ROMANCE AND CONTROL
April 21, 2000
Manliness.
I'm not sure what is "natural", that is primordial and native to humankind. Fear is a natural
response to perceived danger but my problem was in my perception. I did not comprehend nor
figure out an effective way to respond to the danger. And I guess that's really what you wanted
from me: effectiveness. That's not what a man wants from a woman--at least not in this society.
But I think that is what a woman wants from a man now: Can he be predicted to accomplish the
things he seeks despite the obstacles?
Is this not the very soul of what women call "manliness?"
This ability cannot be simply theorized. It must be tested and retested. The first test is "Can you
intrigue me to the point that I will spend time with you?" That first look usually determines this
for a man, for a woman he must be a more particular presence. But then he must maintain and
deepen that sense of presence by quickly demonstrating command over his environment. This is
the second test and in this culture is engaged verbally: the man reveals accomplishments or
sound goals while subtlety evincing a sense of need that a woman might fulfill.
It was at this stage I was first introduced to this issue. I think I'd changed as I'd grown up.
Women who attracted me were not responding in kind. After discussing this at length a platonic
girl friend, Platonia, suggested an experiment. At a party she listened in as I spoke with a
woman with whom initial attraction seemed mutual. After five minutes the woman walked
away--a good indication that I failed the second test. In near shock, Platonia she now knew why
I was having trouble: I gave up control as soon as I started my conversation with the woman.
"Control?" I said, "I never had control." Platonia said that was the problem because a woman
wants a man who takes control. I must say frankly that I was quite shocked. I had no desire to
"control" the conversation but by asking the woman about herself--which, I thought,
demonstrated my interest in knowing her--I had neglected, and therefore failed, the second test
of "demonstrating command over my environment." I had not related my own accomplishments
or goals. In essence, I'd given control to the woman by allowing her to talk too much.
Platonia's testimony was greatly at variance with what I'd heard women say: They want a may
who listens and shows concern for them and doesn't just go on and on about himself. Platonia
said that women just say that. They want a man to do all the talking on first meeting and that
most of the talking should be about him. By dominating the conversation the man establishes
control and, therefore, command over his environment. My psychiatrist--who specifically
addresses relationship issues--confirmed that his women patients often complain about dates
where a man does not take early control. When a man talks on about himself that takes pressure
off the woman. In fact, some women say they want the man to dominate the early stages so they
can maintain a "feminine mystique" that might be destroyed if he finds something she says
stupid.
Intimacy and Control
Intimacy appears to be the act of remaining in a relationship despite an on-going and
repetitious struggle for control. It is the turning away from the relationship that is the demise,
the end of intimacy. For once control is established, as Platonia outlined, it must be challenged
and reestablished at both regular and arbitrary intervals and by both regular and arbitrary
means. This is the third test, the ability to overcome obstacles--it is often called "commitment"
and must be, or apparently be, undergone willingly. If suitable obstacles are not available from
without, it is the intimate partner who must provide them. Often times, in fact, both types must
be surmounted in tandem. Intra-intimital obstacles can be a bitch to decipher. For example,
early in our co-habitation, a glass pan exploded in the oven while Cribtonia was backing. She
left that glass in the oven for over two weeks. At first I could not believe the sloth this seemed to
indicate. Eventually, when seen in a broader context, I realized that this was an opportunity for
me to demonstrate control. A year earlier, Cribtonia had promised to replace an expensive
bottle of my cologne she'd broken. She had "lost" an African statue I held dear after buying
and lugging it along while in Africa.
"Not standing for it", "putting one's foot down" appear to be the effective ways to address the
intra-intimital obstacles. An even more effective way may be offense as a form of before-the-fact
defense. A comedian told of taking his new girl friend to McDonalds. She told the waiter she
wanted a number two sized burger, large fries and a large coke. The comedian firmly halted the
order saying "give her a number one burger, small fries and small coke. I'll have the large of
them all." The girl friend was accepting and the audience--many of whom were
women--cheered this demonstration of manliness. To take and demonstrate control, even in
intimate relations, is to evince "manliness". To remain in the close relationship even while one's
control is repeatedly attacked is evidence of intimacy and the soul of commitment.
Return to ROMANCE Homepage
Return to SPIKE Homepage