In relation to this post 'send all princesses to army' and some of the things I have learned these couple of years, I find that it is getting harder and harder to be a guy, especially in the romantic aspect. The so-called 'dating rules' just keep changing all the time, so much so that sometimes I feel rather tired of catching up.
A few years back, during my JC days, I came across this term 'SNAG' or 'Sensitive New Age Guy', where the guy is supposed to adopt certain originally considered feminine qualities such as being sensitive, caring, compassionate, blah blah blah. This is quite different from the traditional qualities that guys should have, such as being daring, able to shoulder responsibilities. chivalrous, etc.
Then, in these couple of years, I came across a new set of 'doctrine' on how guys should behave in the romantic aspect. The mastermind of this 'doctrine' is none other than David DeAngelo. In his 'doctrine', he argued that guys should possess, fundamentally, the following qualities in order to be successful in the romantic aspect:
1). Maintaining a 'tension' in the courtship and relationship
2). Be cocky and funny
3). Do not be a wussy (take: SNAG)
Follow these rules, or otherwise remain as a chronic failure, he claims.
Quite a lot of qualities to have, isn't it? (I summarized the things he preach, hence it's down to three points) This is especially hard for guys who do not have them in the first place, me included (although I am trying to pick up some of them).
Lately, I have also came across a forum whereby some female forummers left their ex, despite being treated very well, as they 'did not find the guy to be a challenge' or 'is confused'. Confused by what? Only God knows.
Seriously, I think the reasons they gave are rubbish. You have someone who tends to all your needs, what more do you want?
I guess I do not need to repeat that guys need to have a stable career, thick purse loadings, own a car, plus a house, etc etc...on top of all these, we need to know how 'the game' works. Strangely enough, I do not seem to come across a similar set of 'doctrine' for the girls.
Perhaps it's time for someone to come up with that.
A few years back, during my JC days, I came across this term 'SNAG' or 'Sensitive New Age Guy', where the guy is supposed to adopt certain originally considered feminine qualities such as being sensitive, caring, compassionate, blah blah blah. This is quite different from the traditional qualities that guys should have, such as being daring, able to shoulder responsibilities. chivalrous, etc.
Then, in these couple of years, I came across a new set of 'doctrine' on how guys should behave in the romantic aspect. The mastermind of this 'doctrine' is none other than David DeAngelo. In his 'doctrine', he argued that guys should possess, fundamentally, the following qualities in order to be successful in the romantic aspect:
1). Maintaining a 'tension' in the courtship and relationship
2). Be cocky and funny
3). Do not be a wussy (take: SNAG)
Follow these rules, or otherwise remain as a chronic failure, he claims.
Quite a lot of qualities to have, isn't it? (I summarized the things he preach, hence it's down to three points) This is especially hard for guys who do not have them in the first place, me included (although I am trying to pick up some of them).
Lately, I have also came across a forum whereby some female forummers left their ex, despite being treated very well, as they 'did not find the guy to be a challenge' or 'is confused'. Confused by what? Only God knows.
Seriously, I think the reasons they gave are rubbish. You have someone who tends to all your needs, what more do you want?
I guess I do not need to repeat that guys need to have a stable career, thick purse loadings, own a car, plus a house, etc etc...on top of all these, we need to know how 'the game' works. Strangely enough, I do not seem to come across a similar set of 'doctrine' for the girls.
Perhaps it's time for someone to come up with that.
No comments:
Post a Comment