Dating Made Easy - Or Not?

Even the most gender-aware college student sometimes falls back into the conventional forms of gender oppression in one area: dating. "Not another article on that feminist crap," you may think, though I would never accuse anyone of judging me right away. But, rest assured, this topic concerns men at least as much as it concerns women. Dating norms, promoted by Cosmopolitan, Men's Health and other mainstream magazines that mention the word G-spot more often than words like intelligence or care, oppress both genders in ways that hold a person hostage in a role-whether they are comfortable in it or not.

Because it is always easier to tell people what not to do than what to do (unless, again, it's about finding the G-spot, or, in newest English, simply the G), Cosmopolitan recently published an article about things to avoid on the first date to make him yours! Maybe exclamation points could pass as phallic symbols and thereby justify their frequent appearance in Cosmo, but back to the point: in his recipe for dating success, a man lets the reader in on his top six criteria for liking a woman.

The article begins telling us what to wear-jeans and high heels, not baby doll dresses (they make you look, so says the guy, heavier or even pregnant!). So basically, this self-proclaimed dating expert tells us that a woman cannot wear what makes her feel beautiful, but has to abide by the code of dating success: jeans and high heels. Aside from the fact that there is no mention of appropriate attire for the man, the woman is told that she has to be uncomfortable and conventional in order to attract someone to her.

Next, the dating guru goes on to tell us that "When meeting a girl, a guy will go on and on about himself because he's trying to get laid." What? Not that women are already suspicious enough about any man that approaches them with potential romantic interests given that society tells them they are objects, but to say that any guy is first and foremost looking to jump into bed with a woman is just absurd. This is the point where men should realize that gender roles are at least as oppressive to them as they are to women. The article in Cosmopolitan demonstrates that myths about gender diminish trust and a healthy approach to forming a close bond between two people.

Third, the expert informs women that texting guys before things get seriously physical is prohibited. In fact, a woman should not contact a man at all, but let him make all the first moves in the beginning stages of a relationship. That way, says the advice, the man will not lose the feeling that he is on a hunt and become more interested in the woman. So, just for the heck of it, let's consider this situation: a confident and extroverted woman is dating a shy and reserved man. According to the Cosmo dating magician, they both have to deny their true identities and feel uncomfortable in approaching all of their initial communication, simply because society has taught them that that's the appropriate gender conduct? I don't think so.

Fourth, the article tells us that being unavailable makes us undesirable. Now, wait a second - didn't we just learn that we, under no circumstances, should contact the object of our desire? Now he suddenly tells us that we can't seem too busy. So it seems that the best image we should put on is that we sit around all day doing needlework but never think of the man we are currently seeing. In addition, we are told to agree in the first couple of weeks to make him feel like he is wearing the pants, whether he is or not. Because of this, women have no way of helping determine the dynamics of a relationship, which develop in the first couple of weeks. Way to make us feel comfortable and equal. And way to make him feel pushed into making all the decisions.

Fifth, we learn that we should view a date like a flight and turn off all our electronic devices. Because if we constantly check our Blackberry out of the need to show we have many friends, it might make him uncomfortable. I can't help but wonder, however, if this could be easily prevented by letting women be themselves in the first place and not forcing them to pretend anything.

And last but not least, the be-all, end-all dating advice tells us to avoid controversy. What does that mean, you may wonder. It means that you cannot discuss politics or religion but should instead stick to what the dating guru calls "safe topics," such as sports, entertainment and travel. Again, this serves the man's general comfort, seemingly regardless of whether or not he is really into that stuff. And what if you do avoid politics and religion, only to find out weeks into your relationship that your core values clash on every level? How is that for discomfort?

Instead of following lame-ass advice from magazines with an overwhelming focus on everything G, how about some critical reflection of what we as individuals want from a romantic relationship? If we want a relationship as a status-symbol, I suppose it doesn't matter if it makes us uncomfortable or not - as long as we can join in conversations about boyfriends and their joys and flaws. Or, for men-in sticking with stereotypes-in order to brag about the newest sexual adventures. If we, however, are interested in forming an honest and fulfilling bond with someone, we better throw Cosmo away and begin getting comfortable with ourselves. I would assume that any half-way intelligent man would be able to see through a woman's attempts to please him at all costs, because she is too insecure to embrace and communicate her true self.