Last time I tried this I didn’t solve anything.
I started out trying to explain why a person you’ve just met would go out of his/her way to tell you they are not available, that they are taken, that they are not in the market. This led to my confession that I always took this kind of thing as a personal attack, which got me thinking that maybe I see a lot of women as possible sex partners, and so of course they want to shoot me down, although now I can’t see the logic in this thinking.
Anyway, it should come as no surprise that others are wondering about these and related issues, which can be summed up as
The Mystery Dance: What guidelines can we use
to understand The Game of Love?
How can we tell if the object of our lust is similarly interested in us?
This is so important that if you knew the answer, you could — dare we say it? — rule the fucking world. At least I’m pretty sure I could. Evidently the studliest warrior and the ringin’est belle are not much more enlightened on this subject than anyone else. They may be getting it more than most of us (or, actually, they may not), but they still don’t have a clue how the system works.
I noticed that there’s a guy named Dallas who has a crude theory that he uses to explain everyone’s behavior. His theory is that we all automatically put everyone we meet into a hierarchy of fuckability. All of us do this. To everyone we meet. He states his case in a mildly amusing way, but he’s wrong, of course. Go read about it. Go now, if you like. I’ll wait. Warning: This theory is a little bitter.
Dallas has created an elaborate web site to explain his theory, and give him a hand for all his work. If you don’t want to read all 12 pages of it for yourself, here’s what he says: When a man meets a woman, he subconsciously decides how much he wants to have sex with her, and places her on a rung of his “ladder” in a position corresponding to his desire for her. He’s always looking to get it on with someone as high up on his ladder as possible, and will drop someone lower if someone higher enters his life or becomes available. Women do the same, only they have two ladders. The second one is for guys they like but will never fuck — the “friends” ladder.
Everyone does this, and they make their judgements based on the, er, basest of criteria. Men go almost entirely for physical hotness and sexual availability, and women are looking mainly for guys with a lot of money, although hotness counts somewhat. Oh yeah: anyone who says they are looking for intellectual stimulation, good sense of humor, stability, etc. is just flat out lying.
Personally I think this is kind of a scary way to look at what is, essentially, Life, and I instinctively back away from it. I have jokingly said here that all men are pigs (or maybe someone else said it?), and in a way that statement kind of helps to understand The Dance. It brushes aside nuance and lets us focus on the fundamentals, so we can cope with what’s happening. But I hope no one thinks I really believe there is no nuance or free will in our interactions. I don’t know if there is a sure-fire way to know what that cutie-pie across the room might be thinking about you. You have to try to turn off the filters, let the truth flow into you, and then you have to act on what you think. The chance that you might be wrong is where the excitement comes from. And maybe the hope that you might be right is the reason for living.
Looking at Dallas’ web site, I can see that Dallas (and maybe a few friends), over many cocktails, had a lot of fun putting his ladder theory together and coming up with examples of how it works in real life. But just because you have diagrams, graphs and charts does not make your premise true, especially if the research that generated the graphs comes from one guy’s opinions. I think he should stop theorizing pretty soon, and go out and find a girl.
17 Replies to “Pigs and Pussies (Bang Bang, Part 2)”
I agree with you, Larry. However, I don’t think that men should be considered Pigs just because they happen to have loads of testosterone. And, women are just as capable of being little piglettes.
Remember the trademark thingy? You owe me a dime. Talk to my lawyer. I’ve hired Dr. Gonzo as my representation.
I think Dallas may be onto to something, but I agree with you that he’s a bit bitter. Especially with the money and power rating for women.
I think his theory falls short on two areas:
1. Treating people as if they had no conscience or self-restraint.
Melissa — See, I don’t use The Testosterone Defense for myself. I think women should be aware that they are surrounded by pigs, and but I don’t think it lets us off the hook for boorish, one-track behavior.
By the way, show me the piglettes.
Kung Pow P*g,
1.) Show me how to make the little trademark superscript, and I’ll pay you a dime.
2.) Your comment says just what I should have said in my post.
maybe it would be useful to wonder what it is that we want sex for…we just take it for granted that men look at women as potential sex partners…but why so often and with such consistancy? sex equals…blank? what? maybe if we reduce it, or blow it up to that thing, i don’t know, maybe it will be useful to know.
and what do we assume about women? sex equals intimacy. is that what we think?
is that what is right?
From watching tons of science shows on The Discovery Channel as I have, we now further know that the closer a woman is to ovulation (thus able to reproduce), the less amount of clothing she wears and the more makeup and red lipstick–to attract a mate. It is a completely subconscious thing, but proven through scientific study.
Also from the Discovery Channel: Men want to have sex with every woman they see as some sort of primordial leftover–to spread their seed (ugh, hate that terminology). Women want to be attractive to men who have good genes so their babies will be strong and able to survive.
It all goes back to the cavemen times.
About 20 years ago, I found that a lot of liquor could make anyone appear to have good genes if I was horny enough.
“If certain things are done results will follow.”
Type the ampersand (&), the pound sign (#), and the numbers 0153 to make a ™ sign.
Don’t say that I never gave you anything.
If he’d held out for 15 cents, I’d have given it to you myself. I’m an interfering ratbastard, depend on it.
j — We want sex because it feels good. The other stuff (domination, family, intimacy) are byproducts, aren’t they?
SJ — I find this line of inquiry utterly (no, not udderly) fascinating. There is evidence that the male is excited simply by curves – breast and thigh and bottom and… Yikes, now I’m all sweaty again.
Kung Pow Pig™ — You’ve already given so much…
Ron — You sleazy bottom-feeding capitalist pig™!
I want my own trademark!!! *pouting*
How about Redd Hott Redhead™?
I like it! I like it! I better become a redhead first, so I can use it!
P.S. That was way too many exclamation marks, wasn’t it?
In my house you can use as many exclamation points as you want, Babe.
Thank you Lar-Bear!
Both men AND women are pigs. oink!
I do think that the whole female obsession with $ and power is HIGHLY exaggerated. However, the male obsession with blonde hair is not 🙂
I don’t blame women for going for the money and power, and I know a lot of you do. Why not, if you can get it? Luckily for me, it’s not universal.
As for the blonde thing, my eye does go toward the golden head, but not necessarily my heart…
I think the money/power thing is a bit overplayed.
Comments are closed.