attractive; he who despite their pasts is willing to work to let her overcome her fears; he who is willing to offer the long lost respect of her past relationships, but doesn’t want nor shouldn’t be judged and sentenced for transgressions he didn’t commit.

Worst part though is when women use the dreaded “all men are the same” not only to preclude themselves from happiness, but instill fear in other women’s hearts too.

Because even if a woman has been hurt she’s been hurt not by men but by a man, one is left to wonder what’s up with women and the “presumption of innocence”?

____________________________________________________________________

Next post: Women and the “silent treatment” (Monday March 5, 2012)