(http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F60B13FC3F5A0C728DDDA10894DD404482)
This was recently in the Times...I think you have to pay if you want to read it, but this link is the summary of the article...
Anyway...I was thinking about this concept for a while after I read that article...and it's interesting that the article means 'crush' in a thoroughly non-sexual way. Which is itneresting since I forwarded to my dad to give to my mom, and he misinterpreted it. But I guess it's more likely that woman would use the word 'crush' and not equate it with sex.
There is always that person who you look at and think "wow, she's so put together, confident, pretty, etc" and if this person is your friend, and spend time around them...you feel more like you'd want to be that person for a day rather than have sex with them...
My friend from SU, Alise, told me sometime after we became good friends that when she first met me, she thought I was a person who'd had "a lot of sex" because I was confident and she also said that she was intimidated by me. Well, by then, she had found out that I had not, in fact, had a lot of sex but I found that interesting because I always saw her as confident, fairly free-spirited and fun...and she was (is) but the images we had of each other have long since evaporated, leaving more realistic and interesting people in their places. It is always intriguing to hear how other people see you because it isn't always accurate but usually holds some interest.
No comments:
Post a Comment