Women are from Venus, Men wished they came from Coruscant

It is a very well appreciated and well documented fact that men and women are different. Apart from the obvious, what actually constitutes this ‘difference’ remains a mystery and an enduring interest comparable to man’s romantic fascination with the cosmic alignment. For instance, it still remains unknown why putting down the toilet seat can be an issue that has, over the ages, led to warlike behaviour. It is not in the purpose of this prose to unlock the mysteries of the two dominant entities that walk this earth, but it is hopeful that some insight can be shed based on theories formulated during my moments of insanity (refer to previous blog).

I have got this cool theory; that the men and women differ in their conceptualisation of relationships with members of the opposite gender. Basically women adopt a ‘categorical approach’ to distinctly classify relationships, whereas men adopt a ‘continuum approach.’ Allow me to explain.

When women meet a man, they tend to categorically catalogue the person with labels such as; ‘cute’, ‘holiday romance’, ‘makes a good boyfriend’, ‘can never be my boyfriend’, ‘makes a good husband’, ‘soul mate’, and the most notorious and controversial label, ‘platonic friend.’ I don’t know why they do that; perhaps it is a cultivated habit to label things since the childhood years of pasting pink hello-kitty stickers on pencil-cases. These relationship labels are distinctive, mutually exclusive and enduring. The lady weaves the tapestry of fate and destiny when she places a person in any of these categories, because once you are labelled, it will take an act of god before you may have any chance of having the label changed. For example, if on the first date (speaking from experience), you are being labelled as ‘holiday romance’, you will have better luck cracking a brick wall with your forehead than ever having a sniff of being considered a potential candidate to be the lady’s boyfriend.

It is also for the same reason that important issues arise between interpersonal relationships. For instance, women have this strange perception that there is an existence of this mystical impression called platonic friendships (mind you, never attempt to correct this perception because once the bubble bursts, hell breaks loose). Whereas men, at least following Freud’s theories, are motivated by physiological needs and therefore incapable of feeling sexually indifferent towards women. In other words, men don’t classify women as ‘platonic friends’ because this category doesn’t exist in theirmindset; along with other concepts such as ‘shoe-shopping’, ‘diet’ and ‘cuddle.’

Men adopt a ‘continuum approach’, which means that in any relationship with the opposite gender, there will always be sexual attraction. The degree of attraction differs in a spectrum from weak to strong; which can be measured in terms of ‘how attracted the guy is towards the girl before he’ll do something stupid.’ By doing something stupid, in the mildest degree will include sending the lady home, writing birthday cards, to sending flowers. At the other end of the spectrum, it will include buying gifts which he can’t afford, writing poetry and ultimately expressing himself by saying the three words which when placed in a sequence at the wrong time will make him feel like bungee jumping off a very tall bridge without a cord. It is only ‘stupid’ after he realises that his behaviour defies all sense of logic, upon which he’ll he gets a rude shock that he, as the Chinese will say, “has been playing the piano to the cows.”

So it is peculiar when a woman accuses her ‘platonic friend’ for breaking the trust of friendship when the guy confesses his attraction for her. I would say that this scenario has nothing to do with breaking of trust, or poor emotional management or miscommunication; it was just an honest cataloguing mistake.