Men are the New Women pt. 371: The Man Date

I'll hand hold in leaving bar situations too. Just not in stylized window shopping mode, as in street promenade.
Picturing a2k phalanx down Fifth Avenue...
I guess I could get into that.

A clump of milling a2k arm-in-armers?

Well, more of a line...

or maybe a swath..

Just as long as everyone isn't skipping.

Skipping, so, what is so wrong with skipping?
We could be mortified as a group, when reviewing photos years after, as we didn't skip in sync.


By the way, Lion Tamer, I am very fond of your location.

Lol!!! I go on lots of dinner/film/getting squiffy "dates" with female friends.

I will hold hands, lock arms, walk separately as occasion decrees.

I will also happily skip hand in hand down a street - or not.

I am touchy-feely with some friends - not with others - or differ at different times

Well, that's nice, so do I. But do you window shop for a dozen blocks arm in arm?

Only when squiffy, or stoned, I think! Or very happy and silly.

I think I would get too hot!

Actually, I would die of boredom window-shopping for that long.

(what is squiffy?)

I can look at twelve blocks of windows easily, usually, though I am fairly fast at it, but don't particularly like to be held together, even with a guy, looking at everything as a tied couplet.

Whereas I think the promenade as a cultural endeavor has a long history that I might not fit into with man or woman. Dog, perhaps.

I fear my vulgar post earlier, which was meant in rough jest may have actually insulted Kicky and wish to apologize.

Nothing but love, the manly platonic fraternal kind from Chest to Kicky.

This is something I've noticed recently. People I know who are single, unattached seem to be more touchy-feely, perhaps because they need more human contact. My mother in law for instance, who has always given hugs freely, but not overly, has become almost needy for contact. She is newly divorced. She sits super close to me on the couch where there is plenty of room, lays her head on my shoulder, almost tries to cuddle. My kids have to squirm away from her. I'll admit it makes me uncomfortable as I am not accustomed to that from her. I've also noticed this from other single people in my life (friends touching my hair, close-talking, lots of touching). What do you all think?
With a husband and two small kids, I get tons of lovin' from my favorite people. Beyond that, I tend to like my personal space (one foot clearance around the body is considered your personal zone). Don't get me wrong, I like a good friend hug. I just don't need to be attached at the hip. My best friend has never tried to hold my hand while shopping, thank heavens, altho I have held her hair while she hurled and vice versa

You didn't insult me. I knew you were kidding. It was funny. Now don't go getting all man-date-sensitive on me here, you big girl.

Thank goodness. It was such a misrepresentation. I'm glad it didn't hurt your feelings and I want everyone who read it and was taken aback to know, as I'm sure we all do, that Kicky would never take the Lords name in vain.

Well, to be fair, if I didn't have 4 sisters I'd probably be more intimate with my female friends. As it is, I have sisters who understand what a complete wackjob I am and I don't have to dress it up nice like I do when interacting with normal people.

Re: Men are the New Women pt. 371: The Man Date

By the definition in your article, yes. But I suspect it's not really comparable. This distinction between a date and a non-date hangout is much less pronounced in Germany than it seems to be in America. For example, it usually is perfectly non- alarming for Germans our age if their partner goes to see a movie with his ex. From observing the Americans I know, it would be a pretty big deal for you guys, and it's considered good form not to do it. It seems that in America, certain ways of socializing are considered strong evidence of mutual romantic interest, even if the socializing would work just fine even without such interest. As a result, pairs -- man-man, man-woman, and probably woman-woman -- are missing out on perfectly nice opportunities to hang out together. And they're doing it for no better reason than to avoid any embarrassment that might arise from mistakenly signalizing romantic interest. It must be a minefield out there, and this is one aspect of moving to America which I'm not looking forward to.


Fundamentally the same as having dinner, watching a movie, or walking in the park with n>1 male friends, or with a female friend I am not romantically attracted to. Meaning that we talk about work, problems with girlfriends, exhibitions we've seen or want to see, etc. Lately most of my male friends have become fathers, and it has become practically impossible to have a grown-up conversation about anything but babies. In this regard men really are the new women.

Bookmarking - interesting thread.

KP

Oh thanks for bumping this up, kitchenpete, I never responded to Thomas' interesting post.

I agree that it's a minefield, dunno if more or less so than in Europe but I'd certainly believe more. There have been way too many times when what I thought was a friendship was viewed as more than that by the guy, and it's a situation I hate. It's no-win. I mean if I'm romantically interested, fine, though for some reason (unusual in my circle of friends and acquaintances) I haven't usually been friends first -- usually they get to the boyfriend stage but quick or else remain just friends.

Worst-case was probably a guy who just wouldn't take no for an answer and kept pestering me for like years, going from friend to someone I went out of my way to avoid. Best-case is a guy who confessed, I said uh-oh and no, he said OK and we moved on with barely a blip.

But it does seem to come up a lot and so that colors my interactions. I'm really wary of sending the wrong signal. Stupid &*%# signals.

Men are only accepted by our society if they PRODUCE something.
That is their value, not as a human being but as an object.
"How are you" means "have you finished the work yet?"

Therefore, to get together on a "man-date" we must be DOING something.
Either acheiving, winning, or providing -- yardwork, darts, fishing, poker.
Anything that involves a quest, or something measured by "success".

That is what we demand of men: to hide, numb-out, work, and provide.
Otherwise we won't even talk with them.

When you ask someone to "be strong" ... what the he*ll are you doing?
Sorry.



The only way around it ... is to be much, much bigger than any
role-playing, image-making, or expectation. If someone has it together
and seems interesting then just go talk with them, hang out, and
discuss all kinds of things. It's not a "date" or an "appointment" or
"meeting" or "guy's night out". It's just you, as you are, and someone
else as they are. It's an absolutely unique conversation.

If someone wants to analyze it, categorize it, or understand it
they're gonna have to ASK you questions, otherwise they have no
access to or respect for the unique experience that you have.

Again, sorry for being so dogmatic, but I'm pissed fuc!ing off at the
posturing and pretense that any such social modelling promotes.

You could be right of course. But what happens, for example, when it's three male American friends having dinner together -- but not watching baseball, not playing poker, not talking business, or anything of that kind? Do they have the same hang-ups as if they were two? Do they still prefer having their significant others around to overcome those hang-ups? Your explanation would suggest that they are, because they still need to accomplish something. I would guess not, because the situation is less date-like, so no need to document the absence of romanticism at the dinner.

Empirical observations on this, anyone? In my German circle of friends, it would be harmless with or without girlfriends or wifes, two guys or three.