Why Oh Why? with Andrea Silenzi:
Playlist
from March 12, 2014
Andrea Silenzi speaks with friends, experts, guys in bars, and her own Grandma Phyllis about where love and sex meets technology.
Also available as an MP3 podcast.
More info at our Podcast Central page.
<-- Previous playlist | Back to Why Oh Why? with Andrea Silenzi playlists | Next playlist -->
March 12, 2014: #15 - He's Not Into Any of Us
If you're a woman trying to date today, you've probably experienced this situation over and over again. This isn't a date. Let's just keep things casual. If you say the wrong thing or text too often, you might scare him away. My guest Holly Wood has been studying this phenomenon -- and it's not your fault. Her research is showing that guys under 30 in major cities aren't that hungry for relationships.
It's not that he's just not that into you. He's not into any of us.
Listen to this show:
Pop-up player!
| Artist | Track | Comments |
|---|---|---|
|
If you're a woman trying to date today, you've probably experienced this situation over and over again. This isn't a date. Let's just keep things casual. If you say the wrong thing or text too often, you might scare him away. My guest Holly Wood has been studying this phenomenon -- and it's not your fault. Her research is showing that guys under 30 in major cities aren't that hungry for relationships. It's not that he's just not that into you. He's not into any of us. |
||
| Beex |
Beat, Beat
|
|
| Holly Wood | Follow her on Twitter @girlziplocked | |
| Small Colin |
Old Sounds
|
Free Music Archive |
| Avery Trufelman | Fresh college grad conducting the interview! Follow her on Twitter @Trufelman | |
| Holly Wood | Check out her Tumblr | |
| Holly Wood | "It's not par for the course to be sexually objectified on a dating site every day because you want someone to love you." - Holly Wood | |
| Third Coast International Audio Festival | An interview with me was recently featured in their Library Spotlight | |
| Randy on Twitter | FYI @RandyIsDaMan | |
| mr&mrsBrian |
me & my cold
|
Free Music Archive |
| Small Colin |
Mutations
|
Free Music Archive |
<-- Previous playlist | Back to Why Oh Why? with Andrea Silenzi playlists | Next playlist -->
RSS feeds for Why Oh Why? with Andrea Silenzi:
Playlists feed | 
MP3 archives feed
| Email the Program Director | Other WFMU Playlists | All artists played by Why Oh Why? with Andrea Silenzi |Listen on the Internet | Contact Us | Music & Programs | WFMU Home Page | Support Us | FAQ
Live Audio Streams for WFMU: Pop-up | 128k AAC | 128k MP3 | 32k MP3 (More streams: [+])
Listener comments!
BadGuyZero:
UsPostage:
BadGuyZero:
stavros:
Kevlicki:
stavros:
Ken From Hyde Park:
Andrew Waterloo:
Ange:
stavros:
Ange:
JakeGould:
Ken From Hyde Park:
Tom in PA:
glenn:
JakeGould:
BadGuyZero:
kevlicki:
Callieflower:
Skirkie:
BadGuyZero:
Tom in PA:
Ken From Hyde Park:
Robert:
Callieflower:
Callieflower:
stavros:
Skirkie:
I just don't listen to them.
The program itself doesn't owe me anything. How is me trashing it on the comments lend any use at all? It's freeform.
JakeGould:
stavros:
glenn:
Ange:
Allell:
kevlicki:
Ange:
Skirkie:
girlziplocked:
kevlicki:
nickybones:
Robert:
kevlicki:
JakeGould:
Skirkie:
Callieflower:
JakeGould:
jeff in Puna:
nickybones:
stavros:
JakeGould:
Cliff:
JakeGould:
Allell:
kevlicki:
Funny I was just thinking the other day that "success" to me is being able to define my schedule and make myself happy
Robert:
True:
JakeGould:
JakeGould:
stavros:
Robert:
If I were embarrassed every time someone else could be said to be expressing my ideas vicariously (according to others' perceptions), there'd be no end of it.
Ange:
Callieflower:
graham:
Skirkie:
Goes wrong? 24 hours of this station couldn't possibly please everyone all the time. What ends would it serve to bitch about it? If you're legit offended or something go to Ken like Andrea says.
LeeRosevere:
JakeGould:
Ange:
Foolbert:
When men seem reluctant to assume an adult rôle, I think one should assume that they are behaving at least partially as rational actors reacting to an extant and/or perceived incentive structure, and that structure the proper subject of your enquiry.
And as an egalitarian, I find it unlikely that women are fundamentally less unkind than men; it might well be that women are educated into being too timid to act forcefully enough to be unkind as often...but this is not being kind, as surely as naïvité isn't innocence and Oscar Pastorius shouldn't be given props for never kicking his girlfriend.
Callieflower:
LeeRosevere:
Ange:
JakeGould:
stavros:
BadGuyZero:
Guess what...I like to listen to/talk about stuff you couldn't give a flip about. I bet you like some things I can't stand. It's what makes us individuals. But it doesn't give you a pass to be a jerk.
glenn:
Tom in PA:
Ange:
Allell:
Skirkie:
And we can call you out for being a jerk.
Hooray America!
Callieflower:
JakeGould:
Skirkie:
The only relationship I ended up in from that was a disaster.
Robert:
LeeRosevere:
Callieflower:
Righto:
BadGuyZero:
Andrew Waterloo:
JakeGould:
BadGuyZero:
Callieflower:
glenn:
Andrew Waterloo:
nickybones:
LeeRosevere:
Andrew Waterloo:
JakeGould:
Robert:
kevlicki:
Foolbert:
As for fixing your dating life: stop dating. do useful (according to your humour) stuff, be important at something. Meet someone who also thinks those things are important. Dating has always seemed designed to reïnforce the contempt the sexes are taught to hold for each other.
And I doubt you're doomed...unless you only want what is impossible...I'm thinking of the Loh/Flanagan dialogue, which at least at one point seemed to be about 'We want men to be a particular way, and damn them for not being attractive to us when they are.'...or, for that matter, the man who wants a woman who is exactly as sexually adventurous as he'd like but not a jot further, lest she be accounted a 'slut'.
KristinaKoffee:
Ange:
Callieflower:
stavros:
JakeGould:
chris:
Shparky:
JakeGould:
Robert:
stavros:
Andrew Waterloo:
Foolbert:
You have my sympathies...I'm lucky: quickly found someone who is at least content with me-as-I-am, particularly lucky because I am autistic enough that I find it painfully hard to be anything else, I couldn't sustain that for years without sand-papering my mind daily.
Ange:
Callieflower:
stavros:
JakeGould:
glenn:
Skirkie:
Righto:
JakeGould:
Andrew Waterloo:
P-90:
Also, for someone who claims she's completely content with not being in a relationship, she seems very angry and militant about the whole business.
And where does she get the bizarro idea that men in their 20's are looking for sexual experiences that perhaps won't necessarily lead to long-term relationships, but not women. Really???
stavros:
JakeGould:
Greg from Bloomfield:
Perfectly summarizes the thoughts I've been having about online dating that I couldn't find the words for. I think she may have just inspired me to quit OKCupid. PROM KING OUT. <drops mic>
someone:
Still - the interview is great and the material is very interesting...but you don't have to be a Marxist to be amazed that even when the show brings in a trainee sociologist, it happens to be a sociologist who seemingly cannot talk about class. So we hear about how guys make the adult switch when they 'earn 80k', as if this is just normal, this is just what 'guys' are like...but 80k is almost double the average salary in the US...so clearly these are not just 'guys', but guys belonging to the upper 1/3 economic group in the country, at least. Once again, the show is really only and exclusively about the experiences of people belonging to an economic elite, and it doesn't seem able even to admit that fact to itself. Why is this relevant? It's relevant because, as Graham hints, the norms of behaviour amongst 'guys' which are being described, are NOT universal male norms even amongst people in their 20s in the US today. Rather, they are norms shared by a small cohort who are in training to become the corporate / media elite of the US. Their individualistic culture, their self-indulgent hedonism and their inability to form relationships are a necessary part of their training to become, if not members of the 1% themselves, at least their loyal and well-rewarded lieutenants. Okay, so women who belong to the same social group are apparently experiencing things and behaving differently. That's really interesting and it would be great to know why that is. But that question couldn't be answered without some reference to the much bigger social context within which even those women are themselves part of a tiny and incredibly powerful elite whose norms and culture are inevitably shaped by that status. I understand that ultimately the show is not trying to give some comprehensive account of contemporary gendered experience. I get that it is basically just about Ange and her friends. But I really think that Ange and her friends will never understand their own situation and the things which affect it unless they can face up to the fact that they are not just 'women', but are women who belong to an incredibly privileged caste, whose role in the wider social order affects the way that they, and the men with whom the associate, behave, feel, and see the world. Ange says her favourite TV show is 'Girls'...but the thing about Girls is that that show kind of knows all this...it knows that the women whose lives it describes are unbelievably privileged and it invites us, frankly, to despise their self-interested social parochialism even while it considers its nature and causes (that's why the show is actually mostly about their jobs, even though it lures in viewers by pretending to be about their sex lives). The trouble with WoW is that it isn't really managing to be 'Girls' - it's still more like Sex and the City...a story about the sex lives and heartbreaks of the NYC cultural elite...it keeps coming so very close to being something more than that, but every time it gets there, it turns away (I mean my god you have a SOCIOLOGIST) and all she can say about the fact that her subjects live in the most expensive cities in the world is that this 'leads to problems paying the rent' - COME ON...before you start even talking about that, you should talk about the fact that just BEING IN THOSE CITIES AT ALL, without having been born into one of their isolated working class districts, pretty much qualifies these people as upper middle class...). Okay enough. I love this show - I just wish it could get beyond its limitations.
Maybe that's expecting too much.
someone: