If you enjoy reading articles by women about how hard it is for them to find a man for a relationship and procreation, this one is not bad. It has a few funny lines, like this complaining about women who argue that it is women's fault:
What do they think we are doing? Take India Knight’s attack, in The Sunday Times, on what she called “the sweetly retro notion of mooching around pining for Mr Right as the (biological) clock ticks away”. “My advice to all my girlfriends is, just do it,” she announces. “Get pregnant. Don’t wait. Mr Right can turn into Mr Wrong overnight: there are no certainties.”
And we wonder why men are afraid to commit, when women like me are depicted as hormonally charged sperm-bandits interested in nothing beyond the urge to have a child.
The writer complains that she is finding that men change as they age, with over 30 year olds turning into commitment avoiding "man-boys". One of them puts it this way:
“In theory I’d like a family,” says one. “But it doesn’t feel urgent and in the meantime I have a great life with plenty of sex – all on my own terms. Love has sort of disappeared from the menu. And yes, now I’ve learnt that I can, I mess women around in ways I’d never have done in my twenties.”
Horror stories from friends abound, too. “I spent most of last year with a guy who used to weigh me every day and refused to sleep with me if I got too heavy,” admits a colleague. “How bonkers was that? But the awful thing is that once you pass 36, you find it’s single men rather than single women who are the prize commodity.”
How bonkers indeed that any women would let her boyfriend insist even once that he had to know if she was currently gaining or losing weight.
But here's the crucial part where I think women do go wrong:
I don’t know of any woman my age (35) who hasn’t spent several years in love with a boyfriend, only to have to give up on the relationship after realising that children and commitment were not going to happen for ages, if at all.It seems to me sad but true that many men will avoid long term commitment as long as possible, and enjoy the sexual and social benefits of a girlfriend while taking on none of the responsibilities. But - why the hell do the girlfriends in question let this go on for so long?
Even if they don't co-habit, anyone who on a regular basis has been sharing meals and their bed with a friend, and has been taking short holidays together as well as socialising with each others friends, must surely have a pretty good idea of the character and intentions of their partner within (let's say) 12 months. Actually, 12 months is being generous, and would think 6 months would keep men more on their toes.
But if a women lets this type of "full privileges" relationship go on for years at a time, she is simply encouraging that man, and others who know that this happens, to do the same and never commit. Why should they when there is a plentiful market of women who let them sleep with them for years before forcing a decision.
Advances in contraception have no doubt helped this situation develop, yet as was noted earlier this week, unplanned pregnancies still happen. I would have thought that the possibility of contraceptive failure increasing (as it surely must) over time, is another reason for women to set short and realistic time limits for when a relationship involving sex must stop.
Where am I wrong?
No comments:
Post a Comment