I would probably never date a sports person who was super into sports because it bores me to death.. and really if it is that big a part of their life don't they want someone to share that with them? Seems reasonable.
It's hard to find a clue to self-improvement when all you get is, "You're a nice guy, but..." I've gotten that more than once. Nobody has ever bothered to finish the sentence. What does that mean - that I should start being an asshole? Speaking strictly based on my personal experience... it may be limiting and narrow-minded, but I'm not interested in dating someone who doesn't at least enjoy the genre. You see, back when I was married, occasionally I would find myself with my ex-husband in a bar with friends. You know the NTN trivia game that a lot of bars have? The bar we used to hang out at was part of the network, and we used to play. (Sadly, even though my marriage ended in 1997, and I haven't logged into that account since then, I still remember our group's password.) When a science fiction or fantasy-related question came up, everyone in the group would turn to me for the answer. When I knew it (which I did more often than not), and we got the 1000 points for the correct answer, he would then point at me and yell out, "Geek! Geek! Geek! Geek! Geek!" (This, mind you, from the guy who turned to me at the climactic moment of Star Trek: First Contact and whispered in my ear, as the Vulcan ship was coming down in the clearing, "I bet it's the Pakleds." And I don't think he'd even seen a single Trek episode before he met me.) But why should I subject myself to that sort of thing? Why should I date someone (speaking theoretically, as my window of opportunity grows smaller by the day) whose attitude toward something I enjoy is one of derision? I've chaired two conventions, been a Division Head for two Worldcons, worked on more conventions than I can remember and attended even more. I'm on the Board of Directors for an organization that used to run one of the local conventions (and have been asked if I would consider joining the Board of one of the others). I've made hundreds of friends through fandom. I could even make an argument that I wouldn't have my current job were it not for fandom (because that's how I met the person who hired me, and I might never have started to learn Web programming in the first place were it not one of the jobs I was asked to do for Toronto Trek one year). I certainly wouldn't have had my last relationship were it not for fandom - we met at Dragon*Con, and were introduced by a mutual friend whom I knew because of this place. There are two views of science fiction fandom which are fairly common within the community: "Fandom Is a Way Of Life," and "Fandom Is Just a G**D*** Hobby." Clearly, even though I fit into the second camp when I started attending conventions, lo those *mumblemumble* years ago, I've arrived at a point where I have both feet firmly in the "Way of Life" group. Given how closely entwined my life has become with the science fiction community, why should I pursue or accept a relationship with someone who has no interest in the genre, or worse, actively mocks it?
Well, you may think so, but it's accurate and it's the accepted term. We're nerds and they're mundanes. It's the unfortunate reality of the time and place in which we live. No, I don't. Because we're not talking about one interest. We're not talking about playing Sudoku. We're talking about an entire outlook on life. We're talking about the sense of wonder and the literature of ideas. We're talking about the level of importance one places on imagination and creativity, about a perception of what it means to be human. When I refer to people as mundanes, at least in this context, I'm not talking about an unfortunate disinterest in the Arts & Sciences-- I'm talking about an active hostility toward them. There's no problem with civil disagreement. Don't worry about that. You have a different way of going about things, and that's fine. I have never limited myself to dating women who are genre-friendly, but none of those relationships had any chance of progressing past casual because of fundamental differences in lifestyle. That's nice. These women don't have a hostility toward the creative genres then, and their disinterest is not a problem for you. I may be interested in dating some of them myself, but a serious relationship would be highly unlikely. I want somebody I can share my passions with. If she's not going to get excited about a new Jack McDevitt novel or the latest pictures from Mars, she's not for me. I agree. That's pretty much my point. My thesis is only faulty if compatibility is not an issue-- in my parents' day, marriages where the men hung out in the parlor talking sports while the women hung out in the kitchen trading recipes were the norm. I don't go for that. I've also known a lot of women in my 52 years. As I've mentioned, I spent 22 of those years working in Women's Health in two inner city hospitals and a shelter for pregnant teens. I count among my female friends highly skilled surgeons, midwives, doulas, secretaries, administrators, researchers, and writers; women who are literal geniuses and women who can barely read or write. They are all wonderful people who do their best to make their neighborhoods and the world a better place and I'm proud to know them. None of them are hostile toward the creative genres. And none of them would be a compatible romantic partner.
I'm sorry you had to experience that, but most non-genre fans are not going to mock you for enjoying something that they do not. It'll be that thing you enjoy that he doesn't. And, personally, I think it's good that couples have some things to themselves. You must have other interests that the two of you could share besides science fiction or fantasy. Of course, I could never date a non-geek. I actually don't have any non-geeky interests that we could share together. She doesn't have to be into science fiction, but she'd better be a anime/gamer/board gamer fan to make up for it. I'm a huge geek and I'm not sure how I'd relate to someone with no geeky hobbies. Her: So you watch the game last night? Me: Yeah, it was awesome. Scarlett is brilliant with her TvZ. The way she crushed Bomber with that baneling landmine on his group of marines was a thing of beauty. Her: What? No, I meant the Packers. Me: Huh? You're moving? I thought you just got that apartment. Her: Never mind. Let's just order our food.
You sit around watching scifi shows and movies or read scifi books... That's a bit more mundane than someone going skydiving or spelunking...
Some of us do both. Neither are "mundane" but depending on who you're talking to, the skydiving and spelunking do generally make for better stories than "We watched Firefly again. Damn that is a good show."
The Star Wars things seems weird to me because there is plenty of pop culture I've missed out on as well. I wouldn't take it as a total lack of curiosity. There are too many things in life to experience so you have to pick and choose a bit. It's fun to introduce the person you love to something you love. I've watched my brother and his wife make their way through TNG and she's gone from tolerating it to saying things to me like "Oh, speaking of Star Trek," in conversations where I never brought Trek up. She's excited to tell me about recent episodes they've watched and they recently went to go see a Klingon production of A Christmas Carol. On the other hand, I'm dating a Trekkie and I love that he shares some of my less common interests. So there's something to be said for either approach, I'd just not limit myself the same way I suppose.
Indeed. I could be open to someone who'd never seen Star Trek before. I'm probably less likely to be open to someone who has utter contempt for the franchise, but they might "redeem" themselves in other ways. Being amazing in the sack would be a help.
No, it's not. It's needlessly inflammatory, exclusionary, and smug language. You'd think someone who considers themselves intelligent, erudite, and considerate would know better than to "other" everyone who doesn't share their specific outlook, and especially not to denigrate people by calling them "mundanes." So you're talking about a group of people that's vaguely defined and probably doesn't exist in any large number, yet it's somehow the "lowest common denominator"? I'm still trying to figure out how being a genre fan is a "lifestyle." Frankly, a great portion of genre material is out-and-out crap yet commands vast followings. I've noticed genre fans have an inflated sense of the quality of the things they enjoy. Babylon 5, for instance, is held up as a pinnacle of science fiction television, hailed as a "novel for television." But if you stack it up against non-genre TV shows that came before and after, it falls far short. It's no Hill Street Blues, and it doesn't hold a candle to something like The Wire. In essence, the best that science fiction television has to offer is quite mediocre when stacked up against the best of the television medium as a whole. The same can be said of books and films, as well. I think I'd be very concerned about a partner who rates one's preferences in science news and writers above general life priorities, goals, and worldview. I notice you seem to have moved the goalposts here, talking about "the creative genres" as some big umbrella. Are you saying there's some vast body of literature that most people enjoy that isn't "creative," or what? I mean, this began as a discussion of Star Wars and most of the talk was with regard to "genre fans" and being "genre-friendly." To me, that denotes science fiction and fantasy--the speculative genres, the works not set in the "real world," per se. Are you talking about something else, then?
What I've noticed in the sci-fi world is this strange mark against shows that are critically lauded like The X-Files, LOST, and BSG. I can't tell you how many times I've heard that those aren't really genre shows or some such nonsense. It seems like for a show to really count then it has to take place in the future, in space, have a certain tone, and not be appreciated by most others. Quality doesn't seem to come into play.
Hey, the highest mark of possessing taste is liking something that others, especially the media, have disdained and/or ignored. Everyone knows that.
Well yeah, I'd say that someone who has utter contempt for anything that's a large part of you is probably not an ideal match. Personally I'd feel pretty shitty sleeping with someone who is contemptuous of my interests, but that's just me!
Happily one of my interests is the sack, so if they have enough interest in the sack then I may be able to overlook their contempt for another interest of mine.
I wouldn't say interest in SFF is a prerequisite to a relationship, but it is something I genuinely enjoy and would miss being able to share if she simply had no interest in it. If that were the case, we'd need to have very similar tastes in other areas and interests (photography, writing, philosophy, going out for drinks, live music, etc.) to compensate. On the other hand, each of my (very few) significant relationships introduced me to something new - something I hadn't considered investigating or participating in before (astrology, art, music, etc.). So there's something to be said for being with someone who has different tastes. As such, I would hope she'd be interested enough in me to discover what it is about SFF that I enjoy so much.
Also, if one is sufficiently self-absorbed, such contempt is easily seen as actually based in jealousy.
Everyone knows the people who most fervently claim to hate Trek secretly go into their basements at night and watch it. And we're not talking any Trek here. We're talking things like Threshold and Let He Who Is Without Sin...
Ah, but therein lies a key difference between men and women: a woman dances with a man, she validates him as a person. A man dances with a woman, he validates himself also.