From: HF.GTD@forsythe.stanford.edu (Gabrielle Daniels)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.african.american
Subject: Re: dating and commitment
Date: 12 Nov 1992 14:46:14 -0800
Organization: Stanford University
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: morrow.stanford.edu

In article <1992Nov12.021947.22315@cs.ucla.edu>,
gds@york.cs.ucla.edu (Greg Skinner) writes in reply to my responses
to Crudup:

>>In article <1992Nov11.230334.2924@osf.org>,
>>kenny@osf.org (Kenneth Crudup) writes:
>>>But, see, that ain't it at all. This whole thing was going along just the
>>>way I wanted it- no one (she didn't, and I sure as hell was never)
>>>ever brought out sticky, problematic words like "love" or "future" or
>>>"commitment" (consider also this is the word they also use when they throw
>>>you in the looney bin), so we were just doing our thing, having a good time,
>>>going everywhere and doing everything.

Me, myself and I said:
>>Man, just because a woman doesn't say nothin, doesn't mean she's not
>>thinkin about it.
>
>True, but should he have to read her mind?  If she won't say how she
>feels, and he's been honest about how he feels, what else can he do?
>
>I think people (men and women) need to take responsibility for
>themselves in getting their needs met in relationships.  People
>shouldn't assume things are a certain way unless this has been
>discussed.
.
.
Brother, we were talking the same language if you had just let your
horses alone for a minute.  I was being critical of Crudup because
he just went along swimmingly as it were, with an undefined
relationship.  If he had fronted in the beginning, and cushioning
that with his usual savoir faire, nothing of this would have
occurred.  Does it have to be always the sister who is putting on
the brakes?

>>>I respect and care for the woman I'm with.  If this constitutes
>>>"strangin'", well hell, I'm sorry. [...] Maybe, like I eluded to
>>>in another post, certain appearances, possesions, actions and
>>>careers may subconsiously put ideas in somone's mind, but this
>>>wasn't an active thing on my part.  (Maybe I'm just nice to be with-
>>><gasp>!)
>>Look, man.  On the third or fourth date, you might have said,
>>hey--I like you a lot and let's just continue to have fun.  What do
>>you think?  You'dda been spared a lotta grief.  Which is what I look
>>for in men.  No strain and no pain.
>
>It looks to me from what he wrote that he was up front about what he
>wanted and where things were.  Maybe she could've said up front,
>hey--I am looking for something that could lead to something
>permanent, what do you think?
.
.
My man said NOTHING of the kind.  His outward trappings was
apparently what set the girl thinkin. Girlfriend was simply
tabulating, like most sisters do when they see a so-called prize.

A story:
 > >I was seeing
someone a few years back, who I wasn't in love with (but >liked a
lot), who was in love with me.  I wasn't seeing anyone else,
>because I was happy to be spending time with her and no one else.
She >said that it was cool by her.  My sister asked me why I wasn't
seeing >anyone else, and when I told her why, she said that I was
probably >sending the implied message to my SO at the time that this
was going >to be a permanent thing.  I claimed that it was wrong for
my SO to >make assumptions like that, but my sister said that that's
the way >women feel.
.
.
Both me and your sister are correct.  This is a double message if I
ever saw one. Be straight first off and don't take advantage of the
situation, especially if she's in love with you.  This is what I
call stringing.

> >Anyway, I discussed it with my SO and, basically, my sister was
right.  >After that, I decided that it was time to break up, because
I didn't >think it was a good idea to stay with someone whose
feelings for me >were not the same as mine for her, and who had a
different picture >of the long term.
.
.
Well, finally you got the message, but still you caused some grief,
brother.


Yet, I still claim that people shouldn't make >assumptions about
these things.  You can't read someone else's mind.  >Only they know
what they really need and want.
.
.
Hell.  Both women and men should not be waiting for each other to
say something. If the girl/brother admits she's in love with you,
don't just mess with her thinking, well, I just like her.  Talk to
each other.  Give them a little distance.  Tell them to see other
folks, and be serious about it. Anything other than that is
stringing. I'm sure you may have had the right intentions, but there
is something perverse sometimes when guys know they are "loved,"
they don't wanna front off, they wanna milk it for all its worth and
then maintain they are blameless when the deal goes down.
.
Then again, sisters--thinking about the sister in the dude's story
as a case study--if you are reading this, don't just hang on
thinking the dude is going to change.  He ain't.  Drop kick him to
the next goalpost and get on with your life to the next fine brother
who may give you what you need. No matter how hard it gets, drop him
good.
.
I will say, women have a different way of talking than men.  If we
would only begin to learn each other's languages, possibly all this
misunderstanding and stuff would end.