So I open up Internet Explorer last week (not my browser of choice, but I have to use it to access the database at work), and on the MSN homepage, I find this story:
Be the Perfect Girlfriend.
It's a love contract of sorts. Some guy from Maxim wrote it to show girls how to be the "perfect girlfriend." (There is an accompanying feature, "Be the Perfect Boyfriend," which I'll get to in another post.) Now, I've read it several times, and I have some additions/comments to the contract. (Side Note: I do not have a boyfriend. All comments in this post are based on past experience, or from experience gained while helping my friends with their relationship troubles, or from freaking common sense.)
Let's all open our textbooks...
Clause I, Section A: I agree, when out on a date, chicks should eat more than a side salad. In the defense of those of us who eat lightly on dates, we can and do eat like normal people (evidence: my thighs). But on dates, we're fighting nerves. It's not that we don't want to eat normally, it's that we can't; the nerves have eliminated our appetites.
Clause I, Section B: Absolutely right, the guy should not be expected to plan every date. However, I propose this addition to Section B: When The Lady plans a date, The Man will provide ideas, suggestions, and feedback, or be subject to The Lady's whims without complaint. The Lady is not a mind reader, and date planning should be a joint venture.
Clause I, Section C: While I understand the sentiment of this section, it's assuming that guys and girls don't usually share the same interests, and that most dates are a compromise of the mediocre. I like to go to athletic events of any kind. And I'm sure there are guys out there who enjoy foreign/art house movies. While the party who wants to attend the event should be responsible for logistics themselves, it shouldn't be assumed that the other party will have to be dragged there. Relationships are all about compromise, but I think they're about more compromise than this section is saying.
Clause 2, Section A: While I'm sure that everyone understands that discussing ex-boyfriends (and ex-girlfriends) a lot can be uncomfortable, it's most certainly not off limits in the "getting to know you" stage. What's more, if an ex is also a close friend, it should be allowed AND not questioned. This clause is actually more about trust than about ego, and if talking about an ex makes someone in the relationship angry, upset, or start to doubt, there are bigger problems at hand. The clause also leaves out the discussion by The Man of ex-girlfriends, which can also be uncomfortable for The Lady. I propose this addition to Clause A, in the form of subsection 2: Pursuant to Clause 2, Section A, The Man will never discuss an ex-girlfriend, unless mentioning a flaw (such as how ex-girlfriend was an insane, controlling bitch) or discussing ways in which The Lady betters said ex (such as cooking, intelligence, sexual prowess, etc).
Clause 2, Section B: I applaud this section, and would only add: Pursuant to Clause 2, Section B, The Man will reciprocate to the best of his abilities, or will alert The Lady that he having trouble or trying to do so. In that case, The Lady will help The Man verbalize his thoughts.
Clause 2, Section C: I abhor cutesy nicknames like snuggle bunny or whatever. I also think that in an adult relationship, nothing should be spoken in a baby-voice or said in baby-talk. I'm much more a fan of nicknames based on your actual name (mine is Lizzie), situational/one time use nicknames (like Love Queen or Car God), or common use nicknames like babe, hon, sweetie, etc. I would rewrite Section C to abolish all horrible, cutesy nicknames and allow for the use of the three categories I just mentioned.
Clause 3, Section A: This section is great, but it should be reciprocated. The Lady can't be the only one talking about her wishes in bed. I'd say that the majority of people (married or in a relationship or single or whatever) have issues with verbalizing what they want in bed. Doing so is based on deep trust, which is something that is built over time. That is why most people tend to keep their mouths shut at the start of relationships, and when they finally get up the courage to say something, the other party is upset that they weren't told earlier. It's a vicious cycle, and to end it, the issues need to be addressed at the start of the physical relationship, or it must be understood that when suggestions are made, it's not a disparagement. I would rewrite this clause to reflect the mutuality of expressing needs during sex, and also to say that The Lady is also a prideful being, and that most Ladies take extra pride in their sexual prowess, but not at the expense of getting better and pleasing Their Man.
Clause 3, Section B: I call bullshit on this entire passage. Sides of the bed needs to be reserved for whomever the bed belongs to. I'll be damned if someone takes my side in my own bed. And I wouldn't dream of choosing a side in someone else's bed until the owner's preference was clearly stated. Permanent sides of the bed can be decided at a later date, possibly when a new bed is purchased jointly, or when one of the beds becomes the joint bed.
Clause 4, Section A: This is just common sense. You don't ask the guy you've been dating for three weeks to meet your family unless extraordinary circumstances arise. And even then, The Man has the right to say no. Hell, even a month is too soon (my family is a little on the intense side).
Clause 4, Section B: Another bullshit section. The Man should make his "favorite recipes" known to The Lady, and in the situation that The Man isn't a troglodyte from the early 1950s, he should know how to make them himself.
Clause 5, Section A-C: These sections only makes sense if The Lady wants to spend all her free time with The Man, or if The Lady annoys The Man's friends. I'm not one to want to spend all my free time with a person. I'm very much a "do my own thing" kind of gal, and I'm comfortable being alone. I know there are a lot of people out there who aren't like that, but I'm not one of them. So should my guy want to spend an evening with his friends, that's fine by me. These sections should be rephrased entirely to reflect that The Man and The Lady don't need to spend every waking hour together, and that being apart is ok.
Clause 5, Section D: This is also a bullshit section. Seriously. All women should go out with their own friends to maintain their independence. Their boyfriends aren't typically invited along. Who would expect their boyfriend to attend a girls night like that? And who would expect their boyfriend to attend an event solely to calm the feelings of extra-wheel that come with going out with your friend and their boyfriend/husband? I mean, I know the feeling, I know it well, and never would I expect my boyfriend to go if it isn't an explicit double date. Boyfriends are not an accessory, chicks of the world. Please stop watching Sex and the City and wake the fuck up.
Clause 5, Section D, Subsection 3: Must we go through this again? This little subsection is not needed if The Lady is intelligent and considerate, and so is The Man. And, they both need to trust each other. Honestly, just because an ex is around and The Man isn't doesn't mean The Lady is going to throw herself at him, or that the ex is going to throw himself at her! Men of the world, hear us nice, underrated girls now. We are with you. We have chosen you. Other men? Obviously not as good. An ex is an ex for a reason. Live it, learn it, love it.
Clause 6, entirety: I can't believe the writer of this stupid contract thing actually believes that men are this way. Maybe HE'S that way, but I've never met a man who has had trouble saying "I love you" when he really means it. Granted, most chicks are afraid of saying it first, but if I understand most of my guy friends correctly, so are they!! Are men today actually so afraid of commitment? Are they so afraid of expressing themselves? Are we living in a romantic comedy from 1991? And please name for me a woman (besides Demi Moore in that stupid movie) who would accept "ditto" or a high five in return of an "I love you!!" And to be honest, I'm pretty sure that most guys rib each other about their girlfriends, but most I believe are happy for their friends. So say "I love you" back and just take the good natured teasing, you pussy.
I can, however, give Clause 6, Section 1 a pass, because being told something like that when you're not ready for it can be flustering. Giving someone a little time to respond is perfectly appropriate.
And that's what I think of the "Perfect Girlfriend Contract." I'll be attacking the "How To Be The Perfect Boyfriend" article tomorrow. Believe me, it's just as stupid.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment