Not that into me? Say so.
He’s Just Not That Into You. What a dating revolution. Teaching women to suck it up and move on when men are ‘giving the wrong signals’, or some junk like that. I for one, am thoroughly sick of it, because life is not that cut and dried. The ideas behind the book are sexist, demeaning and do not do anything for women. Or men. Or any sane person looking for a quality partner. The book is just a set of rules for people who are too scared to talk about their feelings lest they get dumped. And it perpetuates and even encourages the idea that talking to your partner is a sure-fire way to get you dumped. I mean, who wants all those icky feelings and conversations all out in the open? What you really want and feel is a huge turnoff. So as an alternative to talking and getting dumped, you can read a man’s behaviour, assume what he thinks, and act based on those assumptions. Namely, you dumping him (ha ha! Girl power!).
I really do understand the premise of this book: do not chase men who are obviously not interested in you. But I think this message really only deserves a couple of sentences and not a whole book, which goes a little too far. Books like this just give liars and cheats an excuse to mistreat women.
Point one: monitoring a man’s behaviour all the time? I can only see that leading to trouble. I understand that when you get strong vibes from someone, like they kick you in the shins, that you should not chase them anymore. Same with the guy who only calls you after 10pm. But the tone of his voice, how he dresses for you, whether he kisses you on the cheek or lips? FFS. If you are constantly reading things into every move a guy makes, two things can happen.
1. You will be hyper-vigilant about slight changes in behaviour and:
badger him about it until he gets sick of reassuring you, and dumps you.
badger him about it until he gets bored, has an affair, accuses you of mental instability when you get upset, and dumps you.
hold it all inside until one day you have a very public fit because he glanced in the direction of an attractive girl, and he dumps you.
hold it all inside until one day you are admitted to a mental institute, and he dumps you.
Or you could go the other way:
2. Case study: Sarah, never has a long-term relationship, because every time a man ‘slips up’, like when he calls her 2 hours late (because his phone was stolen), or when he adds ‘xxx’ instead of ‘xxxxxxxxxxxxx’ at the end of a text (because he doesn’t know how to use the phone he just bought to text Sarah). The idea that a man should go out of his way to impress a woman, lavish her with gifts, open a door for you, always be well dressed and well-mannered if he really, really wants you… it’s just childish. If men expected women to reincarnate the 50′s feminine ideal, they’d balk and cry misogyny. Instead, Sarah dresses like a slut and treats men like she’s an entitled whore, because that’s called female sexual empowerment.
Two: “He’s just not that into you” suggests bad relationships are a woman’s fault. That if something failed – she was manipulated, abused, cheated on and lied to – it is her fault and her fault alone. She did not recognise the signs and walk away. Therefore she has no pride, no dignity and no self-respect – and furthermore, because she treats herself this way deserves none of our respect. As if men are blame-free simpletons. Which brings me to ask…
Three: why is the onus all on the woman? Why is she the one who has to read all this behaviour, determine if the guy likes her or not, then make a decision to move forward or dump? Does the guy get any say (and why doesn’t he get to be gifted with lavish lovings)? This idea makes men lazy and women easy to manipulate. All a guy has to do is kiss you on the lips, text five thousand times a day, wear deodorant, and tell you you’re “different and he’s never felt this way before”, and he has you – to use as he sees fit. So when he doesn’t want you anymore, for whatever reason, all he has to do is act aloof and stop wearing deodorant. You know, so you notice something’s up and you leave – no problem for him. And if you stay no problem either – free sex. Some men are known to be notorious cowards when it comes to relationship endings (just look at my previous post); they’d rather lie, sleep around and weasel their way out than just fess up. And I’m not suggesting break-ups should be awful and painful for everyone, but there’s some point where either party has got to step up and say:
“I really like you, do you want to be with together for a very long time?” (or something to that soppy effect) OR “You’re great, but I don’t see us working, we have to move on.”
It’s about respect and honesty and getting a guy to SAY “I’m just not that into you,”. Books like this just give liars and cheats an excuse to mistreat women.
This post was submitted by Yaz.
No related posts.
You’re right. Most of these books are junk. Not to mention a waste of money…
I agree with some of the points you raised. Womens magazines in particular are all about telling you how to pleasure a man, look nice for a man and how to act around a man. My friend reads loads of them and always ends up feeling down after reading them. The content is boring and has nothing to do with being a woman. My biggest advice to her, and anyone else, is to stop buying this rubbish and read something of benefit.
Is it right for a person who monitors a female blog site for emotionally
hurt women to use threats of bodily harm to one of the posters?
I can not believe this. You just removed the commit about you doing bodily harm to me.
Is it right for a person who monitors a female blog site for emotionally
hurt women to use threats of bodily harm to one of the posters?
I can not believe this. You just removed the commit about you doing bodily harm to me.
“Womens magazines in particular are all about telling you how to pleasure a man, look nice for a man and how to act around a man.”
And they suck hard even at that.
Very true
IA. Women’s magazines are more about pleasing men, just like men’s magazines are there for pleasing men. Looking in mens’ mags it doesn’t seem like them much give a damn about pleasuring women
Mens magazines teach the same stuff for men , i feel down after reading them also it on both sides of the sexes. Its all marketing and it is designed to make people feel bad about themselves if they dont live up to ideals oftern written by internet markers that are trying to sell crap advice to make money . Men are told they have to be some alpha male with a career and ern money or they have to sleep with lots of women and women are told that they need to look really attractive for men and if not their inadequate . The real problem is that the whole message of these magazines is that the message is who you are is inadequate and your not ok . Its on both sides not just from a womens perspective but also a mans .
I actually already realise that. I was bringing up the content of female magazines because the OP was talking exclusively about these rubbish books aimed at women. I know mens mags have similar problems, but it’s good that you raised that point anyway. I don’t read any of these mags. They’re a waste of time…I think the sole difference between female and male mags is that the women are objectified in the mags and the men are idealized to be cocky, sex/cash machines. But most men and women are, of course, not comfortable with these objectifications and idealizations. The main way to stop it is to stop buying it.
I agree with your points. Marketing things is largely based on fear of inadequacy. The problem is with, however, that women are marketed as sex products or to be sex products, and men are taught that women are just sex products. The main thrust of marketing things to women is: be attractive and sexually available at all times, so men will give you attention and marry you. The main thrust of marketing things to men is: be an alpha male, so you can have sex with the most physically attractive woman that is available, get respect from your peers. If neither woman or man do this, i.e. advertise their wares, or have a pretty girl on their arm (respectively), then they are sold as inadequate in some way.
It is a generally accepted theme of advertising – men as hunters of sex from women. And instead of stopping the exploitation of women’s sexuality alone, the tables turn to marketing men as sex products – which is equally offensive and often comes off as really cheesy. Surely someone in marketing and advertising is clever enough to come up with a way to depict both men and women in a respectful light and still be humourous or whatever.
Anyway, the book suggests that making assumptions based on behaviour is a good way for women to defend themselves against being hurt and taken advantage of. It plays into the idea that men are sexual predators – the majority of which are not, I hope. Making small assumptions is ok – like if someone spends time with you and calls you, says they like you and some time later sleep with you etc., you can probably assume they like you. Which is why if that same person mistreats you by lying, cheating, leading you on etc., it isn’t your fault i.e. you didn’t bring it on yourself by ignorance. They lied to you because they were an asshole with problems.
Making wild assumptions from a set of rigid relationship rules (instead of making smaller assumptions, building a mutual respect and talking to your partner) is just silliness.
Agreed .
Agreed , the mags benifit the magazines not anyone reading them .