In the latest Boundless podcast thread, commenter Elizabeth said the following:
But really, I would very much respect any man who is verbally open about his interests to a girl; especially if he is still seeking what God wants.
Stop right there, missy – we’ve got ourselves a classic case of projection! For any blog newbies, here’s why it’s projection: because Elizabeth is unknowingly referring only to men whom she finds attractive to begin with.
Imagine a scenario in which this guy
is “verbally open about his interest” to her and also happens to be verifiably seeking what God wants.
Is Elizabeth really going to “very much respect” this guy for his verbal openness? Or is she going to mumble an awkward “thanks” and then run to tell her friends about the creeper who hit on her?
Okay, that was kind of a cheap example. For a slightly more expensive example, let’s consider these peeps:
Of the men in this singles group, how greatly would she respect green shirt or either blue shirt if they came up to her and were very interested in her and were demonstrably “seeking what God wants”? (Now that I think about it, this photo could spawn its own post of game/SMV analysis. If I were feeling really ambitious, I could write a whole churchly soap opera off this picture.)
On the other hand, I’m pretty sure a guy like this could just twitch in Elizabeth’s direction and inspire respect:
Actually, he probably already has her respect. This is why when a girl says she wants X quality in a guy, she really means that she wants X quality in a guy who is already attractive to her.
Furthermore, we know this is true in Elizabeth’s case, because she also wrote in the same post:
I have personally been very hurt by a guy who completely led me on, and if he had simply said something verbally about his intentions it would have (I’m sure) saved me from a LOT of hurt.
The key point here is
THE REDUNDANCY, IT BURNSSS US, PRECIOUSSS that she was denied by someone she was already attracted to. Because, Let’s Be Real here: a lot of guys, no matter how much they’re seeking after what God wants, and no matter how “verbally open” they are with her, are even going to have the opportunity to lead her on. (Not that they would, even if they had the opportunity.)
If you don’t understand projection and can’t recognize it, a lot of dating advice is going to steer you wrong. Part of the reason I write about the things that I write about here is that so many people are hurt in the dating game not because of being led on, but because there is a general deficit of knowledge and understanding of the dynamics of the SMV,especially in the church. How many girls would be saved from “being led on” if they understood their true SMV? And knew that SMV and MMV are not completely synonymous? Likewise, how many more guys would find dating success (and be able to keep marriages together) if they understood the SMV and female sexual imperatives? Moreover, how many people would be more emotionally well-off if they understood that being a Christian has NO SMV VALUE in and of itself. Like other characteristics, being a Christian only has SMV value if other, more primal criteria are satisfied. But we’re stuck with so much Christian dating advice that encourages people to work on their character and their relationship with God, as if that’s just as good on a fundamental level as going to the gym or learning charm.
By the way, men project, too. Most men, when talking about characteristics they’d like in a woman, mean “in an attractive woman.” Kind of like when male celebrities say that they don’t value looks in a woman that much, what they really mean is that they don’t care so much if a woman is an 8.5 or a 9 if she’s got other good qualities. So when, say, Justin Bieber says that he doesn’t care about looks so much as a girl’s heart (theoretically – I don’t know if he has ever said this), he means the heart of a girl who is an 8+; whether she is an 8 or 9 is immaterial. Sorry, Belieber 4s.