Donk: I did not think you meant to be nasty. You are kind of 'cute', in an awkward sort of way. I am sure you are a perfectly 'nice' guy (that might actually be part of your problem -- you may not yet have figured out how to be, as one suave individual put it to me, "A perfect gentleman first and a dirty old man second"). I am well aware that I came across as 'youthful' in my original posts. In a sense, I am 'young' -- at least career-wise -- in that I am 'green'.
I don't know you well enough to know what your whole problem is, but let me put it this way: your remark that : 'darn, I was beginning to think 'cute, naive, go-getter' suggests that you were charmed by my wit and looking forward to being wowed further by a warm and vivacious woman. Initially, you were perfectly happy to label me 'attractive' in some fashion, without actually knowing my age or marital status or anything about what I looked like. You find out I am not under 25 and single, and all of a sudden I am apparently not worthy of your fantasies. Not that I care what you fantasize about. But your remark implied such things.
Given that you live in Canada and I live in California, it really should make no difference to you what my age and marital status are. It is still good for a 'feel good' vibe if you think I am witty, warm, etc, in the way I write. Men who see a lot of action focus exclusively on a woman's 'good points', whatever they happen to think those are. Single men that I have known who aren't big on sleeping alone and not yet ready to settle down and get married, will let a woman know in no uncertain terms how fabulous she is and that she is welcome to call anytime. They seem to ignore tiny, inconsequential details like her age, weight, marital status, etc if they aren't actually scoping for a wife. Some have gone so far as to suggest that if my husband is not taking care of business, I could just let them know when and where to meet.
I have known men who were devoutly religious and very committed to their wives, who had absolutely no intention of having an affair, who made it abundantly clear that we could have had a very good time together if we had met under different circumstances.
White American men (I haven't known many Canadian men) seem to feel that 'saying' it or admitting to feeling or thinking it is as bad (or worse) than actually being unfaithful. They freak out. Men of other cultures feel that there is absolutely nothing wrong with making it abundantly clear that they find a woman charming and her company has been a genuine pleasure, they feel privileged to have known her, etc, without feeling like they have to be embarrassed by that or feel like they have betrayed their wives, etc. They publicly admire a woman's charms, whatever form they come in, without feeling they must bed her.
I tend to have a big problem with white, middle-class American men who take one look at me and conclude that I am of their culture. Hardly. I am an odd mixture of very old-fashioned values and the result of a multicultural homelife when I was growing up. I inherited my father's pale Irish complexion and I grew up correcting my mom's English. I speak English very eloquently and I dress rather conservatively. I look extremely 'white middle class American'.
Then I don't act anything like they expected me too -- I am far more warm and witty than that, with something of a raunchy sense of humor. After 18 years of marriage, I feel perfectly entitled to admit to having a sexuality without fearing that I might be labeled a tramp. Hispanic men understand that perfectly well and find me adorable. White men conclude I am a tramp, treat me as such and then get really confused when I seem to 'run hot one minute and cold the next'. I am no tramp and I do not tolerate being treated as such. But that does not mean I am ready to have my vagina removed and be put out to pasture either.
Tranplanner made it abundantly clear that he is married and was not coming on to me, he just wanted to welcome me warmly, without implying that I must be a dog. Because of that, when he said 'I can't drool without a picture', I did not feel baited nor any need to reply to that. He was being loyal to his wife and a gentleman. It was a polite way to turn aside a potentially awkward situation. I am sure his diplomatic skills are why he is a moderator.
The statements "No, I don't want to get intimate with you" and "God, you are a dog" are not actually synonymous.
(Please realize that I am exagerating so as to make my point as clear as possible. There is no real need to get defensive.)
I really don't care if you think I am dog. I just have no intention of 'agreeing' with any such implication. I used to think I was beautiful. I don't anymore. I have asked a number of men what it is about me that gets such a reaction from men. They don't know. I jokingly chalk it up to 'hormones' these days. I have some hypotheses but I think I have already said PLENTY more than most folks would.
Peace. And thanks. This has been fun. I would have never had the guts if you and Michael hadn't gotten my goat.
