NEWS: Dan Brodribb's Geek Love: Leading Love

GEEK: Dan Brodribb's Geek Love: Leading Love

In every new relationship there are moments of truth. They are small moments. Many of us don’t even recognize them or even remember them after they’ve passed. But the way these moments unfold can make the difference between a happily ever after romance and one cut down before it even has a chance to begin.

That’s where leading comes in.

You can make goo-goo eyes at each other across the anime convention floor hall all you want. There still needs to be the moment where someone makes the decision to walk over and start a conversation. Leading can be non-verbal (taking someone by the hand, going for the kiss), or verbal, (asking for the phone number, revealing your sexual fantasy about the Kama Sutra Pirates).

I think of leading as anteing up. You‘re putting your money on the table (usually not literally), at which point the other person needs to either a) meet or beat your investment, or b) opt out of the game.

Leading isn’t about controlling the relationship. If anything, leading is about giving up control, because if the dancer(*) chooses not to follow, it’s the leader who ends up looking stupid.

Leading is about being willing to take risks. On a more practical level, it’s also about avoiding conversations like this.

BOY: Want to go out?
GIRL: Sure. What do you want to do?
BOY: I don’t know. What do you want to do?

And so on into infinity…

If you’re going to ask someone out, the onus is on you to provide direction for what you‘ll be doing. It doesn’t mean there’s no room for negotiation, but someone has to open the bidding.

Which brings us to the question, why does Boy get to lead? Girls can lead too.

They sure can. And if it works for you, go for it. Putting yourself out there when you don’t know how the other person feels takes guts, and I give mad respect to anyone--male, female, or other--that does it. Be advised however, in heterosexual dating circles, the woman leading goes against convention, so be prepared to face the following reactions.

1) Male insecurity. We’ve had it drilled into us from an early age that we are supposed to take charge. So when a woman does it for us, it can be a stab to the ego. Many women have run into this, and it’s what stops them from taking charge on a date. A friend of mine put it best: “It sucks when guys don’t have a plan cause not only do you have to take charge, you have to bring it up in a way that doesn’t hurt his feelings.”

You would think shyer or more inexperienced guys would welcome a woman who takes charge, but sometimes we take it the hardest because it reminds us of our shortcomings.

2) Suspicion. Often the more attractive a guy finds you, the harder time he’ll have trusting your motives. Instead of counting his lucky stars, he’ll be thinking. “There is no way THAT girl would ever have to ask a guy out, especially a guy like me. Either she’s messing with me or she‘s a murderous sex alien like in Species, and either way, I‘m not falling for it. And I‘m going to make sure everyone knows it by saying something mean to her.”

3) Inexperience. Most guys don’t get asked out a lot, which means they aren’t always going to know how to deal with it. I didn’t when it happened to me (**). We freeze-up and stammer and start looking around for the exits. It doesn’t mean we’re not interested. It means we don‘t deal well with unfamiliar social situations.

4) Dogs and cats living together, mass hysteria. When two people are simultaneously trying to be proactive, there’s going to be some clunkiness until they find a rhythm. The comforting thing about convention is everyone knows his or her role. On the other hand, those people bound by convention will never know what it feels like to live by their own rules.

The good news is, truly confident and self-assured guys have no problem with a woman showing a little initiative. The bad news is, most of those men live somewhere in the Andromeda galaxy. Here on planet Earth, truly confident men are a little thinner on the ground than one would hope. Kudos to you, if you’ve found one.

The last point about leading is that YOU DON‘T HAVE TO DO IT ALL THE TIME (***). Leading isn’t a way to prove what an mighty, in-control Alpha Male or Female you are. It’s a way of keeping a smooth flow while you get to know one another.

Good luck. The Kama Sutra Pirates await.

(*) I realize it would be less confusing to use ‘follower’ but I don’t like it. The word ‘follower’ implies blind obedience, which isn’t what we’re talking about at all. Plus ‘dancer’ sounds prettier.

(**) In my defense, the person hitting on me was another guy. Still, I felt dumb for not catching on sooner.

(***) Timing leads is a column on its own, but here are the basics. You lead a) during ambiguous/awkward moments b) as a response to a cue from your partner or c) when he/she has impressed you.

Christ, you're still here? Will you please stop writing articles about gross stereotypes using research from your narrow pool of friends and pop movies?

You're just ike the friend in Sleepless in Seattle who doesn't want the star to find love, you know that???!?

(I'm the star)

Showing me your cigar moustache =/= love.

Also, why is this on CE? Mods, are you taunting me?

If you don't like Dan's columns, don't read them when you see his headline under News.

If you REALLY don't like them, submit something else yourself. Democracy in action!

Complaining about something without offering anything better as an alternative? Didn't someone tell you that Republicans went out in 2008? Get with the times, kid!

My hilarious posts are what i offer as an alternative.

You also don't seem to understand how threads, or message boards, or the internet , or life works. You might want to look into that.

I actually haven't been reading or commenting on these articles, in the hopes that a low comment count would drive them into obscurity. Thus, my first sentence:

Also, no one is paying me to espouse my narrow opinions, so we're working with an uneven playing field.

Don't call me kid, either.

Says the dude who has never submitted an article on this website.

Maybe he should lead more.

Hey dude, I like your blog, I think its interesting and i identify myself with a lot you write about, dudes can lead the relationship and also chicks `cause its everyone´s right, there´s to need to have one person in control, everything´s about two... or three in some cases.. or ten... I don´t know, being secure and being oneself is the key bro!

keep with the amazing work

OK, OK, Bashing and Ranting aside.

I thought it was an interesting article. Pip, I actually got ur joke

This definitely made me think, and it makes sense.

I liked the poker analogy. that made me smile to think about a poker situation where the guy wants to bet but doesn't know what to bet

We all need to take more risks in life

I don't find this offensive. It's presented more as "these are some things you may run into" rather than "this is the way it is."

And I think it's generally good advice that a lot of nice nerds could benefit from.

I don't get why some people get so up in arms about his opinions. Does everything on the internet really have to be a quest to see just how wrong people's opinions are?

I happen to think his opinions are a very simply guide not stating things are right or wrong just presenting the format many relationships hold.

you really have no idea just how many people on SG could really benefit from this!

I agree; while I don't hold up Dan's writing as some sort of dating Bible, he usually covers some general bases that both sides should be aware of. Sometimes people just don't have one or more fundamental concepts down, and he brings them up for all to recall.

Besides, his articles are entertaining. I like 'em!

To the others: I'm not new here, and not all of the content (articles/photo sets) that gets submitted to SG staff is published. The endless stream of "Hopefuls" should have demonstrated that already. I've put in 1 article about something I could legitimately discuss as an expert/analyst that may have been of interest to members here, but it never got published. No harm, no foul.

Back to the topic, though, I think Dan hit a good point when he pointed out the sometimes-awkward moment where women are required to take charge. I actually like women who are just as "active" a participant in the planning/dating process, because I can't plan awesome dates every time.

Well said!?

I was just talking with a friend about how difficult it is that women never seem to take the initiative. I'm pretty shy, and have no "pick-up" skills whatsoever, so it would be nice if women would take charge for a change. But I suppose my shyness is precisely one of the reasons why they don't go for me.

Hehehe.

This is the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.

Thanks for the comments everyone.

I don't generally comment on my own artices because after having a whole column to speak my piece, I think it's only fair I let others have their turn.

That being said, I did want to address Roethke's because it hit close to the bone:

That wasn't my intention writing the article, but re-reading it, I can see how a woman who enjoys leading could take it as a downer article.

As a shy guy, I love when women take the initiatlve. I also like it if she leaves me a way to salvage my self-esteem, so I don't feel completely emasculated.

One of the best ways I heard a woman do this was when she told the object of her affections something like: "Look, I really like you, but I'm not going to do ALL the work here. I'm free this Friday. Pick a restaraunt and a movie, and we'll go together."

I'd love to hear other people's experiences with the shy guy/woman-taking-charge department. Were there challenges and if so, how did you overcome them? If it didn't work, how would you do things differently?

Maybe people should do more personal work on what does or does not leave them feeling "emasculated" before they try to engage in serious long-term relationships.

TLDR version of TFA: Sack up, because your potential mates are probably only attracted to their fellow vertebrates.

I think I finally figured out why I don't like this column: It isn't about geek love, it's about hopeless loser love. As a geek, I find it generally insulting that you think this is what geeks are like. You're painting your subjects with the same broad strokes as your source material.

I realize there are plenty of socially inept man-children out there, but I'd be a lot more into this style of advice if the emphasis, tone and content were more "man" than "child".

Geek Love.

Also, Fleshlights.

That's a fine vertebra you've got there.