Article: The Dating Game - Page 3

Rowsbette · 7th September 2005, 12:23pm

Many a time have I found myself sneering at vapid chick-lit, or self-help books such as The Rules in bookstores: sorely tempted to purchase them in order to enable me to find out more about the Bridget-Jones-esque dating culture I so irrationally despise. Thoughts of such a book invading my bookshelves like a bad smell (possibly even rendering my wee collection of feminist literature null and void) always convinced me to refrain from wasting my money. However, when I saw a copy of Jo Hemmings’ The Dating Game (a £9.99 book) going for a mere ten pence in Bookworld on Sauchiehall Street today, I just couldn’t resist.

On a positive note, Jo Hemmings isn’t the “how to meet Mr Right and bully him up the aisle” lady I anticipated: her attitude is more “let’s have a laugh for the moment.” It’s still, in essence, a book for women wanting men to like them. As I said in another article, the problem with the flood of relationship self-help books floating about...

Click here to read the entire review

Zippy · 7th September 2005, 1:56pm

I've never been on dates with folk that have materialised into anything more than a few dates.

With Helen we hooked up and didn't go on a date until about 3 months in (Spiderman if I remember right

).

nevali · 7th September 2005, 1:57pm

To be honest, if all else fails, I can always rely on my trusty copy of “How to Pick Up Girls Through Hypnosis”

¡Punk! · 7th September 2005, 2:01pm

I just rely on booze

*Potatojunkie* · 7th September 2005, 2:22pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Foxglove

As I said above, I think most people do "date" even if they use another term for it

People go places with other people they want to fuck/get to know better. This is entirely different from the horrific social construct known as 'the dating scene', where people attempt to somehow lure other people into fancying them.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Foxglove

and most people (not all and that is the point of the article, it is a personal choice) want the whole marriage and babies thing.

Good luck to them, if they fall in love with someone and are doing it for their own reasons. Loveless marriages do exist, though, and people do get married because it's what's expected of them (far moreso in the US than over here). It's their right to do so, of course, but it's my right to call them on being utterly batshit mental.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Foxglove

I think the way you have written this may well offend many people on here

*insert stock sarcastic response to the effect of "tough shit"*

I don't go out of my way to be deliberately offensive, but I'm not going to go the opposite road, either, as it's just as bad.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Foxglove

and certainly there are a lot of people who want the conventional type relationship that these books are trying to teach people how to achieve.

These books teach people, not about conventional relationships, but how to achieve a grotesque parody thereof. That's the main point of misunderstanding here, I think.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Foxglove

It doesn't matter if you want it, it is all about what people as individual's want is it not, whether it is the way you want to live your life or it goes against what you want from life?

If people want to stick forks into their own eyeballs, then who cares, right? It's their choice, and it's not hurting anyone else. Until other people see it and think that it's a reasonable way to behave. And then magazines like Go Fork Yourself! become wildly popular to the extent that it becomes impossible to avoid them, and all you want to do is take a flamethrower to the world.

nevali · 7th September 2005, 2:25pm

Quick! Sign me up to a subscription to Go Fork Yourself!

To quote a certain TV show for the second time in this thread; "Yes, I am over 18, but my IQ isn't".

*Potatojunkie* · 7th September 2005, 2:30pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by nevali

Quick! Sign me up to a subscription to Go Fork Yourself!

To quote a certain TV show for the second time in this thread; "Yes, I am over 18, but my IQ isn't".

If you think I'm going to splash out on a portable walrus-polishing kit, you are very much mistaken.

Mrs.Evil of Hesselink · 7th September 2005, 2:34pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Foxglove

I think it is The Rules that states, "never text a man back for at least 10 (or was ot 20) minutes after he texted you". WTF? Really?

Guilty.

Foxglove · 7th September 2005, 2:36pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mrs.Evil

Guilty.

You sorted that little bad point out yet?

nevali · 7th September 2005, 2:36pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mrs.Evil

Guilty.

Why?

What is it about conversation people find abhorrent?

¡Punk! · 7th September 2005, 2:39pm

the fear of accidentally calling them a cunt

Mrs.Evil of Hesselink · 7th September 2005, 2:43pm

Does multi-quote not work in articles?

Foxglove: Aye

Nevali: I dunno, maybe what Punk said.

¡Punk! · 7th September 2005, 2:46pm

Punk's always right when it comes to matters dealing with the fairer sex

Foxglove · 7th September 2005, 2:47pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mrs.Evil

Foxglove: Aye

Glad to hear it - man it freaked me out!

*Potatojunkie* · 7th September 2005, 2:48pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by Punk

Punk's always right when it comes to matters dealing with the fairer sex

And also with matters dealing with the word 'cunt'.

Coincidence? Unlikely.

Largest of Als · 7th September 2005, 3:29pm

Well, if it's one of those 'day after... how are you' texts....the 10 mins is usually spent trying to remember what her name was.

Al