actuality.log


Wednesday, September the 13th, 2006

This is another query to the women in the audience. Are you capable of discerning between the following two statements?

“I find her attractive.”

and

“I am attracted to her.”

This is a printer-friendly version of the journal entry “Likely possibilities” from actuality.log. Visit http://emphaticallystatic.org/earlier/likely-possibilities/ to read the original entry and follow any responses to it.

31 Responses to “Likely possibilities”

  1. anita says:

    i’m having trouble putting together the words to explain, but yes, there is a difference. it’s definitely possible to find someone attractive and yet not be attracted to them. it’s also possible to be attracted to someone that you don’t find attractive.

  2. Michelle says:

    Yes, I see the difference as well. What Anita said.

  3. bhavya says:

    Yes. Definitely a difference. I don’t think it’s that hard to tell also.

  4. pundit says:

    So what you guys are saying is, hypothetically, “A guy who’s ‘with’ a woman ought to be able to randomly look around and be honest about ‘how attractive he finds these other women.’ And not get flogged?”

    Or did I make a fallacious leap in logic?

  5. J says:

    Ok, now I’m gonna try and give you a different answer… you may not be attracted to an attractive woman, if you’re gay. And you may be attracted to a not so attractive woman if you’re desperate.

    (By ‘you’ I don’t really mean ‘you – the pundit’)

  6. Michelle says:

    Pundit: HAHAHAHA!!!

    You’re funny. :)

    Women are notoriously insecure. Most of them don’t want to know whether you find other women attractive because the fact that you find other women attractive means that we aren’t attractive enough for you and you will leave us for one or all of those other more attractive women. Quite logical, isn’t it? Women are incapable of logic when you hit them in their insecure spots. Women are also brainwashed and buy into stereotypes far too easily. “He finds other women attractive?? OMG what a cheating bastard dog!!!” Because appreciation of pretty things automatically shuts off when you’ve got someone on your arm, you see.

    And then eventually, hopefully, women grow up a little and start thinking for themselves.

  7. anita says:

    what michelle said : )

    you can find other women attractive, but don’t actually say it out loud. or stare at them.

  8. pundit says:

    J: Ooh, honesty!

  9. pundit says:

    So now you’re all basically reversing your stance and telling me that women can’t really discern between the two statements?

    Hah, make up your minds people.

  10. Michelle says:

    I’m not reversing my stance at all.

    The fact that I, and other commenters here, can discern the difference, does not mean that every woman can. And it does not mean that I have always been able to discern the difference, hence the part where I mentioned growing up a little bit.

  11. Crayola says:

    You will not get flogged, as long as the random attractive women you talk about is far from reach (like someone from the silver screen or something) and not threateningly close enough (like in the class room you teach, sitting in the last bench). For you never know when the ‘attractive women’ might get attracted to you, and be all over you!

  12. anita says:

    I wasn’t reversing my stance. there is a difference between the two statements, but obviously they’re not mutually exclusive.

    and besides, just because a woman can see the difference between the two doesn’t mean it’s ok to say you find other women attractive when you’re out with her. that’s a whole different issue altogether.

  13. pundit says:

    Crayola: Why? Don’t you trust my ability to resist their advances?

  14. pundit says:

    anita: Why is the issue so different? Is it, as Michelle eloquently put it, “because appreciation of pretty things automatically shuts off when you’ve got someone on your arm, you see?”

  15. Michelle says:

    “You will not get flogged, as long as the random attractive women you talk about is far from reach (like someone from the silver screen or something) and not threateningly close enough (like in the class room you teach, sitting in the last bench). For you never know when the ‘attractive women’ might get attracted to you, and be all over you!” ~ Crayola

    So you would flog him for something someone else did? Why would it be pundit’s fault if he turned someone away and she made a skank of herself and plastered herself all over him anyway?

  16. Crayola says:

    Michelle: Ah! It is not his fault of course. And i trust him very very much. And when pundit turns an attractive woman (who is all over him) away it would be more of an ego boost for me, than a threat! (..and you must know, there was no way i could undo/edit what i posted after that emotional outburst)

    Pundit: Yes of course i trust you much much… and you know that. But, I did think about what i said, and where it came from; I think am just being possessive… and was reacting to the thought of an attractive woman being all over you. :) Am sure you would be possessive too if I tell you, I find this man attractive and he is all over me?
    I must admit, that initially it would be a little threatening, but not after I reason it out for a moment in my head (like how i did right after i posted what i typed).

    We are all emotional at the end of the day, aren’t we? :)

  17. anita says:

    I don’t know why. I’m just saying that…as a woman, I can see how it might bother me. You presented the two statements out of any context initially, but then when you put them in a context…you were bringing up something different…

    It’s possible a guy might say statement #1 but actually mean #2 as well. How is the girl to know for sure? And if the girl is insecure (as I am), she might immediately make the leap and interpret it as #2. But there’s a lot of grey area…could depend on how it is said, how it came up in conversation, who the other woman is, what time of the month it is, and the particular atmosphere. If you’re having some romantic candle-light dinner, it doesn’t seem like an appropriate thing to say, regardless of what you mean.

  18. pundit says:

    Crayola: We all are. We all are.

  19. pundit says:

    anita: So, you’re basically saying that one must not only worry about whether they say things, but also how they say things if they do, and when? :)

    I can’t believe this is actually more useful than it first seemed.

  20. Michelle says:

    Okay, out of curiousity, how old is everyone here?

    I feel so far removed from this stuff it’s not even funny, and I’m only 31. I don’t know, maybe I’m just not insecure about the same things as everyone else. El Boyfriend says “She’s an attractive woman” and I don’t get my panties in a bunch. Is it okay if he cheats on me with the attractive woman? Hell no, it’s just that I don’t believe it’s remotely possible that he will. So what if she comes onto him? He’ll turn her down and come home with me. It’s called trust. You either do or you don’t.

  21. Michelle says:

    *curiosity, hello.
    I think there’s a Demon of Bad Spelling taking up residence in my keyboard lately. Should have seen how long it took me to write up yesterday’s entry on my blog.

  22. anita says:

    I don’t know what I’m saying most of the time. The main point I was trying to make was that just because a woman might understand the difference between the two statements doesn’t automatically imply that she wants to know if you find someone else attractive, or that she won’t be bothered by it for one reason or another. That’s all.

    Michelle: I’m 28, but immature for my age : )
    Personally, it may or may not bother me, depending on the situation and how it came up in conversation. But I don’t get my panties in a bunch over it either…

  23. pundit says:

    Michelle: I’m 25.

  24. pundit says:

    anita: That makes perfect sense.

    And more generally, since it’s come up a few times, I don’t think it’s trivial to get one’s panties in a bunch. But then again, what do I know?

  25. Michelle says:

    The main point I was trying to make was that just because a woman might understand the difference between the two statements doesn’t automatically imply that she wants to know if you find someone else attractive, or that she won’t be bothered by it for one reason or another. – Anita

    Ah, see, that I can agree with. Not that it ever bothers me in the way that you might expect. On the occasion that it might bother me, it’s usually an instance where the guy is “She’s attractive” and I’m like “What?!?! Are you effing BLIND?? She’s a skank/troll/unsightly dirty beast/whatever!!”

    I mean, if you’re going to find someone attractive, she should measure up to my standards, at any rate. ;)

  26. anita says:

    Oh, I know!! I’ve responded in a similar way a few times…so funny…I can definitely get offended if a guy likes a bunch of ugly girls : )

  27. pundit says:

    So now the consensus is ‘ugly skanks’ can’t be deemed attractive?

    :)

  28. Michelle says:

    Skanks are, by their very nature, just not attractive. They might have physical attributes that would be pleasing on a non-skank, but skanks are just…no.

  29. pundit says:

    But if it weren’t apparent someone was a skank…. wait, might it be? Is there some hidden trick I am unaware of?

  30. Michelle says:

    Paris Hilton? Skank. Use that as a reference guide. It’s more behavior than appearance, but the behavior makes the appearance undesirable.

  31. Fellow Retard says:

    Words are meant to conceal and not reveal.

    Any distinction between the two sentences serves the purpose of hiding behind the subtleties of semantics.

    But yes, there is a difference.

    And may I disagree on Paris Hilton?

    She got consumed by the very glitzy life that she pioneered, but even now, when she is well dressed (read ‘ in photos not shot by paparazzi’), she has an attractive face and endearing smile. Her behavior doesn’t make her any more undesirable than George Bush’s diction, intellect and political acumen. At least, Paris Hilton is not messing up lives of million and dollars in billion.

    Cut her some slack! :-)


1 people conned into wasting their bandwidth.