dragonladyflame: final Berlin entry coming soon

Shataina (

dragonladyflame) wrote,
@ 2008-03-13 12:50:00

final Berlin entry coming soon
But for now, a Sudden Poll!

1) Have you ever heard of The Rules?
2) Do you think you could have summed it up before you clicked on the Wikipedia link?
3) QC: What is your age/sex/nationality?

(Post a new comment)

	jadasc 2008-03-13 05:11 pm UTC (link)
	Yes. Probably. 33/M/USA. (Reply to this)

	arisrabkin 2008-03-13 05:21 pm UTC (link)
	I'd heard of it, probably couldn't have described it at all accurately. 23/male/American [Upstate NY and now California] (Reply to this)

	potatocubed 2008-03-13 06:33 pm UTC (link)
	Yes, yes (although my knowledge of details is iffy and my loathing is strong), 28/M/British. (Reply to this)(Thread)

	dragonladyflame 2008-03-14 03:07 am UTC (link)
	Wow, are you 28 already? ;) I share your loathing. (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	potatocubed 2008-03-14 09:08 am UTC (link)
	Yes, I am old and decrepit. The Rules are a Bad Idea of the worst kind and promote only misery. Their success and popularity is yet another sign that there is something very wrong with the human race. (Reply to this)(Parent)

dmoonfire
2008-03-13 06:38 pm UTC (link)

Not as terrible as the Surrendered Wife, but yeah, I knew about most of them. Mostly, I felt it was a rather passive aggressive method of trying to be attractive without looking like it, but most women that I've encountered that even make a passing attempt at it ended up being strangled by their own rules, wondering what in the world went wrong when they followed it so well. I think they try too hard.

But, nothing compared to my mockery of the surrendered wife.

32/M/USA, thought that really looks like an a/s/l. :P

(Reply to this)(Thread)

	dragonladyflame 2008-03-14 03:06 am UTC (link)
	The Surrendered Wife? (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

dmoonfire
2008-03-14 04:41 am UTC (link)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surrendered_Wife

Basically, to make a properly happy marriage, the surrendered wife basically leaves all decisions to her husband. Because, if he is in charge, then he will find the urge to get up and fix the house or take the car out to the mechanics. From what I've heard, basically she does whatever he asks, whenever he asks. That includes sex. And then thank him for all the hard work he does.

It goes to basically encourage a extremely passive aggressive manner of manipulating your husband while pretending to be completely obedient. The completely obedient is the key part. From that excerpt I've heard, a woman can only truly be happy if she is obeying every whim of her husband. And by showing how surrendered she is, he will naturally be encouraged to do more for her.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

burtlo
2008-03-13 06:38 pm UTC (link)

I had never formally heard of these steps. I believe I could have summed it up before reviewing the link. These steps serve to help a woman assert a sense of quality. Curbing the desire to appear over eager in situations. I think it's valid but it sounds rather stoic, though I've not read the book, and ultimately would rely on fair looks or an over eager, but patient male.

I think more success could be gained if this behavior is tempered with momentary fits of passion. I finished Art of Seduction which defines this behavior as the "coquette." Using a system very similar to hard-to-get or hot/cold where you are luring the person in, giving them a taste, and then cutting them off. Driving up their desire for you. All, very valid strategies in the right context.

But there are other strategies that work differently on different people and work better for different styles of people. I think it's more about playing your target.

30/M/American

(Reply to this)(Thread)

	dragonladyflame 2008-03-14 03:06 am UTC (link)
	I agree that The Rules are definitely a good strategy ... if you want someone to be attracted and maybe even fascinated, but not supportive or understanding or to know you very well. :P I definitely don't support The Rules ... I referenced them and the person I was speaking to was confused, so I decided to test my perception -- that they are a well-known cultural icon. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	heliograph 2008-03-13 08:00 pm UTC (link)
	1) Not the book. But the code? Oh yes. 2) Yes, and much more. There's a whole feigned helplessness and passive-aggressive component they left out. 3) 41/M/USA! USA! This was the majority default behavior for female teens in Louisiana in the 1980s. There were exceptions, thankfully, but they were pretty rare. (Reply to this)

	morpheusak 2008-03-13 08:19 pm UTC (link)
	yes.no.23/m/usa (Reply to this)

	miketodd13 2008-03-13 08:31 pm UTC (link)
	1. No. 2. Yes, but only because it's in your journal and that gives me some inferred knowledge as to what it might contain. :) 3. 27/M/USA (Reply to this)

basseykay
2008-03-13 11:15 pm UTC (link)

1. Never heard of it.
2. Certainly couldn't sum it up since I didn't know it existed, but I was aware that some women held this attitude, which, by the way, is one I despise. Still, I'll admit that my despisal of it doesn't mean that it isn't effective in a certain sense, in that someone who displays such behavior can be pretty sure that anyone who will put up with em must like em a lot. (But then you could also use this argument to advocate physical abuse and all sorts of other unpleasant things, so I don't take it very seriously.)
3. 26 / male / United States.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

	dragonladyflame 2008-03-14 03:03 am UTC (link)
	I mean, playing hard to get and mysterious -- yet complimentary -- is pretty much always "effective". It's just a question of what results you want, really. :P (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	basseykay 2008-03-14 02:26 pm UTC (link)
	I think playing hard to get has a pretty good chance of making someone just loose interest. I rarely sustain any romantic interest in someone who doesn't seem to show a similar interest in me (though, interestingly enough I recently experienced just that), and, frankly, when I do I feel guilty about it. Who wants to be the source of unwelcome advances? (Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

	dragonladyflame 2008-03-14 04:39 pm UTC (link)
	That's where the "yet complimentary" thing comes in. :grin: It's all about giving the impression of interest and care, but not being available very often. Not that I do this, at least not on purpose, but I've watched it played with skill. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	hydrobromic 2008-03-14 12:01 am UTC (link)
	(1) no (2) n/a (3) 21/F/USA Creepy! I would never have guessed these rules were written in '95. Nor would I have expected the bit about "don't talk about this to your friends, family, or therapist" (Reply to this)(Thread)

	dragonladyflame 2008-03-14 03:02 am UTC (link)
	Well, the last bit is a clever way of isolating the patient from someone who might try to talk them out of using The Rules :P I had thought they were originally written longer ago and then updated, but I guess I was wrong. (Reply to this)(Parent)

	fleurs_du_mal 2008-03-14 03:33 pm UTC (link)
	Oh my god...those sound horrible. I'm sorry but "don't discuss the rules with your therapist" sounds awfully fishy...and constantly playing hard to get even when you're engaged/married is psycho and would definitely prevent any kind of real intimacy from ever developing. Yuck. What are these, rules for how to be a huge bitch or something? 1) no 2) I guess 3) 24/F/USA (Reply to this)

	agnoster 2008-03-14 04:02 pm UTC (link)
	1) No 2) No, but "The follow up book The Rules for Marriage: Time-Tested Secrets for Making Your Marriage Work was published around the time Ellen Fein's marriage broke up." FTW 3) 24/M/USA I think you put it best - these rules may work for a given goal, but certainly not for the goal of building any relationship I or most people I know would want any part in. (Reply to this)

nathan_adler
2008-03-14 09:01 pm UTC (link)

1.) Nope.
2.) I... I just don't know what to say. Probably not. This sounds like more what you do if you're dating say, millionare investors and want to observe etiquette; not anything resembling the kind of relationship anyone who wants to buy this book will have.
3.) 22, male, United States.

I think to expand on Yitz's point, these rules may get you a socially-acceptable husband, but that husband will have an equally respectable mistress. I can't imagine these rules resulting in an equal relationship.

On another note, I recall a group of three male stockbrokers that published a dating guide for women that basically stated to behave the exact opposite in their pursuit of a man. I wish I remembered the name, or else I'd share it.

(Reply to this)

Username:		Create an Account Forgot your login? Login w/ OpenID
Password:
	Remember Me
	English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…