My friend (and former NYU classmate) Resalin wrote an article for the Dallas Examiner, and I'm not sure that I believe that the guy in question was trying to cheat on his wife. You can decide for yourself here.
I guess my bigger problem is that my friend seemed to think she'd be forfeiting control of the situation if she agreed to share a meal with this person. This didn't take place in a third-world country where society places a huge rift between the sexes such that women must bend to a man's every whim. Even if she is in Texas.
I guess my bigger problem is that my friend seemed to think she'd be forfeiting control of the situation if she agreed to share a meal with this person. This didn't take place in a third-world country where society places a huge rift between the sexes such that women must bend to a man's every whim. Even if she is in Texas.
I don't know what this guy's intentions were, but hers should be able to trump his, which is why I don't understand why she was so aghast. Unless she shared with this man an uncontroll
able, all-consuming urge to have sex with any man who eats at the same table where she does. Then I could understand her ire.
What do you think?
able, all-consuming urge to have sex with any man who eats at the same table where she does. Then I could understand her ire.What do you think?
Posts
I agree that the leap from a casual encounter with someone open and up front about his marriage to people soliciting affairs on Craigslist is quite a large one, but there are is a well taken "read between the lines" point in Resalin's article:
ReplyDeleteA married man should not be engaging a single woman to "show him around town," if not for the sole reason of refraining from doing so out of respect to his wife.
I'm sure whatever business brought him to town could have provided a suitable tour guide of the same gender. It's clear that the "show me around town" was an after thought when he gathered the cajones to ask her to call him.
By placing the ball in her court and being up front about his marriage, he may have been valuing the weight of her call as an indicator that she was willing to entertain him, despite his marriage, i.e., see what happens.
Resalin's article assumes that members of the opposite sex cannot engage each other without ulterior motives. While this may be narrow minded, it almost certainly statistically supported that she's 100% right.
2.
Sarah, I take your point about Res (and your average empowered American woman) being in control of her actions, but, as I understand it, that's precisely why she said no. The divine Miss Resalin is reading the situation, the chemistry and the guy and exercising (in advance) her option to not 1 - enable potential cheating; 2 - waste her valuable flirt/friendship time with a married guy that she won't see again even if their "tour" doesn't end in her awkwardly rejecting a more direct proposition the next day; and most importantly, 3 - compromise her standards for her own behavior and that of her associates.
ReplyDeleteSo, what I think is: Yep, men and women can have dinner together and not have sex. But they don't have to if they don't want to and Res didn't want to.
Oh, and hi.
How about this: the guy was an editor from Vanity Fair. I at least think she could have used the opportunity to pick his brain and make a contact at the magazine.
ReplyDelete