The Mysterious Distance ...
After a lot of conversations about this in the past week and I guess over the last month, I finally came across what seems to be a sound theory about the mysteries of male and female relationships over a basket of greasy french fries and onion rings at Cheeburger Cheeburger on Friday night.
The theory goes like this:
Girls don't understand guys because they can't believe it could ever be that simple;
and guys don't get girls because they don't think it could ever be that complicated.
The incredulity of the simplicity or complexity of the opposite sex is the main reason for the misunderstandings.
A good friend came up with the first part of that theory, and I just extrapolated the second part. To a certain extent of course, it's an overly simplified (male) theory. I know that as a woman I see a certain stigma created by men surrounding the complicated nature of women. I suspect that the media has heavily added to the stereotypes that say it's necessarily impossible for a man to understand a woman and vice versa. I have to agree with that a little bit. My brother quotes a guy he heard in an acting class one time, the writer for "Home Improvement", which is probably one of the best examples of successful gender stereotypes on television. The gentleman said "the premise for the show was this, and only this: women and men theoretically should not be able to get along together in relationships... but they do. Why is that?" and that simple question provided many seasons of material.
Men and women were created as companions for one another but there is complexity on both sides. When I brought up in discussion the theory and followed it with the question: "Does that mean that all a guy needs to be happy is food, sleep and sex?" The guys chuckled softly and thoughtfully and said "that sounds pretty awesome". Naturally, I was crushed. It couldn't be true. It couldn't be that any human being, such complex creations, could not want anything more than the basic functions of life. Then I thought of the theory... perhaps it's just not possible for me to believe that. The guys were probably subscribing to what is the cliché male response for laughs but when they thought about it, a life that simple seemed kinda nice. I don't think any of them really believe it could be that simple, but is that due in small part to one prong of the triangle of existence (food, sleep and sex) involving females?
I've been trying to conclude this discussion with myself for about a week now, and I keep coming up with different ideas and areas that should be explored in order to present a balanced argument and a full perspective on the theory. It's basically a master's thesis waiting to happen. The only thing I guess I can add is that sometimes that mystery of not understanding, that reason we just don't get something about another person can be captivating. Perplexing in a way that makes us want to know more. Sometimes it's the complete opposite effect. The differences between the female and male characters are just incredible and a reason to glory in creation, as far as I'm concerned. That people do find a way to fit with someone else who is so different and so incomprehensible is amazing and an adventure. But the subject with which one undergoes this study must be chosen carefully, of course.
It's true. Women are not simple. But personally, I don't think any human is. We're complex creatures with capacities above those as animals for a reason. Men are complex too, maybe they are just less obvious about it. In any case, I always look forward to the mystery that is human interaction, regardless of gender.
Some great lyrics in the song from which the title was gleaned:
I could never take a chance
Of losing love to find romance
In the mysterious distance
Between a man and a woman
No I could never take a chance
‘Cos I could never understand
The mysterious distance
Between a man and a woman
You can run from love
And if it’s really love it will find you
Catch you by the heel
But you can’t be numb for love
The only pain is to feel nothing at all
Bono is always so clutch. Totally lovin' the World Cup promos.
The theory goes like this:
Girls don't understand guys because they can't believe it could ever be that simple;
and guys don't get girls because they don't think it could ever be that complicated.
The incredulity of the simplicity or complexity of the opposite sex is the main reason for the misunderstandings.
A good friend came up with the first part of that theory, and I just extrapolated the second part. To a certain extent of course, it's an overly simplified (male) theory. I know that as a woman I see a certain stigma created by men surrounding the complicated nature of women. I suspect that the media has heavily added to the stereotypes that say it's necessarily impossible for a man to understand a woman and vice versa. I have to agree with that a little bit. My brother quotes a guy he heard in an acting class one time, the writer for "Home Improvement", which is probably one of the best examples of successful gender stereotypes on television. The gentleman said "the premise for the show was this, and only this: women and men theoretically should not be able to get along together in relationships... but they do. Why is that?" and that simple question provided many seasons of material.
Men and women were created as companions for one another but there is complexity on both sides. When I brought up in discussion the theory and followed it with the question: "Does that mean that all a guy needs to be happy is food, sleep and sex?" The guys chuckled softly and thoughtfully and said "that sounds pretty awesome". Naturally, I was crushed. It couldn't be true. It couldn't be that any human being, such complex creations, could not want anything more than the basic functions of life. Then I thought of the theory... perhaps it's just not possible for me to believe that. The guys were probably subscribing to what is the cliché male response for laughs but when they thought about it, a life that simple seemed kinda nice. I don't think any of them really believe it could be that simple, but is that due in small part to one prong of the triangle of existence (food, sleep and sex) involving females?
I've been trying to conclude this discussion with myself for about a week now, and I keep coming up with different ideas and areas that should be explored in order to present a balanced argument and a full perspective on the theory. It's basically a master's thesis waiting to happen. The only thing I guess I can add is that sometimes that mystery of not understanding, that reason we just don't get something about another person can be captivating. Perplexing in a way that makes us want to know more. Sometimes it's the complete opposite effect. The differences between the female and male characters are just incredible and a reason to glory in creation, as far as I'm concerned. That people do find a way to fit with someone else who is so different and so incomprehensible is amazing and an adventure. But the subject with which one undergoes this study must be chosen carefully, of course.
It's true. Women are not simple. But personally, I don't think any human is. We're complex creatures with capacities above those as animals for a reason. Men are complex too, maybe they are just less obvious about it. In any case, I always look forward to the mystery that is human interaction, regardless of gender.
Some great lyrics in the song from which the title was gleaned:
I could never take a chance
Of losing love to find romance
In the mysterious distance
Between a man and a woman
No I could never take a chance
‘Cos I could never understand
The mysterious distance
Between a man and a woman
You can run from love
And if it’s really love it will find you
Catch you by the heel
But you can’t be numb for love
The only pain is to feel nothing at all
Bono is always so clutch. Totally lovin' the World Cup promos.
Comments