Recently
As Is
DEAR SUSAN: I guess that at this stage of life (age 63), I'm willing to be the exact same man a woman wants, as long as that doesn't involve change. Sounds kind of selfish at first hearing, but I expect to return the favor — or not find her …Read more.
Courage
DEAR SUSAN: If, as you believe, courage is the passport from old stale patterns, then only the brave are sure to get their dreams fulfilled. But if the answers to our questions are inside us, why don't we just take a peek? — From the …Read more.
Womanstrong
DEAR SUSAN: Your quiz question about whether strong, assertive women turn men off made me write to you. Even men with assertive, strong mothers seem to like women who are bubbly and interesting without being too independent. Often, it is hard for me …Read more.
Sorting Sex, Part 1
The best way to do these questions justice is to read them through in one sitting, let them marinate awhile and then read them again and give your responses. Some may trigger immediate responses; others take more thought. But however you approach …Read more.
more articles
|
Treating Men Like Friends
DEAR SUSAN: I can't figure out why I love this guy. He's romantic, but that's all I know about him. I've known him for three months, but I don't know much about the real person behind the smile. How can I do that? — From the "Single File" blog
DEAR BLOGGER: The (sad) truth is that the men in our lives are rarely offered the straightforward, sisterly gestures of friendship we women give generously — and without much fuss — to other women in our lives. What I mean is — and I admit this sounds cuckoo at first — it's time to start treating the other gender like our own. For instance, send a man flowers; any excuse will do. You'll knock his socks off. Or ask a male friend to volunteer some weekend with you at a local charity. Ask the same man (or another) to share dinner with you at an eatery known for its casual tone. No special reason to meet, except that you like his smiling eyes and friendly style. When you have an extra ticket to an event he'd like — rock concert, Asian dance festival, museum showing off Andy Warhol's teapots — muster the courage to make the phone call to you-know-who. Yes, butterflies will dance in the pit of your stomach, but that's a sign you're growing, taking a risk. It's about time, no?
Now for the zinger: When next you need a shoulder to lean/cry on, ask your favorite male friend. Instead of running to your (female) best friend, try sharing your troubles with the man you've been befriending, the one you've come to trust. For a change, give a man the chance to help you iron out a rough patch. Confiding in him can bring the two of you closer and put feelings between you on a different plane — romantic partners as well as friends. This will be a new facet of your relationship, so take your time strengthening it before moving to the next. At the right time (you'll know when), you might feel inspired to start wooing him actively, perhaps even surprising him with a candlelight dinner at some romantic bistro. It will be fun splurging on the man who's proved himself to be a trusted friend. When you start looking at men as potential friends, a whole new world of possibilities opens. I wish it to you.
DEAR SUSAN: Some friends of mine had a hen party last week, and of course it was all about men. Most of them are very angry at men. I just broke off my engagement, but I don't feel that angry. Maybe I should. — From the "Single File" blog
DEAR BLOGGER: A lot of women mistake anger for progress, believing they must be furious at men to be considered liberated. They exchange battle cries and compare scars, incensed at men for reasons they really can't articulate. They seem to thrive on the latest male blunder. But when I do what I can to find out why they're so furious at the male of the species, they come back at me with clever slogans and pithy put-downs and imagine they've won the battle. And so they sit, justifying their rage to anyone who'll listen. The result is man-hating slogans in the "all men are dogs" genre.
But for the fun of it, let's suppose these haters decide to throw in the towel and reform. Suppose they suddenly find new ways to broaden their lives. The reasons they wave the white flag? Well, it could be they don't have the time or the energy; they have more important things to do; some of their best friends are men; they work with men every day and see too many of their human frailties (and strengths) to condemn them as a group.
The biggies, the more important reasons against bad-mouthing men? Consider: Now that you're getting your life together and figuring out what you really want from your time on earth, you realize that anger holds you back from attaining your goal. You're beginning to realize that some of your past problems with the male have been (at least partially) your responsibility. But the big enchilada, the major reason you need to stop cursing men blindly and start exploring your own psyche? So that you can discover the basis for the anger and give your love partner the best of yourself. Another scenario is out of the question.
Have a question for Susan? You can reach her directly at sumor123@aol.com.
COPYRIGHT 2013 CREATORS.COM 
|
 |
Comments
|
12 Comments | Post Comment
|
|
Susan, The treating men like friends--when she "Ask the same man (or another) to share dinner with you at an eatery known for its casual tone." Who pays? "For instance, send a man flowers" that's fine, but don't you think he might wonder what is going on? When a man sends a woman flowers it is usually a romantic gester. "romantic partners as well as friends." Is this where you get your "womanly needs" met? Isn't that the same as FWB's? Can you have many "romantic partners as well as friends?" In another post you talked about feeling guilty--does that play in anywhere?
Comment: #1
Posted by: J
Fri Mar 22, 2013 6:33 AM
|
|
|
|
J, Iagree with you on the sending a guy flowers. I don't send my women friends flowers, nor do they send them to me, unless there's an occasion: someone's sick, been promoted, or has a new baby.
I do think it would be advantageous for more people, men as well as women, to consciously develop friendship with potential dates before deciding to pursue them romantically. Being friends doesn't preclude romance.
I don't think "romantic partners as well as friends" isthe same thing as FWB. The latter is specifically NOT about romance, but friendship -- and it tends to happen when one person would like to be in an exclusive romance with the other, and thinks this might help sway the other that way.
"Romantic partners as well as friends" is the old Dear Abby (orAnn Landers, I forget which) description of love as "friendship that's caught fire." In our society, it's pretty rare to find people who are polyamorous -- that is, who feel romance doesn't have to mean sexual fidelity/exclusivity -- and Susan Dietz has expressed on numerous occasions her skepticism about polyamorous relationships. So my guess is that by her definition, you canNOT have many "romantic partners as well as friends" .
Comment: #2
Posted by: hedgehog
Mon Mar 25, 2013 4:38 PM
|
|
|
|
hedgehog, In today's society people have several "Romantic partners as well as friends" and are having sex. In time, depending on what they are looking for, those "romantic partners as well as friends" gets narrowed down to one. So yes those "romantic partners as well as friends" that are having sex are FWB's. I agree "Being friends doesn't preclude romance" and that developing friendship before deciding to pursue romantically is advantageous. I don't think in today's society it is rare to find polyamorous friendships that are romantic. Susan Dietz has also condoned women getting their needs met so yes "her skepticism about polyamorous relationships" is pretty faint.
Comment: #3
Posted by: J
Tue Mar 26, 2013 5:29 AM
|
|
|
|
J, I think you need to be careful here in conclusions you are drawing.
It is true that there are people who date several people at once. Of those people who date more than one person at once, only SOME of them sleep with multiple partners. "Dating" doesn't always mean "sleeping with".
I recall many conversations here in the last few years in which Susan Dietz was highly skeptical that poly relationships could work; she took a lot of heat for that stance from people who WERE poly. I don't see that she has advised anyone here to sleep around to get needs met.
Comment: #4
Posted by: hedgehog
Tue Mar 26, 2013 3:01 PM
|
|
|
|
hedgehog, my conclusions come from past experiences, observations of others, and columns such as Susan's and also what has not worked for me. I don't think those conslusions are that far off in today's society. I didn't say that Susan advised anyone to sleep around, only that she overlooked, disregarded, forgave those that did.
I didn't think Dating entailed sleeping with either, that once one done that you were at a different level, but in today's society that assumption is not correct.
Comment: #5
Posted by: J
Wed Mar 27, 2013 5:08 AM
|
|
|
|
hedgehog, my conclusions come from past experiences, observations of others, and columns such as Susan's and also what has not worked for me. I don't think those conslusions are that far off in today's society.
*******
Well, here's the thing, J. If I live in a remote town with one car dealership, I may observe that most of my friends and neighbors drive Fords from that dealership, and see a whole lot of Ford commercials on TV. And if I don't have cause to travel outside my town, it would be very easy for me to conclude that most cars on the road today are Fords. Valid within my own experience, yes, but not indicative of everywhere (what about the towns with only a Hyundai dealership?) or of the nation as a whole, other countries or the world.
***********
I didn't say that Susan advised anyone to sleep around, only that she overlooked, disregarded, forgave those that did.
********
??? I don't get this at all. It's not hers to "forgive" anyone who sleeps around unless she's been personally betrayed.
Can I "forgive" my (imaginary!) brother if he sleeps with many women all in the same month? I can think it's not a smart thing to do...but it's no transgression against ME so it's not up to me to "forgive" him. I might "overlook" or "disregard" or even "excuse" his behavior if he's coming off a nasty divorce, and say it's not like him. -- but does that somehow make me at fault?
The way I see it, as long as he's with consenting adults who aren't incapacitated by alcohol and who are not engaged/married, the only ones he's "wronging" are:
1) women who believe they're the only one
2) himself.
So "forgiving" him would be pretty presumptuous of me, as I was not really wronged!
It's sounding very much as though you are browbeating Susan over something you may have misinterpreted in an earlier column.
Comment: #6
Posted by: hedgehog
Wed Mar 27, 2013 8:10 AM
|
|
|
|
hedgehog, If you go to a Catholic church and that preacher is a known child molester then you have overlooked, disregarded, forgave his actions. Susan advises someone that sleeping around is not the way to find a relationship and when they do find one that way she overlookes, disregards, forgave them for doing it. If a person has sex to just get their needs met then sex has no meaning and I fail to see how that person can one day decide that sex with this person means more then just sex.
Browbeating--naaa just calling the kettle the color it is.
Comment: #7
Posted by: J
Thu Mar 28, 2013 5:13 AM
|
|
|
|
Um, if I went to a Catholic church and the priest were known to have molested children, then I would be an activist for his removal. It's a severe violation of a position of trust to prey on the least powerful in the flock. I've sat through some horrific testimony from men who were abused as children by priests; it is not something to be overlooked or disregarded. I don't know many parents who would feel otherwise, even if the child was not their own.
Susan is right that it's not the BEST way to find a relationship -- or at any rate, not the way that I'd recommend because I think it's more likely to be problematic than helpful. However... there are people posting at Creators who slept with someone on a first date and have been married for 20 years or more. I'm not going to tell them that they DIDN'T one day decide that sex with that person meant more than just sex. 20 years is a long time to stay with someone for sex alone!
Just because someone does something differently than i do and I don't lecture them about it, doesn't mean that I've "overlooked, disregarded or forgiven " them. It's just different than the way I'd hope to do it, is all.
It's kind of like crossing a freeway on foot. Some people will make it across, blindfolded, barefoot and at rush hour. It's not the way I'd ever recommend doing it, because I think it increases the likelihood that you'll get run over. But it's their choice to do it how they wish, no?
Comment: #8
Posted by: hedgehog
Sat Mar 30, 2013 12:20 PM
|
|
|
|
"However... there are people posting at Creators who slept with someone on a first date and have been married for 20 years or more." And thats fine--the person that has slept with many on the first date and doing it while dating others --I don't see how one day that person can decide that sex has meaning.
If "Susan is right that it's not the BEST way to find a relationship" then why does she condone someone for getting their "womanly needs" met? Its ok to sleep around if your not looking for a relationship.
If you continually advise someone on the way to do something and they don't follow your way and yet get what they desire then aren't some questions going to arise. If a person in an advising positon does not say something negative about crossing the street "blindfolded, barefoot and at rush hour" then I would think the way they do advise has not much merit. I wouldn't tell someone "it's their choice to do it how they wish"
Comment: #9
Posted by: J
Sun Mar 31, 2013 8:39 AM
|
|
|
|
If you continually advise someone on the way to do something and they don't follow your way and yet get what they desire then aren't some questions going to arise. If a person in an advising positon does not say something negative about crossing the street "blindfolded, barefoot and at rush hour" then I would think the way they do advise has not much merit. I wouldn't tell someone "it's their choice to do it how they wish"
********
\J, if you don't like the way Susan advises, then it would probably be better for your blood pressure not to read her column anymore. There are columnists here that I do not read because I don't think what they write has much merit.
There is NO one right way to get what they desire. If you advise someone that "Method A" is usually the fastest, most risk-free way to do something, and someone else pipes up and says, "Well, I did Method B and I got what I wanted" -- does it make SENSE to say, "Well, I'm glad you got what you wanted, but you know, you risked STDs, unwanted pregnancy, being killed by someone, etc., etc, in doing so."
Not to me, it doesn't.
I don't believe Susan advised someone to get her own needs met AT THE EXPENSE of someone else's feelings. If two people want to be friends with benefits, and it works for them, than good for them. I don't think it usually works for most people, just like I think most one-armed men won't make it in professional golf.
But... there are exceptions, and there was a one-armed golfer who made a pretty good living at it. So if I wrote a career column and said a one-armed person probably wouldn't want to become a professional golfer and he wrote in saying he'd DONE that exact same thing, I'd say, "Good for you and your perseverance."
If someone is sleeping with several other people and then decides one of those relationships has become more important to him than the others, who am I to say his feelings aren't real? Feelings do change over time; you can grow to love someone even if you don't initially.
Comment: #10
Posted by: hedgehog
Mon Apr 1, 2013 7:13 AM
|
|
|
|
If someone is sleeping with several other people and then decides one of those relationships has become more important to him than the others, who am I to say his feelings aren't real?
*****************************
I'm not saying his/her feelings aren't real I'm saying a person that has that behavior to them sex means nothing. I said the same thing in post #3 "romantic partners as well as friends" gets narrowed down to one. As far as feelings how does that person know that the other people they are having sex with feelings aren't hurt? Gee I can't have sex with you anymore because I have feelings for X.
if you don't like the way Susan advises
****************************
Somtimes she is good, but one time she will say one thing and anothor post something else. If you tell one group the basketball is orange and then another it is black there is something wrong.
Comment: #11
Posted by: J
Tue Apr 2, 2013 8:08 AM
|
|
|
|
I disagree that the sex means "nothing". I agree that it may mean less to them than if they were having it with someone they love, even if it's with the same person who becomes someone they love.
But your "I can't have sex with you anymore because I'm developing feelings for someone else" happens all the time even WITHOUT the sex: "I've enjoyed dating you; you're a wonderful person, but for reasons of my own, I need to break this off now --it's the fair thing to do."
You can't protect someone else from getting hurt. All you can do is behave responsibly --i.e., Don't lead them to believe you feel more toward them than you do, don't exploit their feelings to unethical personal advantage ("If you don't give me $500, I'm going to be evicted"), set them free to find real love when it becomes obvious that they think you are the one and you know you're not.
Add sex to the mixture and the risk of hurt is compounded, yes. It's one reason I didn't engage in casual sex: hurt for me OR them. But... I've seen enough BTLers that I respect indicate they were able to engage in casual sex (and sometimes relationships that progressed beyond the casual sex) responsibly, with both parties' full understanding that this wasn't Love, to believe that for some people, it is possible to avoid the kind of hurt you describe.
Now, I don't particularly see any reason for Fritos to exist, either. But if you're hungry and you grab a bag, I'm not going to advise you that you really should have grabbed the yogurt or bag of carrot sticks instead.
I don't believe Susan has been inconsistent on the issue.
Comment: #12
Posted by: hedgehog
Thu Apr 4, 2013 4:56 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
