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.
Honestly, other than as a possible pointer towards self-improvement, why someone is rejecting you should be irrelevant, because it all comes down to the fact that they're not interested.
Why should someone who doesn't like Star Wars or whatever suddenly be deemed unworthy of attention or pursuit? Don't you think it's entirely limiting and narrow-minded to relegate an entire portion (if not the majority) of women as "out of bounds" simply because they don't share one interest with you?
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.I can't believe I'm replying to this thread but this comment below really just rubs me the wrong way.
^^ Anybody who would reject you for that reason is not worth being with.
Also, one person's idea of self improvement may not be another person's. Like the Star Wars thing. Genre fans are often rejected by mundanes. Why? Because they have more imagination and interests than mundanes. And I don't consider conforming to the lowest denominator to be self improvement.
I think it's pretty classless to refer to non-genre friendly people as "mundanes," no matter how silly the term is.
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.Why should someone who doesn't like Star Wars or whatever suddenly be deemed unworthy of attention or pursuit? Don't you think it's entirely limiting and narrow-minded to relegate an entire portion (if not the majority) of women as "out of bounds" simply because they don't share one interest with you?
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.I don't mean to jump down on you RJ. I like you. But I also know we disagree on a couple things and I think it's really lame that you are perpetuating such a closed-minded perspective on this. If I limited myself to dating only women who were genre-friendly, I'd have a list three people long. Two of whom turned out to be really terrible people, rife with mental disorders and one in particular in dire need of psychiatric help.
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.And while I realize that this does not constitute an accurate assessment of the entirety of genre-friendly women, I also know that the best relationships I've been in have been with well-rounded, cultured, and rational people who appreciated that I had this particular interest and while they may not have shared my gusto or passion for it, at least understood why it was important to me.
I agree. That's pretty much my point.If you're pursuing someone who can't even muster the time or effort to do that, I'd respectfully submit that "not liking genre entertainment" is the least of the problems to worry about.
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.The point I'm trying to make though is that it is foolish to dismiss such a large body of people who might otherwise be creative, imaginitive, resourceful, hard-working, lovely, warm, caring, smart, intelligent, sexy, witty, loyal, funny, beautiful possible companions just because they don't like TOS or think nuBattlestar actually had some value as legitimate entertainment.
I dispute your thesis here because it is entirely faulty. I've known a LOT of women in my 34 years, all across the spectrum of behavior, creed, race, interests, physicality and demeanor and they have, each of them, been wonderful in their own way.
Oh, and here's your twist ending, M. Night Shyamalan:
The majority of these fine ladies were NOT genre-friendly, yet each were educated. Each had vibrant imaginations of their own and were creative - sometimes even more than I believe I am. They are wondrous, beautiful creatures full of wit and opinions nad desires and were worth every minute I spent pursuing and being with them.
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?
You sit around watching scifi shows and movies or read scifi books...^^ Anybody who would reject you for that reason is not worth being with.
Also, one person's idea of self improvement may not be another person's. Like the Star Wars thing. Genre fans are often rejected by mundanes. Why? Because they have more imagination and interests than mundanes. And I don't consider conforming to the lowest denominator to be self improvement.
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."You sit around watching scifi shows and movies or read scifi books...^^ Anybody who would reject you for that reason is not worth being with.
Also, one person's idea of self improvement may not be another person's. Like the Star Wars thing. Genre fans are often rejected by mundanes. Why? Because they have more imagination and interests than mundanes. And I don't consider conforming to the lowest denominator to be self improvement.
That's a bit more mundane than someone going skydiving or spelunking...
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.I can't believe I'm replying to this thread but this comment below really just rubs me the wrong way.
^^ Anybody who would reject you for that reason is not worth being with.
Also, one person's idea of self improvement may not be another person's. Like the Star Wars thing. Genre fans are often rejected by mundanes. Why? Because they have more imagination and interests than mundanes. And I don't consider conforming to the lowest denominator to be self improvement.
I think it's pretty classless to refer to non-genre friendly people as "mundanes," no matter how silly the term is.
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.![]()
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.The point I'm trying to make though is that it is foolish to dismiss such a large body of people who might otherwise be creative, imaginitive, resourceful, hard-working, lovely, warm, caring, smart, intelligent, sexy, witty, loyal, funny, beautiful possible companions just because they don't like TOS or think nuBattlestar actually had some value as legitimate entertainment.
I dispute your thesis here because it is entirely faulty. I've known a LOT of women in my 34 years, all across the spectrum of behavior, creed, race, interests, physicality and demeanor and they have, each of them, been wonderful in their own way.
Oh, and here's your twist ending, M. Night Shyamalan:
The majority of these fine ladies were NOT genre-friendly, yet each were educated. Each had vibrant imaginations of their own and were creative - sometimes even more than I believe I am. They are wondrous, beautiful creatures full of wit and opinions nad desires and were worth every minute I spent pursuing and being with them.
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.
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.![]()
Also, if one is sufficiently self-absorbed, such contempt is easily seen as actually based in jealousy.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.![]()
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.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!
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.