"What about him?"... I dunno, what?

I don't find it helpful when people suggest single men to me. Neither does Elsie. We speak for ourselves, but just in case we also speak for others too, here is our reasoning for why we don't like it when you suggest single men to us.

• I know who the single men are. I don't need help speculating.
• Presumably they know who I am. 
• What am I supposed to do about it? You suggest a man and I'm supposed to say "yeah I've always had an unrequited crush on him, now you mention it... I'm going to go and ask him out!" That's never going to happen. I've got very delicate sensibilities. (They've never been helpful in progressing matters of the heart, but I'm stuck with them.)
• Alternatively, if I don't like him, I can shoot him down publicly behind his back. That's not gracious. Don't ask me to share his faults.
• If I don't KNOW him, that's even more annoying because now I'm speculating about someone I haven't met yet. Totally fruitless. Maybe you expect me to sneakily throw myself in his path somehow? Arrange a "meet cute"? It's exhausting.

So in the end, suggesting single men to me isn't as helpful as you think it is. Actual helpfulness = 0.

I don't know whether men get women suggested to them much, I guess they probably do, but at least the ball is in their court. They can say "Happy being single thanks" or "I dunno" or "I don't really know her well enough" or "Yeah, but would she go out with me?" or whatever, but still, if you're a match-making type, I think that's the end you want to work from first. I really don't think ANYTHING useful can be achieved by just randomly asking single women who they would/wouldn't date.

What ABOUT internet dating?

A recent post on Challies about online prospecting. I haven't thought that much about it, other than to decide that for me, now, I'm not comfortable with going there. (But I'm not comfortable with anything romantic; even if Captain Wentworth himself said he wanted to have coffee with me I would be awkward.) Online match-making is a thing, to be sure. I was bridesmaid for such a wedding last year. But I haven't come across any Christian discussion on the wisdom of it, and my own conversations with friends have been more wondering than useful. None of us disapproves of it but there is some speculation and confusion. Challies doesn't have much to say either, just some generalities, but the first comment there is rather excellent and readworthy for some helpful specifics to consider.

Discrete couples

Sometimes, some couples are so discrete that when they announce their engagement, you go, "Woah, I didn't even know they were dating!" and occasionally, "Woah, I didn't even know they knew each other!"

Job hunting and dating

I think I understand why it's hard for some guys to ask girls out. It's a lot like applying for a job. You send the company your resume and cover letter. You sell yourself and put yourself out there. Only you don't know if they're going to like you or reject you. It can be tough, but you've got to do it if you want the job. You've got to be in it to win it. You've got to be tough enough to handle rejection and move on.

Puma Love Run

Puma Love Run. Meet someone fit. The weekend before Valentine's Day. Love the concept!

Revelation and liberation

I had a revelation yesterday. I have been living as if my life's primary goal is to find a marriage partner, settle down and have kids (this may have been obvious to some of you, but I was blind to it).

What is the effect of this? It means finding a marriage partner takes up a lot of your thoughts, prayers and conversations. It means questioning God, "Where is my husband? Where are my kids? Where is my house in the 'burbs?" and doubting yourself, "Why haven't I settled down yet? Aren't I good enough for anyone? What's wrong with me?"

What (or who) brought about the revelation? Well, God, obviously, but as I've reflected on my life throughout the year, I've been continually thankful for my current life situation. Life is good. Hard at times, but good. I can clearly see that he's given me opportunities that I can take only because of my current season in life: single and unburdened by marriage, kids and mortgage.

Secondly, we studied 1 Corinthians 7 in Bible study last week. Some of you may feel like you know this passage inside out, and you've done it to death. When we went around summarising what we thought the main gist of the passage was, I said, "If you're married, stay married. If you're single, stay single, but you're free to marry. Live as God's called you." It only struck me yesterday that the practical application for me is that my primary goal is no longer "find a marriage partner" but "live as God has called you". Once I realised that, I felt incredibly liberated.

It's liberating because the issue of marriage doesn't have to dominate my thoughts, prayers and conversations anymore. I don't have to worry about whether God has or hasn't got marriage in store for me or whether I'm an unmarriable nutter. It decreases the attractiveness of dating non-Christians considerably. But the greatest liberty is being freed from WRONG thinking. It is a beautiful feeling and state of being.

Sure, I'll continue to pray for me and friends regarding marriage (if it be his will) and at times I may be frustrated by my singleness and I may eventually try internet dating, but earthly marriage is not my life goal. It is neither here nor there. I am free to marry or stay single. Both are good options in God's eyes. Just live as God has called you, whatever circumstance you are in.

Modern-day Charlotte Lucas.

I've been doing some thinking in the back of my mind about settling. The millions of Christian articles which urge men to be godly and prayerfully pursue godly women… ideally, yes, but how often does that happen, really? How many couples I know actually got married because two perfect people who love Jesus were both attracted to each other (esp each other's godliness), the man took the lead, the woman responded, it was romantic, they prayed all the time, had a perfect courtship, never felt awkward, got married and lived happily ever after growing more like Jesus? It's the ideal, but this isn't heaven. Everyone settles.

Read this today:

"Rela­tion­ships are hard work. Love doesn’t hap­pen overnight. You’re not com­mit­ting to mar­ry­ing the first guy you go out with*. Give a guy a break. If you enjoy hang­ing out with him in groups, or in one on one set­tings, don’t hang out for Mr Right — hang out with Mr Right in Front of You. A bird in the hand and all that prover­bial jazz.

"Most Chris­t­ian guys have prob­lems — part of becom­ing a Chris­t­ian means you recog­nise you have fail­ings. The ones who don’t appear to have prob­lems are prob­a­bly arro­gant or har­bour­ing some sort of deep seeded emo­tional issues any­way, scratch the sur­face of most guys and they’re prob­a­bly incred­i­bly inse­cure when it comes to rela­tion­ships or entirely too scared of com­mit­ment to be worth pur­su­ing (that’s why they’ve dated all of your friends and none of the rela­tion­ships have lasted). If a guy seems to have it together, can hold down a job, and is pass­able at con­ver­sa­tion then he’s prob­a­bly a win­ner. It helps if you find him mod­er­ately attractive."

Although it's still hypothetical because there really are no guys in the 'single girl ghetto'. Some excellent wisdom from that wisest of spinsters, Jane Austen: "There is a great scarcity of Men in general, & a still greater scarcity of any that were good for much."

* But oh boy will I speculate about it, and my response to the potential "do you want to hang out" will be based on "do I want to marry you". Really hard to overcome that.

Attraction

Attraction is a funny thing isn't it? I suppose it's what brings people together.

Some people believe in instant attraction and love at first sight. Every now and then I meet someone whom I'm instantly attracted to. But usually I find that when I get to know him better, there's usually not much there to sustain the attraction.

Then there are men whom you're not instantly attracted to, but over time, you get to know his character, his theology, his sense of humour, his personality and one day you find yourself realising what a GREAT catch he is (and if he has fantastic social skills, he's a doubly great catch). Now that's attraction.

So to the single men out there who don't feel they've got it in the instant attraction department, don't worry, it's not the only way to win a woman over. And don't underestimate the power of a disarming smile :)

Conversations (via email) with a 60 year old boy.

[Emails occasionally pass between Sydney and Maitland. Excerpts from a recently received reply.]

Now, I must approach a delicate subject. One of the reasons you were sent to Sydney (and indeed, commissioned by your church I believe) was (not to put too fine a point on it) to find a bloke. Having been trained in all the skills and qualities lionised in Proverbs 31, we (and I speak here in loco avus - in place of your grandfather, (who I understand is quite incapacitated at the moment)) knew there was no-one in Maitland who was worthy of you …

[continued rant at the apparent blindness of young men in Sydney…]

To conclude, dear Jess; you were given the mandate to hunt. It didn't seem likely that you would have to invoke that mandate - it should have been enough just to announce your arrival in town, but it seems that you may need to move to the next phase of attack. Having said this, I quite understand if you are delaying a strike until you get your braces off. But I trust it's only temporary temporising.

[my reply explaining my theories on why I have not been snapped up]

You certainly face a challenge. I always found that belonging to a group (a ghetto of single girls doesn't quite cut it as a group Jess) with a common cause (outreach, social action, musical, knitting (hmm, perhaps not the latter)) was the best way to find a mate. There is commonality of purpose and interest that allows one to have an eye legitimately on two goals. Take a friend, but not two (overwhelming). You seem to be a 'girl's girl' and it is good to have mates, but to a guy that's intimidating. A bit like a shark chasing a school of sardines, he won't know which direction to turn for a meal and just blunders about. Not a real flash analogy, but an interesting picture of the hunt, and a lot of blundering does go on.

Regards,

DB

The Gentleman's Arsenal

I am thankful to Karen for bringing The Art of Manliness to my attention. It is superior to jelssie in many ways, but I feel both websites are written in the same spirit.

I have particularly enjoyed reading What to Carry on a First Date: The Gentleman’s Arsenal. It made me realise that this is the kind of man whose company I would like to be in: a gentleman. Thoughtful, considerate and prepared.

(Though I can't say that the comments are as gentlemanly as the article!)

A bounder and a cad!

For interested persons:

Here is some information about Regency romance, which is useful background when reading Sense and Sensibility, Pride and Prejudice, etc.

If there was an engagement (or a publicly perceived understanding, or obvious display of affection) between a man and a woman, then the man was bound to marry the woman at all costs.

"Has not his behaviour to Marianne and to all of us, for at least the past fortnight, declared that he loved and considered her as his future wife...?"
Sense and Sensibility Mrs Dashwood, Chapter 15.

If he broke off the engagement or tried to back away, his rejection of the lady was seen as a slur against her reputation and her family (was there something wrong with her? was she less than pure?). An insult to reputation and family was disastrous - it might ruin her future prospects for marriage, and the respectability of her family. Therefore, a proper gentleman was bound by honour to his commitment (or a perceived commitment) to the lady. If a man acts the cad and dumps the lady, he could be called out to duel with her father, and settle the matter in public.

A gentleman would always act with honour towards the lady, even if it makes him unhappy: for example, Edward Ferrars gets engaged to the horrid Lucy in his foolish youth; Capt Wentworth incautiously spends too much time with Louisa and everyone thinks they are in love. Neither man would act dishonourably and break it off.

It is ONLY EVER the lady's prerogative to end an engagement and release the man. Fortunately Edward loses his fortune and Lucy dumps him for his brother. Fortunately Louisa falls off a wall and in love with Capt Benwick instead.

The unscrupulous Willoughby, on the other hand, displays a clear preference for Marianne, although not technically getting engaged to her, but then he publicly dumps her for a richer woman. She has no father to defend her reputation. He is a cad.

She felt the loss of Willoughby's character yet more heavily than she had felt the loss of his heart.
Sense and Sensibility Marianne Dashwood, Chapter 32.

"When a young man, be he who he will, comes and makes love to a pretty girl, and promises marriage, he has no business to fly off from his word, only because he grows poor, and a richer girl is ready to have him. Why don't he, in such a case, sell his horses, let his house, turn off his servants, and make a thorough reform at once."
Sense and Sensibility Mrs. Jennings, Chapter 30.

Which is all to say that there was a lot more at stake in those days.

Meals Men Like

We received a very amusing fax in the office today. It said,

New Book! Meals Men Love. How to Catch a Man in 3 Courses

They even have a website and they're on twitter and Facebook.

I clicked onto the website and they sell the most gorgeous aprons. I wouldn't mind one myself. But the feminist in me can't help but cringe to read "Impress him in the kitchen with this stunning designer apron." I'll take it with a grain of salt.

I think I can safely speak for jelssie that we could be similarly woo-ed by a home-cooked 3 course meal. After all, food is currently the most popular label for our posts ;P