Originally posted by J-Man
I hear this a lot from women...But I do observe that it tends to be a trait of "down-to-earth" women. The type that have a larger than normal amount of common sense, and the type that doesn't play quite as many mind games.
This statement makes little sense to me. The implications of the stated 'observation', as well as the language used, is somewhat questionable to say the least.
Why do you believe that women with a 'larger than normal' amount of common sense and an aversion to 'mind games' are drawn towards males for friendship? The insinuation of your statement appears to be either: a) the 'normal' amount of common sense for a woman is considerably less than that for a man, the difference acting as an obstacle to the establishment of friendship between the two genders; or b) (which is, I suspect, simply an unfortunate consequence of the way the observation was phrased) That it is just good common sense to make friends with men rather than women.
Of course, there is a third possibility: That women with higher levels of common sense are capable of recognising and dismissing perceived boundaries between the genders in the context of platonic relationships. This, whilst easily being perhaps the most aggreable of the three implications does little to explain why such women are drawn to men rather than women (unless taken in conjunction with either a) or b)).
Equally dubious is the implication that 'mind games' are mainly the confined to women. Although not explicitly stated, your post does seem to infer this. Otherwise there would be no reason for a 'down to Earth' woman to be drawn towards men if it were the case that both genders were equally likely to indulge in such games.
The matter of the difference in levels of common sense is problematic as you haven't specified what you've defined as 'common sense', or how you've observed it. Do most of the women where you are play with naked flames near flammable materials? Frequently try to walk through doors before opening them? Keep getting caught up in the elaborate scams of salesmen claiming to offer magic beans? To generalise further, what's the ratio between the genders for spending wisely, sensibly preparing for an exam or a job interview, or not building castles in a swamp? I labour the point because I have a perculiar loathing of this concept of 'common sense'. It is an inconclusive and nebulous term at best, and frequently serves little purpose other than to act as an excuse not to apply rigorous analysis to complex issues or problems (i.e. "It's just common sense" being used as a justification for an argument that otherwise lacks supporting evidence).
As for the issue of the tendencies of either gender to resort to 'mind games' it is worth remembering that the doctrine of "Treat 'em mean, keep 'em keen" and the phenomenon of the 'playa'
are almost entirely attributed to male behaviour, a telling fact whether or not you consider such examples as mainly folklore. Both of the given examples make a virtue of manipulation in service to a selfish aim. Also, it is my general experience that women, just as much as men, are likely to complain of their partner playing mind games. Interestingly, one common complaint that I've heard is of men turning round at the tip of a hat and classifying even innocent behaviour on the female's part as being evidence that 'mind games' are afoot, i.e. a woman's behaviour which the male finds disagreeable is branded as manipulative and she is thus warned that any repeat of that behaviour will be met with a similar stinging assessment of their character.
Of course mind games do exist, and I would wager that both genders are equally likely to resort to them. However, it's my opinion that a lot of the claims of mind games are a combination of one party's behaviour or an aspect of their personality provoking the paranoia of the other, who then perceives that they are deliberately being manipulated. As an example, one of the most common complaints I've heard from males is that a woman is 'blowing hot and cold' on them (which, taken literally, actually sounds like quite a pleasant treat, but I digress...). The simple fact that she may not feel like being 'hot' all the time, or that her behaviour may at different times be affected by concerns about the relationship which she doesn't feel confident enough to voice seem to play little part in the reasoning of the male, who typically finds it far more satisfying to conclude that she must be either mentally unbalanced or in the midst of hatching some grand scheme to destroy his sanity. This is even more so the case should she then break off the relationship, in which case she is seen to obviously be one of Hitler's clones in drag.
This post has tended to go somewhat off topic, but that is because it is attempting to highlighting the inaccuracies in the idea of most women being silly creatures who are incapable of reigning in their preferences for manipulation and folly (an idea going back to the bible, with poor old 'Not just down to but *of* the Earth Adam being lulled into eating apples by that superficial spare rib on legs) which is implicit in the post to which this is an answer.
)