4 posts tagged “relationships”
A Russian man immediately filed for divorce from his wife of 18 years after he discovered she had been making pies with pumpkins instead of zucchini.
From Majikthise.
A few days ago, after having discovered reddit, I found a couple of lists of sex advice. Given that the general disfunctionality of modern "dating" has always interested me (even back when it was largely academic), I couldn't let them go without responding.
The first list is entitled Fifty Mistakes Men Make When Having Sex, and is actually an okay list but seems idiosyncratic in places (and nowhere deserving of the outpouring of misogyny found in the comments).
2 Not knowing how to kiss sensitively
Passionate or sensitive, firm or gentle, good kissing is an art form which lubricates the wheels of sex and gets everyone in the mood for more intimacy. Learn how to kiss, and do it well. That doesn't mean sticking your tongue in her mouth and wiggling it around like you're trying to floss her teeth.
While I partly agree with this one, I have a problem with "Not knowing how to..." being classified as a "mistake." "Kissing badly" may be, and being stubborn in one's ignorance about what pleases one's partner certainly is, but if people are willing to communicate about what they like, it shouldn't take too long to figure out what'll work.
8 Not shaving before sex
When you're in the throes of passion, having your beard stubble brushing back and forth across her face isn't so sexy, but at least it'll produce a red rash she can remember you by.
I'm a bit uncomfortable with these sorts of unilateral obligations. I think that if a guy does have stubble, that should be acknowledged - if I haven't shaved recently, I'm not going to be doing some things in quite the same way because of that sandpaper effect. Really, it's a cost-benefit thing - is the delay required to go in and shave worth the change in sensation? Sometimes it will be, sometimes not. And I suppose if someone of any gender really wants to make some form of hair removal a deal-breaker, more power to 'em. But honestly, a lot of it seems like societal expectation rather than general preference.
14 Breaking off just as she's getting to the point where she wants you to keep going at all costs
Women often get so lost in their sexual arousal that they forget to give feedback. In reality, the fact that she's lying there quietly may actually mean she loves what you're doing; if so, you should feel her pressing her vulva against your mouth or fingers, or shifting like she wants more touch, rather than giving you a sense that she'd rather be out shopping.
I'm not sure if this falls in the category of psychic powers. I'd consider shifting to be "feedback," but if my partner is just "lying there quietly" I'm sure as hell going to stop and ask if everything's okay. And if I'm wrong, she's perfectly capable of telling me to keep going; erring on the side of caution is better in the long run, because it's easily self-curing. Maybe I'd feel differently if I were into one-night stands, where there's no "long run" to speak of.
16 Undressing yourself inelegantly - which includes taking your socks off after your underwear
Nothing is more comical (or pathetic) to a woman than a man in his socks and pants. Except possibly a naked man wearing socks. If you don't understand why, just accept that it is so.
If you're trying to give your partner a show, perhaps. Most of the time, this is going to be sufficiently temporary or irrelevant that nobody will care.
18 Sticking a finger up her vagina before she's ready, willing and able
In general, women do like to be penetrated just as much as men like to penetrate, which, considering how much men like to stick things up there, is just as well. However, she'll only want you to do this when the time is right - i.e. when she's aroused enough to enjoy it. If you're giving her clitoris attention, there'll be a point where she might like to have a finger or two inside her. If so, be gentle, and start with one finger on her G-spot. Make sure she enjoys this before you put another one up there. Two fingers on her G-spot is probably as much as she will want. And be just as firm with your touch as she finds pleasurable. If you don't know what the G-spot is, then do some Google-ing before you get into bed.
I'm not disagreeing with the gist here, but Google is not an acceptable substitute for talking to your partner.
19 Entering her without asking her first
What is it with men and these dark, wet places? Just keep in mind that she decides how far sex goes, and if she doesn't want to enjoy intercourse then don't press the point. This applies especially to any strategy that involves nudging your penis into position and then pressing forward without her consent, verbal or otherwise! Having said that, you don't always need to ask "May I enter you?" though it can be a romantic and sexy thing to do if you're looking deep into her eyes. Needless to say, that's most likely to happen in the man on top position, which, by the way, remains everyone's most popular position for sex.
I'm sad that this has to even be on the list - it's not "a mistake," it's rape. And I disagree - you do always need to ask in some form; it's just that rape apologists act like the only way to do this is stop and speak in stilted language. (Also, since when is "man on top" everyone's favorite position? And if it's not the favorite, why is it the most popular?)
22 Coming before she's got excited or begun to enjoy sex
There aren't many men who can last long enough to really satisfy a woman who enjoys vaginal intercourse and G-spot stimulation. If you can't be bothered learning how to be a long lasting lover, then at least have the decency to keep going for a few minutes so she gets some pleasure. This isn't hard, and there are plenty of ways you can learn to extend intercourse and not come so quickly. Do some research on Google for "end premature ejaculation". See also number 26.
I'm not sure about the "learning how to be a long lasting lover" thing (it's probably possible, but "learning" seems the wrong word; "training" maybe?), but I can guarantee that if you Google for that you're not going to find what you're looking for (assuming you're not looking for "vitamin supplement" style snake oil) easily. But continuing PIV sex after ejaculation strikes me as a horrible idea for anyone who's actually concerned about avoiding pregnancy (I'm assuming a fertile couple and the use of barrier methods, here). I'm not saying that it's "game over" - just find other ways, and in the future plan your timing better.
23 Not coming at all - or losing your erection when you put the condom on
If you're one of that rarer breed of men who has trouble coming during intercourse, may we respectfully suggest you see a sexual therapist? You can then deal with this problem, learn to come more quickly, and avoid giving her a numb vagina and an intimate knowledge of the exact shade of color you painted your bedroom ceiling. If you're one of the many men who lose their erection when the condom comes out of its foil wrapper and onto the head of your penis, it's back to Google for a search on, surprisingly enough, "losing erection when putting on a condom".
We seem to be moving away from "mistakes" and into the realm of "peeves." For the first problem, why is she still having intercourse if she's not enjoying it? Tell the idiot to stop, and do something more fun. As for the second, if you're going to use Google as your resource rather than, say, a library, why not look up the information together?
24 Asking her how it was for her
This is not the mark of a confident lover, so if you really want some feedback, phrase it thus: "Did you prefer it when I did X or Y?"
Honestly, I'm going to probably want to talk about it, because that's the best time to discuss things that aren't appropriate for "during." I'll try not to be cliche (e.g., "was it good for you too?"), but I don't feel I'm under any obligation to be "confident" to the point of ignorant.
34 Answering honestly when she asks you what your last lover was like
Guys, when a woman asks you if her butt is too big, do you tell her the truth? Enough said. Your current lover is always the most gorgeous, sexy and desirable woman around. Even if she doesn't really believe it, that's what she wants to hear.
This is a stupid mind game, and if your partner is doing this sort of thing than she (or he) is acting immature. I wouldn't usually answer these kinds of questions because it's disrespectful to the other partner; would she want me to tell a potential future partner about intimate details?.
36 Making her do all the work
Changing positions is all very well, but asking her to ride you each time you have sex seems a bit one sided. Vary the positions, have fun, and take equal shares of the work. Don't just settle for one favorite position and flog it to death.
I think the important thing here is communication - if it feels like "work" to one person, something's wrong!
38 Photographing or videoing your lovemaking
Unfortunately, as many jilted lovers can testify, taking pictures while you enjoy sex is putting power in the hands of the person who has the pictures. A good compromise is to link your video camera direct to your TV without recording the images. That way you can have the erotic thrill of seeing yourself during sex without having to worry about seeing yourself having sex on the internet in a few years' time.
Unfortunately, we are in a culture that encourages that sort of thing as a revenge tactic, and what really needs to be done is for people to stop encouraging that (and recognize that it's illegal in most jurisdictions). One way of mitigating this is making sure both people have a copy of the images (easy to do in these days of digital recording), a sort of "Mutually Assured Destruction" policy - but even that's dicey in the emotional flareups that can happen after a breakup. I'm not sure what the best solution is, besides being aware of the risks and making sure both parties totally consent to the recording before, during, and after (i.e., if one partner wants the recording deleted, it gets deleted).
40 Not romancing her
Women love romance. Men put up with it, or do it to get sex. True or false? Probably true, but the romantic "chase" is deeply rewarding for most men (i.e. seducing and winning a woman makes us feel deeply fulfilled), and romance is an essential part of that process. If you're able to continue being romantic once you're an established couple, then you set yourself head and shoulders above the rest of your fellow men, and you stand that much greater chance of getting regular, passionate sex.
Stereotype city. Though I'm not even sure what she means by "romance" here, I'm pretty sure it's not a one-way street, or something that's exchanged for sex. Neither "romance" (in the "feelings" sense, or in the "trappings of a traditional monogamous relationship" sense) nor sex should be bargaining chips, in my opinion.
45 Talking dirty without checking if she likes it
Generally a little consensual dirty talk between adults adds to the excitement. The first time your partner tells you to f*** her hot wet c*** you'll see what I mean. If that hasn't happened yet, and you'd like it to, encourage her to talk dirty to you when you're making love, and see what pops out of her mouth. You might be surprised. Remember legend has it that the quiet ones are often the most surprising in bed!
There's a disconnect here between the title and the text. I don't see talking as something to directly "check" the way physical activities do, but it's probably a bad idea to be cliched or misogynist in your talk, because it's likely going to be profoundly unerotic. Most pornspeak, unfortunately, is both.
49 Not spending some time with her in your arms after sex
A man who gets up after he's done the business and sets about his daily routine is probably top of most women's sexual dislikes. For her, this is a special time when a woman feels very close to her partner. She takes much longer to come down from sex than a man does, she wants to know she's loved and special, and she wants to feel adored by the man to whom she has just given her most precious asset. The very least you can do is to spend a half hour or so cuddling her while you relax after making love, even if you're not going to spend the night with her.
While I see the author's point here, can we avoid the essentialism of "he wants to get up and leave, she wants 30 minutes of cuddling?"
Now on to the men's rebuttal, which was actually written by a woman--or at least someone who claims to be. (Ironically enough, the "mistakes men make" list was apparently written by a man.) This "Mistakes Women Make" post is obviously a response, and as such has the problems of being (a) too defensive and (b) framed in response to the other post.
1. Assuming he can get a raging hard on when it suits you. Contrary to popular belief, men can't just flip a switch and get it up because you decided to stop being a frigid bitch. Getting it hard is your job. I suggest you figure it out.
We get a recognition of the distinction between reasonable and unreasonable expectation, but it's couched in so much misogyny that I can't see how anyone would bother with trying to "figure it out." (Hint: it's not her job to "get it hard." It's both partners'.)
2. Thinking that kissing needs to be this sweet romantic thing all the time. Sometimes pressing your lips against your partners mouth while you get off is the hot. It depends on the situation.
I don't think this is really in contrast to what was said above, except that the author is buying into the "women like gentle, men like rough" stereotype.
3. Leaving him responsible for your orgasm. You know what gets you off. Tell him. If you don't, it's your own fault when he's snoozing and you're all wound up.
This is the best advice of the bunch, and it applies to both men and women.
4. Expecting him to cuddle. Men and women are wired differently. Sex makes most women want to talk and bond and all that shit. It makes men pass out. It's a biological thing. Stop fighting it, and stop holding it over his head, it's not his fault.
Gah! Can we stop with the "wired differently" bullshit? It may have meaning when you're talking about particular physical activities (though once it boils down to brain chemistry, I doubt there's all that much difference), and to an extent even to post-sex fatigue, but everything that gets lumped in with this makes no sense. Men apparently want to talk about if the sex were good, leave, and fall asleep; women want to talk and bond and cuddle and never get tired at all.
6. Expecting him to always lay on the charm and romance. Sometimes, that's nice. Sometimes. But expecting him to be all roses and candles all the time is like expecting you to act like a pornstar all the time. If you're not willing to do that, don't expect him to switch for you.
Okay advice except for the gender essentialism and the whiff of quid pro quo.
8. Using Cosmo as a sex bible. I dont know who comes up with half that shit, but I'm pretty sure they need counseling.
Who does this? I thought that the sex advice in those mags was more for entertaining teenagers.
9. Whining when he pushes your head down on his cock instead of stroking your hair. Know why he's pushing, skippy? Because you aren't doing it right, and have apparently ignored the other clues he's given you. Pay attention to the signals that he's sending you.
Honestly, this is probably bullshit. His mouth is likely unoccupied; he can bloody well tell you what he wants. He's probably doing that because he saw it in a porno, or because he's trying to feel in control.
10. Not moving at all. Missionary is not an excuse to do nothing.
Who keeps going if their partner is lying back and thinking of England? At least talk about it, and if there's some reason they're doing a sex-doll imitation you can figure things out.
12. Not shaving your legs. Im pretty bad at this myself. But if you want your guy stubble free, you better get out the razor.
It's not the same thing, though; beard stubble can be a lot more bothersome. (And again with the quid pro quo!)
13. Allowing your crotch to resemble the amazon. Yes, waxing hurts. Yes, some people don't want to go bare. Thats fine. If you like bush, great. If you have sensitive skin and can't shave, I feel for you. But for the love of Christ, trim that shit if you want him to spend any time down there.
People spend way too much time already worrying about this. It's not a prerequisite.
14. Assuming that sex means a relationship. The only relationship you have is that he has now stuck his hoo hoo dilly in your cha cha. That's as far as it goes unless otherwise noted.
Honestly, this isn't gender-specific. In fact, I've heard more women complain about it than men.
15. Withholding oral sex just because you're ragging. He didn't do it. Unless you want him to withhold oral sex because he's hormonal, I suggest you get some kneepads.
I've never encountered this - is the idea that reciprocation has to be evaluated on a per-encounter basis? Also, kneepads? What's with the assumption that he's going to be standing up? That seems less comfortable for everyone involved.
16. Expecting him to figure out what you like by what noise you make. Use your words. Have you ever actually heard what you sound like while you're having sex? If you heard yourself on tape, and someone asked you to explain what was causing you to make that noise, 67% of women would respond with answers like "I stubbed my toe" "I ran up the steps" or "I was putting up drywall".
Communication is good, though noises aren't always that ambiguous, especially in context. (Again, err on the side of caution.)
17. Leaving condoms up to him. If you're sexually active and insist that he uses a condom, I suggest buying a box and keeping it by your bed. Not all men keep them on them, and it's just as much your responsibility as it is his. If you think that makes you a slut, you shouldn't be having sex anyway. Go back to Jr High.
Well, it's both people's responsibilities, though I think it makes sense to have some in each partner's bedroom.
18. Getting your undies in a bunch when he talks dirty. A little fantasy can be fun. If he treats you with respect all the time, you shouldn't be offended when he calls you his dirty little slut. When he calls you a whore and tells you to come, its his way of showing that he cares if you get off. Stop being a sissy.
There's talking dirty, and there's talking dirty badly (am I the only one who saw that Seinfeld episode?). Using misogynist terms like that (without deciding in advance that you're both into that sort of thing) is an easy way to hit a wrong note. If you can't figure out how to say erotic things without calling your partner "slut" or "whore," you need to find some better erotica, stat.
19. Refusing to be spontaneous. I know this is shocking, but sometimes sex OUTSIDE of the bedroom is fun.
Not really a single-gender thing.
20. Dissing quickies because it's not some slow sensual ordeal. Sex is a dynamic thing. Theres an awesome raw energy when you only have 20 minutes but having to have someone so bad that you do it half clothed against the wall. Readjust your thinking.
Again, not really single-gender.
21. Being too much of a pussy to tell him what is or isn't acceptable before you start bumping uglies. Be honest. If he asks if he can poke you in the butt, and you giggle and say no like it's an invitation, don't look surprised when he "accidentally" sticks his cock in your butt.
While communication is a must, this is bullshit. (And, for that matter, rape.) There's no such thing as "saying no like it's an invitation" except in the minds of sociopaths. If you can't say what you like, you're not likely to get it, but that's not an excuse for your partner to assume carte blanche.
23. Undressing in the dark. If youre shy, dim the lights, but give the man something to see. No ripping off the clothes and diving under the covers, either.
It seems silly, but body image (and entitlement) issues are real. As long as it doesn't lead to "I'm just going to lie here and do nothing," I don't see it as a big problem.
24. Refusing to get on top. Theres no reason men should have to do all the work.
Maybe there's more of a reason, maybe not. Communicate!
25. Getting that bored look on your face. Men are more visual than women. Give him something to look at. Get on top and arch your back a little bit. Move. Do something to indicate that you 1) are not dead and 2) didn't suffer a minor stroke rendering you unable to move.
This wouldn't be a problem if we didn't have a societal expectation of this sort of thing rather than enthusiastic participation. But then there's the bullshit "men are more visual" thing, and the suggestions that don't suggest that she's enjoying it for himself, but that she's obligated to please him.
26. Expecting him to do all the touching when you're riding him. It's your body, you're used to it. Play with your tits, rub your clit, do something to make his job easier.
"To make his job easier?" My job is typing documents and doing research. Do it because you enjoy it. (And again, this should apply to both genders, yet we expect it more from women, as "putting on a show.")
28. Getting into bed, getting naked, fooling around and then deciding that you just want to cuddle, then getting offended when he doesn't. Its your choice to stop, but don't look all fucking surprised when he's confused. You got him naked in your bed, what else did you think was going to happen?
Gah. (First, it's again not a gender thing, though there's arguably more pressure on guys to not stop.) If he's confused, you talk about it. (That's talk, not have a debate contest with sex as the potential prize.) All an attitude like this does is keep people from "fooling around" when they want that but not more, and I think that's a bad thing.
29. Refusing to let him take control. So your a feminist. Big fucking deal. Letting him call the shots doesn't make you any less of one.
I haven't encountered this as a question of feminist cred. Occasionally a "sex thread" will get women who say they like their partner to take control, but they've usually reconciled this with their feminism. (There are others who say they don't like this; the consensus is usually that it's something to be agreed upon rather than assumed.)
30. Refusing to take control. Its ok to crawl across a bed to him on all fours, push him down and crawl on top. It's not his responsibility to start things all the time.
How about negotiating control and avoiding the strawfeminism?
31. Forgetting that he has a body that likes to be touched, too. Men have things like backs and shoulders and stomachs and other parts that are fun to kiss and touch. You miss a lot of good places by concentrating solely on his penis.
32. Ignoring his balls. Seriously, they are there. Kiss them, lick them, suck on them, make a relationship with them, just don't ignore them.
Honestly, 32 is mostly overrated except as a subset of 31. While some guys are undoubtedly "wired differently," I think for many it's mostly psychological.
33. Leaving him to his own devices. Nothing is worse than a girl who gets you most of the way off and then bolts because she doesn't want to deal with the mess.
I can think of a lot of things that are worse. But I'm really not sure what's being referred to here. (At the risk of sounding like a broken record... communication! It doesn't take very long to agree on precautions.)
34. Launching into some speech about not being an object for sex when he tries to titty fuck you. Jesus Christ, just push them together and enjoy yourself. You get a great view.
More strawfeminism. I think the people who don't like it just don't get much out of it; there's nothing wrong with that. It's not an obligation (and if someone's acting like it is, there is an objectification problem there).
35. Expecting him to handle you like a porcelain doll. I'd hate to be the bearer of bad news, but you're not going to break, sister. So doing it against the wall gives you a bruise on your shoulder. Look at it later and giggle at the memory.
There's a middle ground between leaving porcelain dolls and bruises. (Though if either's your thing, more power to ya.)
36. Refusing to try things in the name of "making love". You're not making anything. You are naked. With another person. Making strange faces and weird noises. Stop romanticizing it.
This is confusing. Is the problem "refusing to try things" (which can be bad or not - people are allowed to say that something doesn't excite them before they've tried) or romanticizing sex (which is neither good nor bad, unless there's unrealistic expectations involved). Just live and let live, what's so hard about that?
38. Throwing a bitch fit when he asks for a 3 some. Its the American dream. (I know my ex is reading this right now, so a quick interjection. One request for a 3 some is ok. Every 5 minutes, not so much. Know the difference).
Honestly, it's not "the American dream" - it's just a safe answer to the "what's your fantasy" question. As for asking, even the author notes a difference between bringing something up (and if you don't understand that it has to be handled delicately with a monogamous partner, you're an idiot) and acting entitled.
41. Bitching when you get jizz on you. You're having sex. That will happen. Thats the entire point of sex. Establish where he can and cant jizz and be done with it. Remember, it tightens the pores.
Um, right. If this is a woman writing it, she's doing the whole "I'm the best girlfriend because I do what men want" thing that's really annoying. The earlier complaint wasn't about accidentally coming into contact with semen, it was about guys who take their cues from porn deciding that it's just natural to ejaculate on someone else and they don't have to ask about it. (It's not "the whole point" - enjoyment is the point. Messy fluids are anything from a means to enjoyment to an annoying side effect to a biological hazard.)
42. Not making any noises at all. Moan. Scream his name. Something so he knows he's the best you've had, even if he isn't.
This is good advice given in an insulting manner. I don't have to be the best anybody's ever had (that's another way of saying you want any other sex they've had to not be as good as it could be; what kind of selfish jerk wants that?). I just have to know they're enjoying it.
45. Anything that involves inserting anything into his body that he has not specifically approved before hand. I don't care what Cosmo says, some things are simply not pleasant surprises.
Not gender specific.
46. Refusing to use oils/whipped cream/other messy but fun things because you have 541510630 count Egyptian cotton sheets that were made by hand by the only person alive capable of sewing that pattern. They'll wash.
Just do that stuff in a kitchen or bathroom, where cleaning up is easier. Practicality may not be romantic, but some things are just stupid.
47. Doing all of your before bed things before sex. Yes, sleeping with makeup on is bad. Now is not the time to remove it, you can do that later. And really fucking you with your hair in a ratty scrunchie with acne cream on your nose is not all its cracked up to be.
Honestly, this doesn't matter that much.
50. Asking questions right afterwards. The woman equivalent of "was it good for you?". Now is not a good time to ask "What this means". Right now, it means he probably needs to take a drink, a leak and a nap, perhaps not in that order.
Speak for yourself. I'm gonna wanna talk. (Incidentally, the "woman equivalent of 'was it good for you?'" is "was it good for you?". Also, hopefully he'll take a leak before he takes a nap if you're sharing a bed.)
[This post originally appeared on Official Shrub.com Blog.]
“I’ve had it with this m*****f***ing sexism on my m*****f***ing plate!”
Over on Feministing, Sailorman recently commented about an entry on The New York Times “Dining & Wine” blog concerning the increasingly infrequent practice of giving menus without prices to some patrons at restaurants. (Feministe has commented on this as well.)
The actual practices described varied from automatically giving a woman a menu “sans prix” when she dined with a man, to providing price-free menus only on request for people who wanted to treat a family member or business client.
I was most surprised at the comments to the blog entry, which had a surprising number of people bemoaning the loss of “class,” “chivalry” and “old world style” involved with this practice.
So sad to see yet another tradition dying out. I don’t see how the practice is insulting at all. I remember being taken to Le Bernadin to celebrate a special occasion, and being given a menu without prices. I thought it was a very chivalrous gesture; and on a day-to-day basis we all split enough bills in the name of equality and fairness that I can’t see how one old-fashioned gesture once in a while is something to decry.
Most restaurants I’ve met in Europe follow this practice (no menu prices for the guests), and I like it. Here in Florida, no such luck. I am often frustrated when taking my poor Depression-era mother to dinner and she goes into shock, ordering the meanest, cheapest salad instead of a meal. Absolutely no class throughout the state (but the winter weather’s nice).
Oh come on! Can’t you see the charm in it? It has a hint of old world class. It takes us back to a time when men took pains to put a lady at ease.
Doesn’t this make you long for the days when men still stood when a lady entered the room?
Here’s what I find wrong with price-free menus:
They Confuse the Customers
One recurring theme throught the comments to the post was that, despite protests that everybody knew more or less which entrees would be expensive (”chicken costs less than lobster”), many people whose menus didn’t contain prices made expensive mistakes as a result:
As he had prices, and I did not, I was unaware that I had ordered a $75 salad–I don’t remember for sure, but I think it was more expensive than our wine.
Then, after the meal, she asked for a copy of the menu, to remember the meal by. It came, autographed by the chef. She almost fell off the chair. She had assumed, not seeing prices on her menu, that we had a set prix fix meal with several courses, and naturally she wanted to taste all of them.
The most expensive meal I ever ate was at a restaurant where I — known to be the penny-pincher in the relationship and completely unaware that unpriced menus existed — assumed my price-less menue meant it was a prix fixe meal. My husband, shocked and happy, thought I was just caving in to the beauty of the experience. Well, hello! I’d never have spent that much money on a meal, and never have again. Though I sure did enjoy it, until the bill came.
The problem here is that these mistakes usually benefit the restaurant, which means there’s little incentive not to offer the menus, especially if they can play into class anxiety by doing so:
It seems the worst thing one can be called today is “cheap”. It is the most cutting insult of all. Liar, cheat, thief, addict, scoundrel, even racist or slut - these are forgiven and in some cases even admired. But “cheap”… cheap is the lowest.
But “cheap” is often nothing more than a ploy by others to manipulate one to spend more. Once labeled as cheap, the only defense is to go further into opulence. Typically the accuser is the benficiary.
I think it’s telling that the most common use of the price-free menu was traditionally during a date, where there can be even more pressure not to appear “cheap.”
They Make the “Guest” Uncomfortable
I see a lot of talk about “I’m the host and price-free menus are what *I* want!” but I don’t see very much talk about what the guests want.
The idea behind the price-free menu is to put the “guest” (i.e., the person who’s not buying) at ease by letting him or her choose her courses without being influenced by price. Of course, that doesn’t always work:
If I were handed a host who insisted on price-free menus, my anxiety would go through the roof. I would worry and try to guess what was a “safe” choice. When I eschewed the chicken in favor of salad and then found, to my horror, that the salad was $75, I would be mortified.
I’ve been a guest and received a menu without prices. I don’t care for it because, frankly, I’m not always sure what I want to order and use the prices to decide whether I really want the lobster if it costs $150. No matter how much money I have, certain things just aren’t worth the money…no matter who’s paying for it. It’s not a matter of being cheap…more a matter of using the price to assist me in a sometimes difficult decision.
When I was treated to that ilk of restaurant by my father years ago, not seeing the menu with prices left me the task of guessing which might be the modest choices. It therefore brought more frustration than ease.
I have seen it cause distress with some guests who REALLY need to know what the prices are and are then made more uncomfortable by the lack of that knowledge.
The idea that less information will put someone at ease doesn’t make much sense to me. If I’m being treated by someone I care about, the price is going to matter as much to me as it does to them, because their comfort is important to me. If I’m worried it’ll be a problem; it’s going to worry me as much, if not more, if I don’t know how much of a bill I’m racking up. If I know it’s not a problem, I’ll get what I want regardless. If I’m not sure if it’s all right, I’ll ask. (I’ll probably ask anyway, because I’m used to everyone sampling each other’s courses at restaurants.)
Besides, as one waiter points out:
It never works.
The other guest(s) always excuse themselves at some point and ask to see a menu with prices outside the watch of their host. I rarely sense they feel this was any sort of compliment to their company and it usually signals a first and last date.
It’s Sexist as Practiced
Quite obviously the practice of assuming that a man will pay for a woman’s meal is a sexist one, whether that assumption takes the form of handing the check to a man, or giving a woman a menu without prices. (Many commenters also pointed out that the assumptions get even more muddled when dealing with non-heterosexual couples.)
This is one of those things that straddles the border between chivalrous and “look how hard I’m trying to impress you, I must really, really need to get laid.”
If my attempt to pay for my meal is refused within a dating context, I want to feel less beholden than more, so again, not seeing the prices is an annoyance rather than a luxury.
May I also add that this is not sweetness or chivalry - this is taking the chattle out for a little treat, and since she can’t earn money (or drive, or vote, or think) why should she see the prices?
Another comment shows how this sexism intersects with other forms (in this case, emphasizing the cultural narrative of the date as an exchange of dinner for sexual favors):
How about this…I invited my husband and another couple for a wonderful steak dinner at La Queu de Cheval in Montreal. I was appropriately presented the bill but when I casually turned it over there was a quote imprinted, which equated something like “a good steak is like a good woman, juicy in all the right places”. This is not a verbatim quote since it was years ago and I have never been back.
However, I don’t think the sexism entirely goes away when the policy is made facially neutral (though you’re less likely to find such an offensive quote on the check), such as the proposed practice of asking who the host is. It’s akin to citing “asker pays” as a non-sexist alternative - while facially neutral, it’s not actually equal outside of a culture in which the idea of “asker” is not gendered.
It’s Classist
Throughout the comments, there’s a strong element of “it doesn’t matter,” with an implied accusation of cheapness on the part of the people who do complain.
if I am inviting guests to a meal at a restaurant, I greatly appreciate the option of being able to set aside the vulgarity of money, and enjoy each others’ company for its own sake.
If you find money so vulgar, how about letting those of us who don’t find it so relieve you of that burden?
Other commenters agree that being focused on money - i.e., not being sufficiently rich - is bad manners:
To me, it clearly [shows] the decline of proper etiquette and good manners.
Why must it be so hard to just be a guest and leave it at that? If you think your host can’t afford it then suggest someplace else. Jeesh this is not rocket science it’s called civilization.
Some commenters go so far as to insinuate that the riff-raff should know their place and stop trying to dine at “high class” restaurants:
It always strikes me as tacky / low rent when a server in an otherwise good restaurant is quoting prices for the specials. Turns any fine dining experience into a “my God, do they think we are at TGI Friday’s?” moment.
I agree with the post above that asks why you would go to a restaurant you could not afford in the first place?!?! If the $600 check is going to make you gag, then you should have gone to the Shake Shack with grandma!
Fuck you both, and the luxury cars you rode in on. I routinely go to restaurants (even that bastion of plebeianism, TGI Friday’s) with the assumption that I’m not going to get the high-priced items on the menu (if I did, I couldn’t dine there routinely).
As for the comment ‘if you can’t afford it, don’t go,’ well, there’s more than one problem with that. Firstly, there’s often a considerable price range on the menu. Just because you can’t afford the most expensive items doesn’t mean you shouldn’t eat there! Myself and a traveling partner have several times ’saved up’ for a meal at a nice restaurant at the end of a trip. We always chose nice places, even if we could only afford a glass of wine and mid-priced entree, because it was a ‘treat’ as much for the ambience as the quality of the food.
I think a lot of the classist “if you have to ask, you can’t afford it” folks underestimate the difference between low-priced and high-priced entrees. Even taking extreme outliers like lobster off the list, it’s not uncommon for the high-priced entrees to be over twice the cost of lower-priced ones, which can be a very big deal when you’re eating at a restaurant where even the low-priced courses will stretch your budget.
If a slice of pie is going to be $8, then we’d like to know before we order it. If that makes us classless and vulgar, well, we didn’t inherit our money - we earned it. It took a long time, a lot of care, and more than a few coupons. I guess that makes for vulgar people who like to know the price of things before buying!
Damn right.
[This post originally appeared on Official Shrub.com Blog and on Patriarchy Hurts Men Too.]
There have been quite a few discussions lately - on Hugo Schwyzer’s blog, at Punk Ass Blog, and at Pandagon (also this post), Saucebox and Neurath’s Boat - about young men who think that feminism and heterosexual male sexuality are incompatible. Which is even more interesting given the discussions here and Putting the “Fist” in “Pacifist” about how most men aren’t feminist *enough* to be worth getting involved with.
I originally started this post as a “how-to guide” for these (presumably) sincere but frustrated nice guy types (I’m probably giving their professed sincerity more credence than it deserves, but the ones who are just the larval form of MRAs don’t really deserve much mention - I’m talking more about the ones Protagoras calls “Shy Feminist Men”), but was quickly overwhelmed by how much “how to” would be needed, and it was increasingly obvious what was fueling these misconceptions.
I. Patriarchy and the Single “Nice Guy”
I think the main problem this sort of “nice guy” has is that, while he tries to meet a few feminist standards (no means no, don’t harass, etc.), he still buys into a lot of patriarchal bullshit, namely:
- Sex and desire are inherently dirty, shameful, and degrading;
- Being attracted to someone entitles you to their time, attention, affection, body, whatever;
- Women are less interested in sex than men (and consequently use it as a means to achieve other ends);
- Women are less attracted to “visual” characteristics than men - so if she’s not attracted to you, it’s because (a) you did or said the wrong thing; (b) there’s something wrong with her standards (she only likes “jerks, “she’s a “gold-digger,” etc.); or (c) she’s a lesbian.
- To not have your attraction reciprocated is a serious insult, or a statement about your worth as a person;
- Heterosexual “courtship” consists of an active man approaching a passive woman, and her acceptance or rejection of his “offer”;
- Any interaction that doesn’t ultimately lead to sex is a failure;
- A conventionally attractive partner is a symbol of status and a panacea for depression;
And so on. But because the feminist imperatives are explicitly expressed while the patriarchal ones are harder to dig out, feminism gets all the blame for the conflict, and the “nice guys” conclude that feminism is something for when they’re older, but not now when it would involve work or sacrifice.
II. And Everything You Thought Was Just So Important Doesn’t Matter
About this point, I realized that there were going to be far too many of these patriarchal assumptions to go into detail about all of them, other people had already begun to do this, and besides, they could be summed up in a single sentence:
“Everything you’ve heard about relationships is wrong.”
III. Shoehorning Life Into Glass Slippers
The reason why our model is so erroneous, I think, is because of the essentially private nature of most relationships, which means none of us have much in the way of direct observation to rely on - and observations of any relationships other than our own are likely to be incomplete (i.e., we see them as they are in public, but not as they are by themselves). What fills the gaps in our knowledge are “cultural narratives” - ideas about how the world works that we’re generally familiar with and sound plausible enough. When it comes to (heterosexual) relationships, the cultural narrative is one of “storybook romance,” and it’s one that’s fundamentally flawed.
The problem with “storybook romance” is that life isn’t a storybook, and attempts to force experience into a narrative structure are not only prone to getting it wrong, they’re prone to getting it wrong in systematic ways, and those ways promote harmful misunderstandings.
IV. And There’s Gonna Be A Happy Ending, But That’s Only the Beginning
The first way that the cultural romance narrative gets human relationships wrong is by assigning a beginning, middle and end to them - and by encouraging us to look at relationships this way while they’re in progress. This gives us expectations that our relationships will take these forms - most notably:
- That a nonreciprocated attraction is merely a relationship in the “beginning” stage;
- There’s a “middle stage” with easily identifiable and understandable conflicts; and
- If those conflicts are successfully resolved, there’s a “happily ever after” stage in which the relationship has no more major problems.
Though I’ve been using the phrase “storybook romance” to describe this cultural narrative, even something as conventionally “unromantic” as a one-night casual fling can get mapped onto this structure (meet, flirt, go off together; beginning, middle, end), with the same harmful assumptions (if she’s not into you, flirt more; once you’ve left together it’s smooth sailing, etc.)
V. What’s Montage? It Is Nor Hand, Nor Foot, Nor Arm, Nor Face…
The second way that “storybook romance” as a cultural narrative lies in the necessity to compress the relationship (and the character introduction) into 90 minutes of film, or 400 pages, or a three-minute song, or whatever the medium dictates. So we usually get, instead of a real incipient relationship, a quick montage of “fun dates” (usually culminating in a scene on a playground) without problems, “downtime,” or any concerns whatsoever, either within or without the relationship.
VI. Attack Of the B-Plots
“Storybook romance” is also problematic because of our insistence in including it at every opportunity. I can’t remember the last CRPG I played that didn’t have a romantic subplot (probably one of the NES Final Fantasies); hell, I’ve even seen sports games that had a rudimentary dating sim tacked on. And pretty much any random movie is going to pair off the leading man and leading woman by the end of the film. In a patriarchal movie culture where “lead actor” and “leading man” are virtual synonyms (with the exception of movies where the romance is the main plot), this has the effect of making leading women into love interests first and characters second.
VII. But I Like Those Stories!
I’m not advocating that we do away with romantic plots and subplots, any more than I’d advocate that we chuck high fantasy because the magic described therein isn’t real. I’ve enjoyed plenty of stories in each genre - and that’s pretty much what this romance narrative is, even when it’s not published by Harlequin: a genre with its own conventions and expectations, that’s there to make it easier for the audience. It’s just that when it comes to fantasy, we don’t expect the conventions of the genre to accurately reflect our own experience, and we don’t demand that every story include elements of the genre.
Conclusion: What Now?
“Everything you’ve heard about relationships is wrong.”
So what do we do? At this point, where all we know is our own ignorance, we’re all pretty much without a net, which can be both liberating (I don’t have to play this role that isn’t me!) and terrifying (so what do I do instead?).
What’s needed, I think, is a way to get these patriarchal assumptions, and real-life counterexamples, out into the open, so that we can develop a more authentic understanding of what a truly feminist form of initiating heterosexual relationships would belike. (You’d think with all the time abstinence-only sex ed frees up, there’d be plenty of time to talk about relationship stereotypes…) Heterosexual feminist/pro-feminist men, in particular, need to combat the assumption that this patriarchal model of “romance” is the only reliable one for relationships.
