PoemoftheWeek

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MelanieD

And what's wrong with that? Women's lust passes over feelings like love, which is always ambiguous, as mostly you can't distinguish one from the other. And to wallow according to the American Heritage Dic is: to roll the body about indolently, to luxuriate, to revel.
I'll tell you something. I'm not a good talker (please: no fishing) and I haven't ever LEARNED anything about poetry, I read poems intuitively. I do have lots of volumes bought at random but seldom READ poetry with attention. So, being here, reading what you have to say makes me happy, I feel like coming nearer the heart of the matter (of living?) I LEARN and therefore I wanted to thank you all.

---

Thanks are to you for bringing it, Melanie! Btw, I am not learned in it either, just like to wallow in it, lustfully. Not sure about the context of 'wallow' here.

Here are a few:
a. A pool of water or mud where animals go to wallow. (n)
b. condition of degradation or baseness. (n)
c. To be plentifully supplied: wallowing in money. (v)

Interesting, you wrote, 'women's lust passes over feelings like love, which is always ambiguous'. I would like to assist by adding 'men' to that, to be on the safe side. We can certainly see her emotional condition.

Also btw, Melanie, I wanted to ask, how do you know its her talking for him about her? Did KAP write that later, or is this the generally accepted decision? I am only asking because I want to know if there is a definitive phrase, word, or other clue that makes this clear, and which it is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Virgil

One thing, I didn't pick up the rhyme, rod, trod, god. It makes the poem accelerate.

---

Yes, she gets progressively more 'angry' until she proclaims for him, 'I am God!' He is starting to look in a much better light now, eh.

Quote:

---

Another highlight of this poem to me was two interesting adjectives: "ambiguous lusts" and "wallow you." My first reaction was, what is so ambiguous about this lust? But it dawned on me that the ambiguity was on her part, not his. That's what led me to think that this was her imagining of his thoughts. She wasn't so naive; there was a part of her that was just as lustful.

---

"Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned."

Quote:

---

What an interesting euphemism for sexual intercourse with "wallow you." Replace the "wallow" with "f**k" (excuse me, but this poem brings out the devil in me) and the line works perfect: "That you're a dupe who let me BLANK you."

---

The devil is needed, not Mary Poppins. :banana:

I am digesting what Melanie wrote and some research I did on KAP. This piece appear a dialog an actor/actress might perform on stage, a screenplay- one person and a single chair (nothing else), talking for two people. I think there was a lot of heavy drama being written in the US during those years. (nope, I don't know why).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MelanieD

And what's wrong with that? Women's lust passes over feelings like love, which is always ambiguous, as mostly you can't distinguish one from the other.

---

I didn't say there was anything wrong with it, just that she wasn't as naive as he thinks. Women's lusts (I'm speculating here, and probably going to sound foolish) are more ambiguous than men, aren't they? We men just let our lusts hang out there. :D

Quote:

---

And to wallow according to the American Heritage Dic is: to roll the body about indolently, to luxuriate, to revel.

---

I didn't want to elaborate, but "to wallow" strikes me as so apt. It's usually associated with wallowing in wet things.

Quote:

---

I'll tell you something. I'm not a good talker (please: no fishing) and I haven't ever LEARNED anything about poetry, I read poems intuitively. I do have lots of volumes bought at random but seldom READ poetry with attention. So, being here, reading what you have to say makes me happy, I feel like coming nearer the heart of the matter (of living?) I LEARN and therefore I wanted to thank you all.

---

I hope you stay around and contribute to other poems we'll be discussing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jackyyyy

Yes, she gets progressively more 'angry' until she proclaims for him, 'I am God!' He is starting to look in a much better light now, eh.

---

That is a very good observation.

"Wallow"

I don't think 'wet' things at all, not in this context. You know, I really think you guys are thinking American, where is Unnamable to sort this out? :brow:

Is that American? I don't know. Here's the entire definition from American Heritage Dictionary:

wal·low (w¼l“½) intr.v. wal·lowed, wal·low·ing, wal·lows. 1. To roll the body about indolently or clumsily in or as if in water, snow, or mud. 2. To luxuriate; revel. 3. To be plentifully supplied. 4. To move with difficulty in a clumsy or rolling manner; flounder. 5. To swell or surge forth; billow. --wal·low n. 1. The act or an instance of wallowing. 2.a. A pool of water or mud where animals go to wallow. b. The depression, pool, or pit produced by wallowing animals. 3. A condition of degradation or baseness. --wal“low·er n.

I don't have Oxford electronically. I wonder how that would compare.

My favourite is a combination of 'devote oneself entirely..' and 'delight greatly in'.

The noun wallow has 2 meanings:
Meaning #1: a puddle where animals go to wallow
Meaning #2: an indolent or clumsy rolling about

The verb wallow has 5 meanings:
Meaning #1: devote oneself entirely to something; indulge in to an immoderate degree, usually with pleasure
Meaning #2: roll around, as of a pig in mud
Synonym: welter
Meaning #3: billow forth; as of smoke or waves
Synonym: billow
Meaning #4: be ecstatic with joy
Synonyms: revel, rejoice, triumph
Meaning #5: delight greatly in


http://www.answers.com/topic/wallow

My Shorter Oxford gives similar details but in more detail - there is a distinct meaning of 'Remain plunged, take delight or indulge unrestrainedly in vice, sensuality, pleasure, misery, etc; revel in.', which sort of fits, except that he doesn't wallow in her, he wallows her. Still it wouldn't be the first instance of a poet using a word slightly out of context to drag in its associations.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Virgil

I didn't say there was anything wrong with it, just that she wasn't as naive as he thinks. Women's lusts (I'm speculating here, and probably going to sound foolish) are more ambiguous than men, aren't they? We men just let our lusts hang out there. :D

---

Hi Virgil, maybe I heard something that wasn't there. It is just that the word love and lust are overburdened by different meanings which are kicked from one camp to the other like a football. As I see it, nature did endow men and women differently (genetically mixing it up like in a cocktail shaker, so everyone is different), but as far as I know women's love is more ambiguous than men's. You're sprung by it, if this is correct English. No hard feelings, anyhow I'm not a feminist. I fought men straight on (when necessary), maybe like KAP.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MelanieD

but as far as I know women's love is more ambiguous than men's. You're sprung by it.

---

Can I assume by this you mean that women are not sprung by "it"? And is "it" love?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MelanieD

genetically mixing it up like in a cocktail shaker, so everyone is different.

---

Actually I think genetics is a very accurate science, where only the smallest difference can cause dramatic changes. And most of the DNA of people are identical; everyone is different due to very small differences in their DNA (not to mention all the angry sociologists listening to this from heaven :)).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Regit

And most of the DNA of people are identical; everyone is different due to very small differences in their DNA (not to mention all the angry sociologists listening to this from heaven :)).

---

Aye, and don't forget to include the social engineering you elaborated on extensively, else you could be talking in her voice about him who is actually a female but acting at playing a man with a woman's perspective. :lol:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jackyyyy

Interesting, you wrote, 'women's lust passes over feelings like love, which is always ambiguous'. I would like to assist by adding 'men' to that, to be on the safe side. We can certainly see her emotional condition.

---

It is my tendency to pass general statements. I better not say anything.
But I thought of Richard Ford in 'Independence Day', at the end of the book where he talks to Sally, and I found a good quote:
"I finished our talk by telling her not that I loved her but that I wasn't beyond affection, which she said she was glad to hear.
Let's be honest, each encounter is a blind grip for a dream. Let's be content, that men are not beyond affection.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jackyyyy

Also btw, Melanie, I wanted to ask, how do you know its her talking for him about her? Did KAP write that later, or is this the generally accepted decision? I am only asking because I want to know if there is a definitive phrase, word, or other clue that makes this clear, and which it is.

---

No, I don't know. There seems to be no general accepted opinion about KAP. The book by Darlene Harbour Unrue says:
"In the meantime, in the autumn of 1928, Porter met Metthew Josephson and began another sur-to-fail love affair that would bring forth more poetry....
"Morning song", written at the end of the affair, reveals Porter's usual reaction to the disillusionment that attends the failure of romantic love. What is unusual in this poem is that the persona is the jilting lover. Instead of bringing forth the personally experienced pain of being betrayed, Porter had to imagine the callous arrogance of the faithless lover. For the effect of irony, she reverted to a conventional Cavalier beginning suggestive of Marlowe of Herrick, which in this instance quickly turns to a contrasting bitternes."
The rest is up to us, I guess.
I for my part stick to the version of self-punishment for this poem. Imagine her imagining (maybe wrongly, but it doesn't matter) the crudeness of this guy. Isn't she kind of exorcising not the man but the feeling that is inside her that makes her always strain to seek the wrong men? Open-heart surgery? And how about the clay-feet. Virgil should know where this comes from, Dante or Homer? Clay feet equal dust, the transient. He says he stands on clay feet and they trod on her who's dirt. So she knows he knows all is transient, but there was just one moment (triumph of man, but also of woman in a different sense, women can bring men down!), one moment where he felt eternal. I'm reading the Shakespeare sonnets, so what is he talking about in the first ones? Please my love, procreate, so you continue being. The prayer of man. Useless for most women, at the time of KAP you had no choice, but she couldn't have children. Another hurt she inflicts on herself? So maybe she incorporates the poem as both, man and (barren) woman? To whom nothing is left but lust?

Wow, I've been missing a lot of good discussion and no time to make a proper response just now, but this caught my eye:

Quote:

---

Like the Larkin poem, this is an aubade, a greeting of the morning between lovers. There are allusions in it of renaissance poems, refering to the woman as his star (doesn't Dante do this with his Beatrice?) and the line "in that moment when I brought you down". This is a metaphor comparing the seduction to a hunt, very prevalent in Renaissance poetry. I'm always reminded of Sir Thomas Wyatt's "They flee from me that sometime did me seek" when I think of this metaphor; just google that first line and it'll come up. It's a pretty poem where he puns hart (deer) with heart.

---

Virgil is quite right to bring up the allusions to Renaissance poetry (I like the Wyatt connection--his "Whoso List to Hunt" also comes to mind), but I can't believe that we're going straight to Dante and Beatrice without anybody first mentioning the "Twinkle, Twinkle Little Star" allusion. :D Maybe it's just too obvious. It's so appropriately and ironically employed. Now he is no longer gazing up at some unattainable and mysterious "star" and wondering what she is, but has brought her to earth and thinks he knows exactly what she is (i.e. what kind of woman she is). I found a copy of this poem that doesn't have a question mark after the "I/ know what you are." I wonder how that choice of punctuation was made. It certainly makes a more forceful statement without the question mark.

Quote:

---

So, being here, reading what you have to say makes me happy, I feel like coming nearer the heart of the matter (of living?) I LEARN and therefore I wanted to thank you all.

---

Well, we're really glad you've come to join us Melanie. I know I've been learning a lot myself from your posts in this discussion. :nod:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by “Regit”

But I suppose a heated discussion about feminism can be interesting, that is under the assumption that someone would be brave enough to take the side of the masculine message suggested here. Because, as Grumbleguts rightly said, men are not like that!

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by “Petrarch's Love”

As a poem, it is describing a certain type of individual that does in fact exist. There are men with this kind of attitude.

---

I’ve mentioned this before but there is a male teacher I know out here who is very similar to the male in the poem. He boasts openly (but only to other men) that he sleeps with a different woman at least twice a week and adds that none of them has a waist larger than 24 inches (we are all supposed to admire this). He is, quite simply, a pig - so ‘wallow’ is perfect in his case. The only thing I cannot understand is why women are stupid enough to fall for his charms. I have therefore come to the conclusion that the male speaker in the poem is right – his victims deserve their fates. Of course men lie to get women into bed and the task is made easier by the fact that women have placed such a ridiculous importance on love. We know what you want to hear so you’ll hear it.

"I don't want love. I haven't time for it. It's weakness. I am a man, and sometimes I want a woman. When I've satisfied my passion I'm ready for other things. I can't overcome my desire, but I hate it; it imprisons my spirit; I look forward to the time when I shall be free from all desire and can give myself without hindrance to my work. Because women can do nothing except love, they've given it a ridiculous importance. They want to persuade us that it's the whole of life. It's an insignificant part. I know lust. That's normal and healthy. Love is a disease. Women are the instruments of my pleasure; I have no patience with their claim to be helpmates, partners, companions."
W. Somerset Maugham

“‘Gentlemen, woman is an animal that micturates once a day, defecates once a week, menstruates once a month, partuates once a year and copulates whenever she has the opportunity.’”
W. Somerset Maugham

“Love is the delusion that one woman differs from another.”
HL Mencken

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by “Petrarch's Love”

Virgil is quite right to bring up the allusions to Renaissance poetry (I like the Wyatt connection--his "Whoso List to Hunt" also comes to mind), but I can't believe that we're going straight to Dante and Beatrice without anybody first mentioning the "Twinkle, Twinkle Little Star" allusion. Maybe it's just too obvious. It's so appropriately and ironically employed. Now he is no longer gazing up at some unattainable and mysterious "star" and wondering what she is, but has brought her to earth and thinks he knows exactly what she is (i.e. what kind of woman she is).

---

“Hope not for mind in women; at their best
Sweetness and wit, they are but mummy, possess'd.”
John Donne Love's Alchemy

For ‘possess’d’ read ‘wallowed’.

well this poem makes me sad. Is it forever to be that man and woman cannot be like children and just open up to one another and not have a double agenda. Must the very act of sexual contact make man or woman a liar, a fake, a manipulator to receive a temporary orgasm that is forgotten ten seconds later while the wound they inflict upon the other-even if the other does not know it but somehow feels diminished-is to last forever.
It almost makes me think-why bother.why bother if you acted in honesty and kindness and the other acted as if you were a notch on the wall, an obscene joke.
oh well......

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Unnamable

The only thing I cannot understand is why women are stupid enough to fall for his charms. I have therefore come to the conclusion that the male speaker in the poem is right – his victims deserve their fates... We know what you want to hear so you’ll hear it.

---

You make a good point. A wise man once said: "Only in the absence of charm can a woman be trusted." (Yes, I know, "wise" is totally in my opinion). As much as I would like to be on Rachel's side, I have seen how easily good looks and charm can win some girl's affection. The guy in the poem never said that he loved the girl. He called her his "Star", and, as he expected, she thought that it meant love. This does not necessarily mean that charm is a bad thing. It can be a great thing. Many genuinely nice guys are also charming and also with an agenda; but once he wins a girl's affection, he becomes dedicated and caring and other nice things (or at least he will try his best to be). I guess, as Unnamable said, "we know what you want to hear so you'll hear it." And, beast or man, what becomes of the guy after the "wallowing" is merely a chance that the girl was prepared to take, having easily interpreted charm for love and having consented to sex. Afterall, she could have said no.

And as Unnamable thinks his teacher friend a pig, so do I the guys who trick girls into bed. But the girls who get tricked must be partly at fault, for how bad at judging a character must someone be to mistake a guy like the one in the poem for a caring and loving man?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Unnamable

"I look forward to the time when I shall be free from all desire and can give myself without hindrance to my work. Because women can do nothing except love, they've given it a ridiculous importance. They want to persuade us that it's the whole of life."

---

This is something that I sometimes want to scream out loud. Because the thing with work is, if we don't put it on top of our list, it will never get done properly.

PS. Quoting my "brave" comment, you must be one who loves a challenge Unnamable :)

It is by no means just women that fall for 'charm'. I found this particularly interesting - it appears to be true that when a man's blood rushes elsewhere, his brain is left deprived. ;)

Link

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Virgil

But ktd, the "he" is not the "I". The "I" is the woman, who orients us with "He speaks".

---

I can totally get behind this idea, except that I don't think its out of the realm of possibility for a man to act in this manner.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Virgil

Yes, I count nine "I's" and nine "you's" and that's a huge amount for such a short poem. In fact so much of the poem is framed "I am," and "you are."

---

Ya, whats interesting is that even though there are nine "I's" and nine"you's," the sound created by the 'I' is more pronounced than the 'you'. Isn't this something poetic thats happening in this poem?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Unnamable

Of course men lie to get women into bed and the task is made easier by the fact that women have placed such a ridiculous importance on love. We know what you want to hear so you’ll hear it.

---

Well, let me ask you this. On what basis would you prefer relationships to be formed? I can only think of three general types: on love, on financial/status (and I don't necessarily mean prostitution), and lust. Perhaps there are others. Real relationships may share some element of each, but the only one that I meaningful is love.

Quote:

---

women have placed such a ridiculous importance on love.

---

Frankly that's what I find most endearing about women. From a mother's love, to a grandmother's love, to a wife's love, they hold our families and I our lives together. God knows what this world would be like if only men existed or if women acted and felt just like men.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ktd222

I can totally get behind this idea, except that I don't think its out of the realm of possibility for a man to act in this manner.

---

Oh yes. Of course. But my point was that it was very unlikely that he would speak these thought, even if true, to her.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ktd222

Ya, whats interesting is that even though there are nine "I's" and nine"you's," the sound created by the 'I' is more pronounced than the 'you'. Isn't this something poetic thats happening in this poem?

---

They seem equally prominant to me. Perhaps "I" might be a shade more prominant.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Virgil

They seem equally prominant to me. Perhaps "I" might be a shade more prominant.

---

The 'I' is whats being stressed in this poem. I can't believe you can't hear this.

I was wondering how long it would take before Unnamable came along with a reality check and a quote from Donne (who was obviously just reiterating this "feminist cliche" about men ;) ).

Quote:

---

He boasts openly (but only to other men) that he sleeps with a different woman at least twice a week and adds that none of them has a waist larger than 24 inches (we are all supposed to admire this)

---

What a nauseating individual--not to mention a deadly dull conversationalist. If only all like minded men had such requirements. It would save those of us with a larger than 24" waist the bother of having to tell them to get lost. :lol:

Quote:

---

well this poem makes me sad. Is it forever to be that man and woman cannot be like children and just open up to one another and not have a double agenda. Must the very act of sexual contact make man or woman a liar, a fake, a manipulator to receive a temporary orgasm that is forgotten ten seconds later while the wound they inflict upon the other-even if the other does not know it but somehow feels diminished-is to last forever.
It almost makes me think-why bother.why bother if you acted in honesty and kindness and the other acted as if you were a notch on the wall, an obscene joke.

---

Don't give up Rachel. Remember there are good people out there, both men and women, and good relationships are possible, just hard to come by sometimes. :nod:

I certainly won't, I was just expressing what I have heard so many say. I do understand that it is a great risk and takes courage to just be honest about who you are and what you want from someone. Why men or women think they have to lie and tell the other person what he or she wants to hear just to get either sexual thrills or money or security is something I cannot, maybe never will comprehend. Just speak the truth and if the other person doesn't like that or want that well then move on.
And the way they hate each other afterwards, at least some of my friends, well I am glad that I have chosen to be alone for these years and take my time.I could care less if I am made fun of, I have my dignity and my integrity-and besides there are too many men and women showing up at my house with tears flowing down their poor faces from having been used. It keeps me quite busy!
you are the best of friends dear Love and I know that whoever has the honor of taking your hand one day won't be anything like that.

Quote:

---

My Shorter Oxford gives similar details but in more detail - there is a distinct meaning of 'Remain plunged, take delight or indulge unrestrainedly in vice, sensuality, pleasure, misery, etc; revel in.', which sort of fits, except that he doesn't wallow in her, he wallows her. Still it wouldn't be the first instance of a poet using a word slightly out of context to drag in its associations.

---

My etymological instincts were awakened after reading the discussion about the definition of wallow above in the thread. I went to the online OED and found that there is indeed a definition of it being used as a transitive verb the way it is in the poem (and a lot of other interesting definitions I won't list here). To wallow somebody is to roll them around or to "cause them to lie prostrate in some liquid or sticky substance," also "to make dirty by wallowing." Most of the examples given are reflexive, as in "he wallowed himself in sin," though there are some like this in which one person wallows another. I think in this poem though, there's also the sense of the word being used as him "wallowing in" with the "in" missing just as Xamonas suggested. In any case I think I should send a friend of mine who does some work for the OED the line from this poem to include in the examples for the definition of this word. It would spice things up for bored dictionary readers. :brow:

Quote:

---

I certainly won't, I was just expressing what I have heard so many say. I do understand that it is a great risk and takes courage to just be honest about who you are and what you want from someone. Why men or women think they have to lie and tell the other person what he or she wants to hear just to get either sexual thrills or money or security is something I cannot, maybe never will comprehend. Just speak the truth and if the other person doesn't like that or want that well then move on.
And the way they hate each other afterwards, at least some of my friends, well I am glad that I have chosen to be alone for these years and take my time.I could care less if I am made fun of, I have my dignity and my integrity-and besides there are too many men and women showing up at my house with tears flowing down their poor faces from having been used. It keeps me quite busy!

---

Good for you Rachel. And I'm sure your heart-broken friends appreciate your sympathetic shoulder to cry on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Virgil

Well, let me ask you this. On what basis would you prefer relationships to be formed? I can only think of three general types: on love, on financial/status (and I don't necessarily mean prostitution), and lust. Perhaps there are others. Real relationships may share some element of each, but the only one that I meaningful is love.

---

“There is no more usual basis of matrimony than a mutual misunderstanding.” - Henry James

To be honest, perhaps it would be better if relationships were not formed at all. The way I see it, women are like potato chips – they come in all sorts of flavours and we all probably have a favourite. However, no one wants to eat ‘Cheese ‘n’ Onion’ time after time. It’s good to try a packet of ‘Salt ‘n’ Vinegar’ now and again, as well. I agree that some women might be more like a fine, three-course meal than a bag of what we Brits call ‘crisps’, but often I really don’t want a fine meal – I’d prefer to stuff my face with junk food. That’s why God created bimbos. They are the sexual equivalent of a ‘Big Mac’.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Virgil

Frankly that's what I find most endearing about women. From a mother's love, to a grandmother's love, to a wife's love, they hold our families and I our lives together. God knows what this world would be like if only men existed or if women acted and felt just like men.

---

How sweet! And not at all patronising to the gentler sex. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Unnamable

“Hope not for mind in women; at their best
Sweetness and wit, they are but mummy, possess'd.”
John Donne Love's Alchemy

For ‘possess’d’ read ‘wallowed’.

---

That is a lot more meat on the table than we had before.

Its goes against my instincts to jump into a debate about relationships rather than simply study the actual meat in the poem, the object. However, I now have an excuse like everyone else. If this poem was written three hundred years ago, would it fuel up the same thoughts, or close? Unnamable does not need to be polite about it, being blunt is needed while people have fogged up notions. There do exist plenty of walking around examples to show its true. Our own unedited social engineering today, still includes mothers telling their daughters its profitable to be a bimbo and fathers telling their sons its a strength to notch up bed posts. The problem is, children are taught one way to behave, then retaught another way... or left to educate themselves. I don't know which is worse, but education is a start, because with that, they 'might' develop a brain to discern a good act against a bad one, and if granddad and grandmom passed down some of their painful experience, just maybe that would help develop some strength of character to say 'no'. There is no clear definition of how to be, act and behave. And, we allow that, don't we.. promote the spirit of independence. So, we do it to ourselves, should slap our own faces, get used to it.

I want to add a comment about anger that I find applicable here. I believe there is an equivalent hate to love in the same person. A person's great love turns to that same person's great hate, with an equal force. I am not going to try and measure it, just say that it is the same brain loving that is hating. I guess with time, the brain would have changed itself, maybe mellowed in acceptance.

This is also one of the reasons why I refrain from pointing the finger soley at 'him', and agree with Melanie and others with regard to 'her' involvement. After digesting this idea that KAP was 'more' venemous in her portrayal of him to us because of her emotional condition, I still must conclude that it is 'him' talking. And, right or wrong, all reasons aside, that is how the author wanted 'him' portrayed to us. Therefore, he is being a pig, as presented, and in the lack of other information, and 'her' portrayal, which would only make him 'fair' or 'not fair'.

And, I need to be blunt here too. I know plenty of people that talk cr*p to each other.. and actually love each other like crazy, fall about themselves to sniff the air that person walked in. Love is a crazy notion, and the hate wallowed is equally crazy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Xamonas Chegwe

It is by no means just women that fall for 'charm'. I found this particularly interesting - it appears to be true that when a man's blood rushes elsewhere, his brain is left deprived. ;)

Link

---

Vampires do exist! Love bitten, smitten, and it's victim left pale.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Virgil

Well, let me ask you this. On what basis would you prefer relationships to be formed? I can only think of three general types: on love, on financial/status (and I don't necessarily mean prostitution), and lust. Perhaps there are others. Real relationships may share some element of each, but the only one that I meaningful is love.

---

Relationships are variable, therefore, a seven year contract, renewable. Throw an insurance policy in there for good measure, with no claims bonus. That should increase the number of insurance agents knocking on your door and reduce the number of divorce lawyers. Or, lawyers include insurance on the same paper. :brow:

Quote:

---

Frankly that's what I find most endearing about women. From a mother's love, to a grandmother's love, to a wife's love, they hold our families and I our lives together. God knows what this world would be like if only men existed or if women acted and felt just like men.

---

We need a woman here to say something good about men (to be on the safe side). :brow:

Rachel,

“Sex without love is an empty experience, but, as empty experiences go, it's one of the best.”

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by “Petrarch’s Love”

If only all like minded men had such requirements. It would save those of us with a larger than 24" waist the bother of having to tell them to get lost.

---

They don’t tell him to get lost – they compete for his attentions – arming themselves for combat with yet another caked layer of cosmetics and ever-tighter garments stretched over their carcases. What’s wrong with your sex? Why are they so foolish? Why is it that it takes only a few months for “You’ve got such beautiful eyes” to change to “What the **** are you staring at?” And why do I hear “I don’t ever won’t to change you,” changing to “you’ll never change”? Don’t any of you realise that there hasn’t been a new man since Adam?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by “Regit”

PS. Quoting my "brave" comment, you must be one who loves a challenge Unnamable.

---

I suppose I do – especially when it gives me an opportunity to spit venom at the idiocy that is womankind.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jackyyyy

We need a woman here to say something good about men (to be on the safe side). :brow:

---

Where are you going to find one? Dylan had it right:

“Idiot wind, blowing every time you move your mouth,
Blowing down the backroads headin' south.
Idiot wind, blowing every time you move your teeth,
You're an idiot, babe.
It's a wonder that you still know how to breathe.”

Truth will ouch.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Unnamable

Where are you going to find one? Dylan had it right:

“Idiot wind, blowing every time you move your mouth,
Blowing down the backroads headin' south.
Idiot wind, blowing every time you move your teeth,
You're an idiot, babe.
It's a wonder that you still know how to breathe.”

Truth will ouch.

---

Dylan's brother had it right:

"Well, I'll look and I'll duck, and keep on lookin', and truckin' too, wid me guitar and my best friend Shoot - till she darn well finds me..." :banana:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Unnamable

How sweet! And not at all patronising to the gentler sex. :D

---

Patronising? How am I patronizing? If anything they (the women in my life) have patronized me, tolerating my boyish wanderings and silly excursions, all at the expense of avoiding what is truely important in life. I'm not patronizing. I'm speaking from the heart. I'm speaking from my life.

So you didn't answer: On which is it best to build a relationship: love, finance, lust?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Unnamable

Where are you going to find one? Dylan had it right:

“Idiot wind, blowing every time you move your mouth,
Blowing down the backroads headin' south.
Idiot wind, blowing every time you move your teeth,
You're an idiot, babe.
It's a wonder that you still know how to breathe.”

Truth will ouch.

---

wow, the way you keep talking you'll never meet a good women. I tend to think that women are probably better then men in many cases. Well, from what I've seen; I don't know your luck.

Quote:

---

We need a woman here to say something good about men

---

No problem. I've met many fine men in my life who are honest and caring people. I've known men who are hardworking, who are excellent fathers and role models, who are strong either physically or emotionally (or both). I think men have the capacity to provide the enjoyments of companionship, additional support in life (and here I mean emotional/spiritual support--though obviously many men do an admirable job of providing financial support as well), an added sense of security, ...and then there are all the obvious physical attractions (well, only obvious to about half of us I guess). :lol: And of course individual men have all sorts of wonderful qualities that people in general can have--love, loyalty, integrity, intelligence, wit and so on. I don't think either sex is necessarily better.

Quote:

---

How sweet! And not at all patronising to the gentler sex.

---

This may come as a bit of a shock but, given the choice, the "gentler sex" by and large prefers being "patronized" as being loving family members rather than as being bags of crisps. :lol: Besides, I took Virgil's remark as being sincere and well meant, not patronizing.

Quote:

---

They don’t tell him to get lost – they compete for his attentions – arming themselves for combat with yet another caked layer of cosmetics and ever-tighter garments stretched over their carcases. What’s wrong with your sex? Why are they so foolish? Why is it that it takes only a few months for “You’ve got such beautiful eyes” to change to “What the **** are you staring at?” And why do I hear “I don’t ever won’t to change you,” changing to “you’ll never change”? Don’t any of you realise that there hasn’t been a new man since Adam?

---

Quote:

---

I suppose I do – especially when it gives me an opportunity to spit venom at the idiocy that is womankind.

---

I like it better when you're calling all of humankind idiots. At least that sounds like a logical argument. I can't tell you what's wrong with the idiots of my sex any more than you can tell me what's wrong with the idiots of yours. Incidently I personally agree that it's by and large a fruitless effort to try to fundamentally "change" a man. I've never tried to do so and don't know why some women do. I prefer to just choose to date men I don't feel the need to change, people whose flaws (and we all have them) I feel I can deal with and whose better points I can admire and respect.

Quote:

---

He speaks:
Come, my laid lady, whom I wooed with words,
And called my Star--
Since you proved that you loved me, I
Know what you are?

For, knowing what I am, I have a rod
To measure by
If you mistake what I gave you for love, you are
More beast than I.

And having eased in you my ambiguous lusts
I now can prove
That you're a dupe who let me wallow you
And call it love.

If I have feet of clay, yet you are now
The dirt they trod --
And in that moment when I brought you down,
I was a god!

Katherine Anne Porter

---

Now I am wondering if he is simply looking out the window in the morning, talking to himself. Hardly singing because I don't think this is something to sing about.

"He speaks:"
Does this really mean its his turn to speak, or simply, 'he speaks'?

"Since you proved that you loved me, I
Know what you are?"
Why do we think he is asking her?

I am also starting to feel there are errors in the structure of the poem, and I am getting tired of dealing with ambiguities or where the piece has no apparent clue to indicate its true targets. Maybe someone here can ID them because I cannot ennunciate it.

Thanks, Petrarch. Unnamable is rather good at pushing buttons, isn't he, and if we read everything he wrote, he is actually pointing out deficiencies in both sexes. So, yes, everyone is an idiot. :banana:

The more I read this, the more I think that she is criticising herself in this poem, almost more than the man. Remember, she is merely putting words into his mouth. When he calls her beast / dupe / dirt, it is in fact KAP describing herself this way.

She's not fond of the guy either, don't get me wrong; but I think there is perhaps more self-loathing / -criticism here than I originally picked up on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Petrarch's Love

This may come as a bit of a shock but, given the choice, the "gentler sex" by and large prefers being "patronized" as being loving family members rather than as being bags of crisps. :lol: Besides, I took Virgil's remark as being sincere and well meant, not patronizing.

---

Sure, I would not doubt Virgil's sincerity for a minute either. But you cannot deny that this remark somewhat conflicts with itself, being used as a defence against the argument that women give love a ridiculous importance. And so far I haven't heard a point raised against that argument.