It's been a while since I last posted, and late on a Saturday night, however, I figured I'd write again about dating. Both with guys in my life and in my friends', I've become rather interested in what makes a person have dating balls.
Now, mind you in today's gender inclusive environment, the responsibility does not fall solely on the male for pursuing and making his intentions known. Yet for the life of me, I have not been able to understand what makes someone put him/herself on the line and obviously pursue someone else. In the ideal world, knowing someone is interested in you would make you more likely to put yourself out there, but this is not always true.
Case in point: for those who don't know, I'm rather interested in the topics of bowel/bladder/sexual function from a scientific perspective, and am pretty open to talking about it. Yet at a party last week, one such attendee decided to broach the topic by telling me personal stories of his sexual encounters. I am all for discussing the physiological mechanisms of mating and procreation (and their dysfunction), yet I don't really want to hear about how enjoyable orgasm is to you and details of your sexual conquests. And for some odd reason this particular attendee did not pick up any of the hints dropped that this was not a good way to hit on me. Which makes me think, he's in his late 20s, so he's got to have had many interactions with the opposite gender. Who on earth helped support his notion that this was a good way to pick up girls? Or how has he gone through this much of his life and not realized it?
As my friend Randy said, the difference between a sweetheart and a creep is whether his advances are welcome or not. Complicated to decipher, perhaps, but a relationship's potential for success depends on a person's ability to truly understand the other, and correctly perceiving one's response to your actions can play a pivotal role.
On the other hand, what makes some so willing to entirely put themselves out there for a potential boyfriend/girlfriend? I mean, at these early stages do they really know they'll be successful ahead of time? Or are those that are more readily pursuant just more self-confident in general and are willing to risk more to gain more?
I guess what I'm asking is two-fold: 1) what makes some potential datees be more ballsy than others, and 2) which is worse- someone you liked lacking the decisiveness/courage to pursue you, or someone you don't like continuing to pursue even though you've tried your best to discourage them?
Sunday, February 03, 2008
Sunday, January 06, 2008
A land called paradise
For those who like to make generalizations about Islam and Muslims, or are just curious about American muslims check this out. It's a good reminder of how wrong assumptions and stereotypes can be. Thanks Sahar for sending this my way!
Thursday, January 03, 2008
Libya reformed?
This morning I read that Libya begins its month-long presidency of the UN security council. Wasn't it just a few months ago that we got it to abandon pursuit of nuclear weapons and begin taking a look at human rights? How is it we trust them now to head the UN security council???
For a description of how our current administration is handling Libya, I want to paste a few paragraphs written by the brother of a Libyan dissident currently imprisoned for speaking out against the government:
Tomorrow, Libyan Foreign Minister Abdel-Rahman Shalqam is to meet with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. Their sit-down at the State Department will come nearly seven months after President Bush declared himself a "dissident president" and promised active support for dissidents around the world. "I asked Secretary Rice," Bush said during a speech in Prague, "to send a directive to every U.S. ambassador in an un-free nation: Seek out and meet with activists for democracy. Seek out those who demand human rights."
Nothing of the sort happened. In fact, in its embrace of Tripoli, the Foreign Service has built a wall of silence around human rights concerns...
My brother, Fathi Eljahmi, is Libya's most prominent democracy activist. Speaking at a conference in Tripoli in October 2002 that is usually a stage-managed affair, he surprised Libya's mercurial dictator, Moammar Gaddafi, by suggesting that legal guarantees of free speech and a constitution should accompany Gaddafi's rhetorical embrace of reform. State security agents took him directly to prison.
After nearly 17 months, Fathi won a respite, thanks to the intercession of Sen. Joseph Biden (D-Del.). And on March 12, 2004, President Bush cited Fathi's release as a barometer of change in Libya. "We stand with courageous reformers. Earlier today, the Libyan government released Fathi Eljahmi," Bush said. "It's an encouraging step toward reform in Libya. You probably have heard. Libya is beginning to change her attitude about a lot of things." Bush may have heard, but the Libyans had not. Two weeks later, Gaddafi rearrested Fathi. My brother has been in solitary confinement ever since.
Look to the whole article for more details and our government's reaction (or lack thereof). Just another example of how the current administration is failing to speak out again blatant human rights abuse in the world, to make a firm stance (and not just lipservice) against islamic fundamentalism, and in general to effect/demand real change.
For a description of how our current administration is handling Libya, I want to paste a few paragraphs written by the brother of a Libyan dissident currently imprisoned for speaking out against the government:
Tomorrow, Libyan Foreign Minister Abdel-Rahman Shalqam is to meet with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. Their sit-down at the State Department will come nearly seven months after President Bush declared himself a "dissident president" and promised active support for dissidents around the world. "I asked Secretary Rice," Bush said during a speech in Prague, "to send a directive to every U.S. ambassador in an un-free nation: Seek out and meet with activists for democracy. Seek out those who demand human rights."
Nothing of the sort happened. In fact, in its embrace of Tripoli, the Foreign Service has built a wall of silence around human rights concerns...
My brother, Fathi Eljahmi, is Libya's most prominent democracy activist. Speaking at a conference in Tripoli in October 2002 that is usually a stage-managed affair, he surprised Libya's mercurial dictator, Moammar Gaddafi, by suggesting that legal guarantees of free speech and a constitution should accompany Gaddafi's rhetorical embrace of reform. State security agents took him directly to prison.
After nearly 17 months, Fathi won a respite, thanks to the intercession of Sen. Joseph Biden (D-Del.). And on March 12, 2004, President Bush cited Fathi's release as a barometer of change in Libya. "We stand with courageous reformers. Earlier today, the Libyan government released Fathi Eljahmi," Bush said. "It's an encouraging step toward reform in Libya. You probably have heard. Libya is beginning to change her attitude about a lot of things." Bush may have heard, but the Libyans had not. Two weeks later, Gaddafi rearrested Fathi. My brother has been in solitary confinement ever since.
Look to the whole article for more details and our government's reaction (or lack thereof). Just another example of how the current administration is failing to speak out again blatant human rights abuse in the world, to make a firm stance (and not just lipservice) against islamic fundamentalism, and in general to effect/demand real change.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
