Tag «#nablopomo»

i feel like i don’t even know what game i’m playing.

September 15th, 2008 by steph | shades of perspective , , , , | No Comments »

everything I touch turns to shit. everyone I try to love won’t hear of it, now my hands are overfull of things I’d like to give. does anybody want it? does anybody want me?

ok. so, i suppose i should address the issue of the ‘pathetic and miserable dating life’ tweets that have been filling the universe lately. while i’d like to write about how i am happy in my singlehood and not having a pity party for myself… um that may be a little false. i am officially frustrated. do NOT read this as desperate, please. i’m not. i know everything is going exactly how it is supposed to.

that being said, what GIVES. i would not ever consciously say that i am in a dating drought. cause a) i would LIKE to believe that i could be dating someone this very second if ’someone’ is who i would like to be dating. and b) i don’t really like the concept of dating just to date. so i’m not looking for just dating as sport.

BUT. if i WERE i feel like i COULDN’T EVEN DO THAT. sigh. there are some weird differences with chicago and SF in regards to dating. in chicago, i couldn’t go to a bar without being approached by a dude. 90% of the time said dude was absolutely not anything i wanted to deal with, but he was there. predictable as always. and when i went home without a number, or without giving one, i honestly believed it was my choice. and friends in chicago. well i had my close group of friends that understood, loved, supported, cared about and embraced me. and i met a million guys that never would get me. and that was life. and i was used to it and it was predictable and i could read it and plan for it.

but here. i feel like im playing a totally different ball game. like rugby. or something that looks like a game i know but has a different accent and different rules. in SF i have friends, a shocking amount, that GET me. like the real me. and love and support and understand and embrace all that is steph. but guys. well. um. i haven’t been approached by one. let me check my brain. nope not one. again. this is NOT pity party. this is rational observation time. that is all.

im confused. first and foremost, i haven’t even met anyone in SF that i would like to get to know better on a romantical level. i mean yes, i meet a new soul mate weekly. but someone that give me butterflies, and makes me excited to think about and get to know, and connect with, notaone (oh shit, there was one. but he doesn’t count cause he is paid to be nice and serve drinks, ha, i’m pathetic). secondly, in chicago, when i went up to guys at that bar and showed interest in them i was considered intimidating and brash and a lot to handle. and though lots of guys SAY they would like to be approached by a girl, i don’t think they mean a not on purpose loud big curly red haired girl whose laugh echos off the walls and is possibly too honest for her own good. they mean the cute blonde or brunette that is part of the gaggle of young ladies at the bar that stick together. not girls that do what they want. but here. i feel like this may be different? the one time i did openly approach a boy and show interest it went, well, it went. no connection there. but definite physical and entertainmentical interest. and that was what it was and was good for what it was.

so. SF. what are your rules? because, in chicago. the game was like this- i only felt semi interested in getting to know roughly 10% of the boys i’d ever meet. and if THAT average applied to my SF dating life i think i may not meet someone until 2016 (when i return to chicago for the olympics, that is). because there i met a new guy a night, so 10% meant that every few weeks i’d meet someone of interest. but here. well, please tell me that i do not have to play with the same odds. also, girls hitting on guys… DO i have to do all the work? if so i don’t mind. but honestly, that one boy that i already approached and gave my number to, he is the only one i’ve even wanted to do that with. i mean i don’t mind stepping up my game and doing the macking, but could you PLEASE send me some mack worthy mackees?!? people in this city are smart, open, exciting and interesting. why are none of them single, attractive men that like crazy curly hair red heads that I want to get to know BACK!?

i’ve been mapping it out
i don’t know what’s wrong with me
but I wish that it was something else
i’ve been mapping it out
maybe you should find a girl who cares about herself

are we playing different dating games?

September 12th, 2008 by steph | shades of perspective , , , , , | No Comments »

well i guess you left me with some feathers in my hand. did it make it any easier to leave me where i stand? why’d you leave me till i’m only good for… waiting, for you.

it’s all a game. and usually i’m ok with that. but recently, it’s just really been annoying me. i was speaking with a friend the other night. a friend that i have gotten to know because he has had a girlfriend(s) most of the time we have known each other. and therefore, his main focus is not sleeping with me, but just getting to know me. so we had our first analytical talk of the dating game. and his thoughts, though unbelievably clear, haven’t been sitting well.

we discussed the ‘levels’ of the dating game. show interest/connection. create an event that jeopardizes that connection (fully knowing that your ‘connection’ will pull through thus intensifying it) then show vulnerability. and boom. they are hooked. and you can get to know one another, and date. or end it if you so desire.

so i said to my friend ‘but how do you know if they are interested back?’ and he said, well, ‘they just always are.’ and this is where i am hung up. maybe its his confidence (cough cough) that got me thinking. or his assurance that the levels of ‘dating’ are the sure fire way, but it just seems off. like ingenuine, or something. to play that game without ever wondering if they will like you back. at what point does the ‘level’ of making yourself vulnerable become just that? a level, and the vulnerable part becomes only symbolic of actually being vulnerable?

vulnerability. the key to connection. letting your guard down. honestly. it allows you to learn about someone else, learn about yourself. so what does it mean when we start ‘faking’ such an important aspect in life and relationships? it seems as though the dating game then becomes purely sport. a way to make it through the levels for the win. not for the possible connection. and is this bad? or wrong? or naive of me to think that we do all date for connection. not for sport.

i suppose this means a few things. there seems to be a conflict of interests going on with the players of the dating world (and no wonder it keeps getting harder). when i’m in it for connection, and you are showing me vulnerability as a strategy to complete all your levels then we are playing two different games. and based on the nature of those games i would then be the loser. and, uh, that sucks. also, i believe in being vulnerable (apparently so much that i write to the world at large every little thought about my own pathetic dating life). and i think that the only way to grow and learn and do things genuinely is to understand what being vulnerable brings to your life.

so, i’m not sure where i’m going with this. but i feel frustrated that we are taking such an important thing/emotion/state of being thats entire purpose is to be genuine, and faking it to get ahead in a game that others don’t even know about.

so i ask you this. when you are chatting with that girl/guy at the bar, or party, or industry event with a purpose of going home with them ask yourself if a) you are being genuine, and b) they know which game you are playing (and if your vulnerability is just irony.)

all my innocence is wasted on the dead and dreaming.