It’s quite funny when one hears the saying, “Men are from Mars, women are from Venus”.
Mars: Roman God of war; warlike spirit, fighting, battle, army, force of arms.
Venus: Roman Goddess of sexual love and generation (Aphrodite); charm/beauty.
I disagree with the connotations of saying that women are from Venus. Well, men, I can’t say, so I’ll let you defend yourselves. :)
Men and women are on two completely different spheres. Just to pick on one example, many of my friends (who are female and especially those who are Christian) believe that one should date with marriage in mind. I agree full-heartedly, simply because dating without any long term purposes cheapens the experience, and well, you’d end up with broken hearts trailing behind you. Note, I never said that a proposal to date would be a marriage proposal. Go in knowing that this should work with eventual matrimony, if it is God’s will, and also that it might not work out. From what I’ve seen, many guys aren’t very ready for that kind of committment, hence arguing that one should “date for the sake of dating”. Correct me if I’m wrong. To an extent, I see that the committment is very daunting, especially if it means that you’ll be tied down to that one person, especially at such a tender age. Perhaps that’s why we teenagers are advised not to start dating till we can be sure that we are willing to date with a long-term goal in mind. Perhaps it’s us, females being romantic and impractical, but is it necessarily wrong?
I can’t write much more simply because that’s all there is to say. Not quite apt or appropriate but:
Amor volat undique
captus est libidine.
Iuvenes, iuvencule
coniunguntur merito.
Siqua sine socio,
caret omni gaudio;
tenet noctis infima
sub intimo
cordis in custodia:
fit res amarissima.
7 comments
Comments feed for this article
November 27, 2006 at 7:40 am
Aug
haha actually i feel that there’s no distinction to make. the assertion is as good as saying that there are substantially more female christians than male christians. *shrug*
November 27, 2006 at 9:42 am
becktan
I didn’t mean it that way, so my apologies.
November 27, 2006 at 9:57 am
sinisterdexterity
It’s that peculiar neo-Christian non-Platonic idea of ‘a date’.
In the past, a date was something you highlighted in your diary so that you would remember to meet someone somewhere sometime.
Then all this ‘Christian dating’ stuff came into vogue. Well, I guess I’d have to define ‘Christian date’ as ‘a pre-nuptial lack of agreement’ then. I think it’s silly.
And if your name happens to mean ‘in the service of Mars’, that’s… ironic. Haha.
November 27, 2006 at 10:15 am
becktan
Why is it silly?
Oh yes, the defender of man…
November 27, 2006 at 7:58 pm
sinisterdexterity
It’s silly because the entire Bible either uses the ‘arranged-marriage’ paradigm or ignores the idea of dating altogether. So why is there this concept of ‘Christian date’? The best thing then would be to submit to the head of your household and let him choose a life partner for you after praying about it.
November 27, 2006 at 8:10 pm
becktan
is that supposed to only be applicable to girls? If not then did you do that? Hehe.
November 30, 2006 at 11:39 pm
xin
more like –
Eh? The head of your household is a man?
If so, well.
You’re quite screwed (to put it rather undelicately).
Because, as Becca says, the men just don’t get it.
Nothing personal, you understand. It’s just that all men are born that way. That’s why women are version 2.0. XX system, because XY didn’t live up to expectation. It needed a system with more RAM and also more powerful processors.
That’s why women are more compact (smaller hard drive), but more powerful at linking and multi-tasking.