Wednesday, March 11, 2009

Avoiding temptation

"If women respected one another and stuck together then men wouldn't be so tempted to stray."

That's life according to a friend of mine. That as women, we should stick together against the evil male hormones that prompt promiscuity and ruin relationships. That a true bond among feminine friends could very likely cut the casualties that result from infidelity.

But I would like to think that flirting and eventually succumbing to the desires or not is really representative of the individual who is IN a relationship rather than the person who may be perusing them.

But is there something to be said for a woman who defines the word TEMPTRESS???

According to THIS ARTICLE there are ways for a man to resist temptation, whether it's in the form of a sexy-ex or a coy co-worker.

Men are encouraged to be honest with themselves by acknowledging that enticement is out there and that there are ways to fight it.

But can a man really turn down a casual fling by mumbling the words "I have a girlfriend" a few hundred times???

Or is it necessary for the female temptress to consider ALL parties involved and back off for the sake of women everywhere?


Mario said...

Any chance the female temptress is being driven by "evil hormones" of her own? And if so, are these hormones some mutation peculiar to the individual, or are they more widely distributed among those who share her gender?

I just wondered what your friend's comment would be on this point.

Sten said...

I kinda resent the whole "us" verse "them" gender battle.

Most of my friends are guys ... and they are all good, honest non-cheaters. (I'd certainly go after one of their girls before they'd pounce on my guy.)

I also think you can't steal what doesn't want to be stolen. As tempting as a temptress, or tempter can be, it really shouldn't be THAT hard to turn away.

Mario said...

I agree, Sten. What gets my goat is this whole idea of the "International Solidarity of Womanhood": namely, that if women would simply realize that they have to side with their sisters, those "bad men" wouldn't have anyone to cheat with.

I don't know how to read it any other way.

Chrissie said...

that's exactly how some (including myself;) read this very thing.

i was opening up the topic to hear both sides, so far we're together on this i think.

like i said...

But I would like to think that flirting and eventually succumbing to the desires or not is really representative of the individual who is IN a relationship rather than the person who may be perusing them.

however "tempting" the other gal may be, it's still up to the GOOD GUY to turn her down.

and in regard to this being a gender battle, the his/hers isn't so important in this one for me. i think the same argument could be made that if "men respected other men" then they wouldn't pursue women who were in relationships.

AJ said...

I think this is kind of a two-way street. If you're in a relationship, have the steel to turn away, if you know someone is in a relationship, accept that they're off-limits and don't pursue them.

I don't think its a "we gals need to stick together" issue, so much as a "let's all respect our (And others') relationships" issue.

Colin said...

I agree with Sten and Mario on this one.

I've got to ask AJ this though. Why should you "respect" an individual's relationship if you are interested in one of the parties? I've 'stolen' quite a few girlfriends over the course of my life and my fiancee is no exception. It shouldn't be an issue of not pursuing at all and giving a blanket amount of respect to a relationship. It should be an issue of not continuing to pursue an individual if they are uninterested, same as if they were single.

Mario said...

When single meant "not married," things were a lot clearer. More or less -- all single people were fair game.

Now, I'm sure the "why do two people need a 'piece of paper'" jazz is sure to come up, if this thread continues; but for whatever you want to say about it, that "piece of paper" was a clear social signal to stay away. Both parties, the adulterer and the home wrecker, risked social opprobrium by violating this convention.

Digitalis said...

I just have to say that I read the 'advice' column, and it was some of the stupidest crap ever.