Most of the time, girls don't want to have fun. Unless you re-define "fun" as saying no to what is otherwise mutually agreed to be fun.
There are an infinite number of stated reasons, starting from the cliched "I have a headache."
(As for me, if it seemed like I was getting a headache, I'd take an aspirin or ibuprofen a couple hours ahead of time. My philosophy on this, aptly described in a famous Dire Straights song, is whatever-it-takes, which is the antithesis of only-when-all-the-cards-are-right.)
But what "no" really seems to be is no-for-the-sake-of-demonstrating-I-can-say-no.
So at a fundamental level, it seems to be an excercise of power. OK, we all like to feel powerful in some way important to us, that's one thing I think Nietzsche was right about. But better that it be more in direction of fun, as the problems of the world are actually very little caused by fun, in fact I think they're mostly caused by people-not-having-enough-fun-in-the-right-ways. Rather, the problems of the world are most often caused by doing work, work of the wrong kind, work toward greed (as with the banksters, or the fossil fuel extracting corporations, either of which the world would have been better without) or often even duty, such as the duty to have a large family to please God, or fight in the imperial army, to please Dad, Caesar, Bush, Prince, or Jesus. Sometimes those kinds of work (such as kill, kill, kill) can seem like fun, but it's the wrong kind of fun.
So it follows that I see "no" as in "no fun tonight" as the wrong kind of no, not the right kind of no. No as in I won't kill people for their beliefs or differenent ways of doing things would be the right kind of no.
Now I'm speaking as a athiest, and that is where my experience derives. How is this dynamic in religious societies where men often wield too much power over women?
Well, what happens in those socieities is that everyone says no to fun. Life is not about fun, it is about making babies for Dog, raising families for Dog, casting cannons for Dog, killing infidels for Dog, etc. To whatever degree fun even exists, it is to be ignored, all the better that it be brief, therefore, or restricted to adolescents.
So fun loses on every side. Instead, we keep pushing onward to the abyss, whether for Dimon or Jesus or simply an arbitrary exercise of power.
Now there is one society that (at least in stereotype) seems to actually want too much fun (as hard as it is for me to conceive of such a thing). And that is the society of young gay men. OK, I will concede that 24 hours a day of fun is too much. 16 hours of fun a day may be about right, but not 24.
And among women, there are variations also. It seems, much like you might expect, the women whose appearance is generally less enticing to men, for example, those having a large waist and small bust, are among those more likely to want more fun rather than less. Perhaps from fun-starvation, or perhaps their personality makes it harder for them to say no either to food or fun.
OTOH, thin women, perhaps accustomed to saying no to their own food desires, tend to be in the I-want-less-fun range. I met one such woman who said she might consent to sex about once a month, after getting the roses, the fine restaurant dinner, and the show, not just that night but on the three preceding weekends as well, and if the guy was really sincere, and she liked the way he said it, and if she felt like it.* Maybe she would better be described as slave-driver.
It believe it is precisely this slave-driving tendency of the hottest women that drives men insane--to conquer the world in some bad way in the vain hope of pleasing such women and thereby getting more fun.
*Honestly I don't mind taking a woman to all those dinner and shows. I especially don't mind, in fact I enjoy spending my own money on her. It's just the endlessness of it all, the uncertainty of it all, that in the end makes me feel frustrated and powerless. And I accept no, I will accept that, I'd just like to hear yes more often.
There are an infinite number of stated reasons, starting from the cliched "I have a headache."
(As for me, if it seemed like I was getting a headache, I'd take an aspirin or ibuprofen a couple hours ahead of time. My philosophy on this, aptly described in a famous Dire Straights song, is whatever-it-takes, which is the antithesis of only-when-all-the-cards-are-right.)
But what "no" really seems to be is no-for-the-sake-of-demonstrating-I-can-say-no.
So at a fundamental level, it seems to be an excercise of power. OK, we all like to feel powerful in some way important to us, that's one thing I think Nietzsche was right about. But better that it be more in direction of fun, as the problems of the world are actually very little caused by fun, in fact I think they're mostly caused by people-not-having-enough-fun-in-the-right-ways. Rather, the problems of the world are most often caused by doing work, work of the wrong kind, work toward greed (as with the banksters, or the fossil fuel extracting corporations, either of which the world would have been better without) or often even duty, such as the duty to have a large family to please God, or fight in the imperial army, to please Dad, Caesar, Bush, Prince, or Jesus. Sometimes those kinds of work (such as kill, kill, kill) can seem like fun, but it's the wrong kind of fun.
So it follows that I see "no" as in "no fun tonight" as the wrong kind of no, not the right kind of no. No as in I won't kill people for their beliefs or differenent ways of doing things would be the right kind of no.
Now I'm speaking as a athiest, and that is where my experience derives. How is this dynamic in religious societies where men often wield too much power over women?
Well, what happens in those socieities is that everyone says no to fun. Life is not about fun, it is about making babies for Dog, raising families for Dog, casting cannons for Dog, killing infidels for Dog, etc. To whatever degree fun even exists, it is to be ignored, all the better that it be brief, therefore, or restricted to adolescents.
So fun loses on every side. Instead, we keep pushing onward to the abyss, whether for Dimon or Jesus or simply an arbitrary exercise of power.
Now there is one society that (at least in stereotype) seems to actually want too much fun (as hard as it is for me to conceive of such a thing). And that is the society of young gay men. OK, I will concede that 24 hours a day of fun is too much. 16 hours of fun a day may be about right, but not 24.
And among women, there are variations also. It seems, much like you might expect, the women whose appearance is generally less enticing to men, for example, those having a large waist and small bust, are among those more likely to want more fun rather than less. Perhaps from fun-starvation, or perhaps their personality makes it harder for them to say no either to food or fun.
OTOH, thin women, perhaps accustomed to saying no to their own food desires, tend to be in the I-want-less-fun range. I met one such woman who said she might consent to sex about once a month, after getting the roses, the fine restaurant dinner, and the show, not just that night but on the three preceding weekends as well, and if the guy was really sincere, and she liked the way he said it, and if she felt like it.* Maybe she would better be described as slave-driver.
It believe it is precisely this slave-driving tendency of the hottest women that drives men insane--to conquer the world in some bad way in the vain hope of pleasing such women and thereby getting more fun.
*Honestly I don't mind taking a woman to all those dinner and shows. I especially don't mind, in fact I enjoy spending my own money on her. It's just the endlessness of it all, the uncertainty of it all, that in the end makes me feel frustrated and powerless. And I accept no, I will accept that, I'd just like to hear yes more often.
