Friday, January 16, 2009

An apt analogy.

Each year 40,000 new cinema scripts get registered into the writers guild databanks. 80,000 scrips are penned each year according to some reports. Studios usually do not take unsolicited submissions, unless they have been vetted carefully by an agent, even then, they take thousands of scripts, go through a careful screening process, and make maybe 20 of those into actual films.

How many movies that get made absolutely SUCK? Most of them. So after all that rejecting of submissions, all that careful attention to choosing the best projects, most movies SUCK. and are LOSSES.

See the parallel here?

Women reject 1000's of guys, carefully screen based on all kinds of nonsense. Yet, most of them complain about the relationships they are in. Whats the problem here?

Ladies, care to explain?

6 comments:

Anonymous said...

It's cultural.

In cultures where marriages are arranged and marriage means for life, the spouses still complain about each other but there is not question of leaving because society does not allow you to abscond from your "duty".

In dating cultures that emphasize romantic love and sexual chemistry, one knows that they can get out of relationships and move onto other ones with relative ease.

Therefore we are used to having many choices, not only in relationships but in everything from sliced bread to shampoo.

That creates a syndrome of never being satisfied and thinking there's always a better product out there somewhere.

The answer lies within.

THE_HMF said...

"about each other but there is not question of leaving because society does not allow you to abscond from your "duty"."

thats a tangential topic. if someone believes in "duty" to persist a bad realtionship, fuck up their kids, and have them repeat the process, then they are complete idiots themselves. but hats a different topic.

However, Im referring to women who think they are being so smart, and so selective with who they choose, yet if they just choose random guys it would be just as "successful"

Pizaaz

Anonymous said...

Women and men both chose people who light their fire. There has to be initial sparks, initial attraction. After some time those sparks may fade but they are what got the two together in the first place. Just choosing some random dude whom one does not find appealing and one does not know anything about would be rather odd.

THE_HMF said...

but it would be about as successful. my point is, all the vetting (leaving initial sparks aside), all the screening, all the game playing, all the he did this, she did that, bla bla bla amounts to not much, because most are doomed to failure anyway.

Anonymous said...

Relationships are a waste of time unless one wants to have and raise children and then only are they required.

THE_HMF said...

Intersting point, but 9 women out of 8 will say THATs what they are looking for, a successful long term relationship.

My point is, there's surely a draw back to having such a haughty opinion about the manner in which one "decides" on being with a certain person (and even saying they are the person with the last say in the matter - as most women believe they are) when in truth, their "vetting process" is about as succesful as throwing darts at the phone book (or would yield the same success rate)

Now if you're saying (and you're certain hinting at it) that their primary goal isn't to have long term relationships, rather to just have lots of casual encounters, then yes throwing darts at the phonebook isn't as successful.

However, thats contradictory to, for example whats being said on the very next thread, with HMFfemale saying she holds 'personality' as the best indicator of a match -and has even said no sexual activity would take place unless an LTR was already established.